Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The presence of claim limitations that are preceded by the phrases “wherein” often raises a question as to the limiting effect of the claim limitations (see MPEP §2111.04). The Examiner has interpreted the limitations following the phrase “wherein” as positively being claimed (i.e. the claim limitations are required and/or the claim limitations following the “wherein clause” limits the structure), where “wherein” is being used as a transitional phrase.
Drawings
The drawings were received on July 27, 2026. These drawings are acceptable, the drawing objection is hereby withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I shown in Figure 3 in the reply filed on March 4, 2026 is acknowledged. Applicant has added claims 15 and 16 directed utilizing pumps to control the coolant flow “continuously” in the oil cooler, the compressed gas cooler, and the housing cooler. Figure 4 appears to show this configuration, which is a non-elected species. Species shown in Figure 3 (the elected species) has valves (V11, V12, V13, and V16) and a controllable pump (12), and therefore, does not specifically disclose utilizing controllable pumps for the oil cooler, the compressed gas cooler, and the housing cooler. Furthermore, if these claims were previously presented, they would have been withdrawn as being directed to a non-elected species or a species that is not shown, thereby being withdrawn due to election by original presentation.
Newly submitted claims 15-16 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: the new claims now recite a controllable oil cooler controllable pump, a compressed gas cooler controllable pump, and a housing cooler controllable pump.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 15 and 16 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Furthermore, as discussed above, it appears that claims 15-16 read on Figure 4, which is a non-elected species.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “at least one (emphasis added) selected from the group consisting of: a compressed gas cooler…; and a housing cooler…; wherein each one of the oil cooler controllable valve, the compressed gas cooler controllable valve and the housing cooler controllable valve controls each of the oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate, the compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate and the housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the oil cooler, the compressed gas cooler, and the housing cooler”. The claim is indefinite since the first part of the claim recites “at least one selected from the group consisting of”, however, this is then followed with limitations that would require that both are “selected”, since the compressed gas cooler controllable valve and the housing cooler controllable valve is further limited”, which makes the claim indefinite, since it is unclear if both are required or not. The Examiner recommends removing “at least one selected from the group consisting of:”. Furthermore, the use of the limitation of “consisting of” is a closed ended limitation (see MPEP 2111.03, II). Claims 3 and 14 recites “the compressed gas cooler includes an intercooler and aftercooler”, claim 5 recites “the housing cooler includes at least one jacket cooler having a plurality of jacket sub-coolers”, claim 14 also recites “a member selected from the group consisting of the intercooler and the aftercooler includes an individual compressed gas cooler controllable valve”.
“The transitional phrase "consisting of" excludes any element, step, or ingredient not specified in the claim. In re Gray, 53 F.2d 520, 11 USPQ 255 (CCPA 1931); Ex parte Davis, 80 USPQ 448, 450 (Bd. App. 1948) ("consisting of" defined as "closing the claim to the inclusion of materials other than those recited except for impurities ordinarily associated therewith"). But see Norian Corp. v. Stryker Corp., 363 F.3d 1321, 1331-32, 70 USPQ2d 1508, 1516 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (holding that a bone repair kit "consisting of" claimed chemicals was infringed by a bone repair kit including a spatula in addition to the claimed chemicals because the presence of the spatula was unrelated to the claimed invention). A claim which depends from a claim which "consists of" the recited elements or steps cannot add an element or step.(MPEP 2111.03 II. CONSISTING OF).
The Examiner recommends removing the limitations directed to “consisting of”, since this is a closed ended limitation, as well as, the applicant tries to add additional elements, which is not allowed when “consisting of” limitations are used.
Claims 2, 3, 5-7, and 9 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 1. In addition, if the dependent claims add additional elements or steps, this is improper when utilizing “consisting of” limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TSURU (U.S. Patent 5,613,843) in view of NISHIMORI (WIPO Publication WO-2022/163079 A1, a machine translation was provided with the foreign reference in the PTO-892 mailed on 3/27/2026 and is utilized in the rejection below), the claims are rejected based on the understanding of the 112(b) rejection above.
Regarding claim 1, TSURU discloses: a compressor installation (see Figure 1 and Abstract), comprising
a compressor (1, 2) for compressing a gas for generating a compressed gas (see Figure 3, Column 8, lines 24-67), and
a cooling installation (see Figure 3 that shows a cooling installation that receives coolant (aka water) from the water supply main pipe (29)), the cooling installation comprising:
an oil cooler (7) comprising an oil cooler liquid coolant flow (see Figure 3, Column 8, line 24 – Column 9, line 14, where water is considered as the coolant to the cooler and is a liquid) for cooling oil heated by the compressor (see Figure 3, Column 8, line 63 – Column 9, line 14),
a compressed gas cooler (5, 6) comprising a compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow (see Figure 3, Column 8, line 24 – Column 9, line 14, where water is considered as the coolant to the cooler and is a liquid) for cooling the gas which is at least partially compressed to the compressed gas (see Figure 3, Column 8, line 63-67, where gas cooler (5) cools the partially compressed gas, and gas cooler (6) cools the completely compressed gas), and
a housing cooler (1a, 2a, 8) comprising a housing cooler liquid coolant flow (see Figure 3, Column 8, line 24 – Column 9, line 14, where water is considered as the coolant to the cooler and is a liquid) for cooling at least a part of a housing of the compressor (see Figure 3, Column 9, lines 1-14).
TSURU discloses that the housing cooler (1a, 2a, 8) is controlled by a coolant pump (10), where the oil cooler, the compressed gas coolers, and the housing cooler receive the coolant via the main pipe water supply (see Figure 3), where there is no specific controls discussed for the oil cooler and the compressed gas coolers. TSURU fails to specifically disclose an oil cooler controllable valve to adjust an oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously, and at least one selected from the group consisting of:
a compressed gas cooler controllable valve to adjust a compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously, and
a housing cooler controllable valve to adjust a housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously;
each one of the oil cooler controllable valve, the compressed gas cooler controllable valve and the housing cooler controllable valve controls each of the
oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate, the compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate and the housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the oil cooler, the compressed gas cooler, and the housing cooler.
Regarding claim 1, NISHIMORI teaches: a compressor installation (see Abstract and Figure 1), comprising
a compressor (101, 102) for compressing a gas for generating a compressed gas (see Figure 1, Abstract and Page 2), and
an oil cooler (106) for cooling oil heated by the compressor (see Figure 1 and Page 2),
a compressed gas cooler (103, 104) for cooling the gas which is completely or partially compressed to the compressed gas (see Figure 1 and Page 2), and
an oil cooler controllable valve (111) to adjust an oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously (see Figure 1 and Page 5), and at least one selected from the group consisting of:
a compressed gas cooler controllable valve (110, 112) to adjust a compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously (see Figure 1 and Page 5), and
each one of the oil cooler controllable valve and the compressed gas cooler controllable valve controls each of the oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate, and the compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate (see Figure 1 and Page 5) individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the oil cooler and the compressed gas cooler (see Figure 1 and Page 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have an oil cooler controllable valve to adjust an oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously, and at least one selected from the group consisting of: a compressed gas cooler controllable valve to adjust a compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously; each one of the oil cooler controllable valve and the compressed gas cooler controllable valve controls each of the oil cooler liquid coolant flow rate and the compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the oil cooler and the compressed gas cooler in the compressor installation of TSURU, in order to provide the desired cooling of the oil and compressed air (see Page 5 of NISHIMORI that discloses utilizing the valves to control the flow rate to a specific cooler).
The compressor installation of TSURU/NISHIMORI discloses the claimed invention, however, fails to disclose that a housing cooler controllable valve to adjust a housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously; where the housing cooler controllable valve controls the housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the housing cooler.
TSURU discloses utilizing a pump to control the housing cooler and not specifically utilizing a housing cooler controllable valve to adjust a housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously; where the housing cooler controllable valve controls the housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the housing cooler. NISHIMORI teaches it is known to add controllable valves (110, 111, 112) to control the respective coolers (103, 106, and 104).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a housing cooler controllable valve to adjust a housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate continuously; where the housing cooler controllable valve controls the housing cooler liquid coolant flow rate individually such that a cooling output is individually controllable for the housing cooler in the modified compressor installation of TSURU/NISHIMORI, since applying a known technique (i.e. utilizing control valves to adjust the flow rate to a specific cooler), as taught by NISHIMORI, to a known device (i.e. the housing cooler of TSURU) would have yielded predicable results. The results are predictable and provide the improvement of being able to individually and accurately control the coolant flow rate the specific cooler (i.e. the housing cooler) allowing for better control of the cooling of the housing. Furthermore, it would require only routine skill in the art to control the coolant to the different coolers in a compressor installation since each of the different components (oil cooler, the compressed gas cooler, and the housing cooler) each have their own specific requirements and needs, where controlling coolant to each of the coolers allows for the required cooling when needed, thereby not overcooling or undercooling the oil, housing, or compressed gas, especially when NISHIMORI teaches that it is well-known in the art to add valves to control the coolant to each of the different coolers (see Page 5 of NISHIMORI).
Regarding claim 2, TSURU further discloses: the oil cooler,
the compressed gas cooler, and
the housing cooler,
are connected to a primary cooling circuit in a parallel connection (see Figure 3 that shows all are connected to the water supply main pipe (29)).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, TSURU further discloses: the compressor includes a plurality of compression stages (1, 2), and
the compressed gas cooler includes an intercooler (5) and an aftercooler (6), and wherein
the intercooler cools gas which is partially compressed to the compressed gas between a first and second compression stage (see Figure 3), and
the aftercooler cools the compressed gas at the outlet of the compressor after having passed through the plurality of compression stages (See Figure 3).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, NISHIMORI further teaches: the intercooler (103) and aftercooler (106) each include an individual compressed gas cooler controllable valve (110, 112) (see Figure 1 and Page 5).
Regarding claim 5, TSURU further discloses: the housing cooler includes at least one jacket cooler (1a, 2a) (see Figure 1, Column 9, lines 1-5), the at least one jacket cooler having
a plurality of jacket sub-coolers connected in series (1a, 2a) (see Figures 1 and 3), each jacket sub-cooler cooling one compressor stage using the housing cooler liquid coolant (see Figures 1 and 3, Column 9, lines 1-14).
Regarding claim 5, the modified compressor installation of TSURU / NISHIMORI as discussed above, would obviously have the housing cooler liquid coolant as controlled by the housing cooler controllable valve, since as discussed above NISHIMORI teaches that it is known to utilize controllable valves in order to adjust the coolant flow rate to a specific cooler (i.e. housing cooler).
Regarding claim 6, the modified compressor installation of TSURU/ NISHIMORI discloses the claimed invention including an oil cooler controllable valve, the compressed gas cooler controllable valve and the housing cooler controllable valve to control the oil cooler liquid coolant flow, the compressed gas cooler liquid coolant flow, and the housing cooler coolant flow (see discussion above).
Regarding claim 6, NISHIMORI further teaches: a control unit (2) implemented on a process computer (2) (see Figure 1, Page 2) and in communication with the oil cooler controllable valve and the compressed gas cooler controllable valve (see Figure 1, Page 2, 3, and 5), and additionally with the modification discussed above in communication with the housing cooler controllable valve such that the NISHIMORI teaches that each valve is controlled individual and in a coordinated manner with the other control valves (see Page 5).
Regarding claim 7, TSURU further discloses: the compressor is selected from the group consisting of a dry-running compressor (Column 1, lines 14-17), and
a screw compressor (55) (see Figure 16) that compresses the gas by a movement of a plurality of mutually engaging screws (101, 102) (see Column 1, lines 9-17, Column 10, lines 60-65).
Regarding claim 13, the method for operating a compressor installation as claimed would be inherent in the normal operation of the compressor installation discussed above in the rejection of claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim 1 and the claims that depend from claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection utilizing NISHIMORI in combination with TSURU. It is noted that NISHIMORI teaches the limitations, or it is obvious based on the teachings of NISHIMORI that are argued (see rejection above).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Additional Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
MATSUZAKA (WIPO Publication WO 2021/053965 A1) discloses an oil cooler (203) and compressed gas coolers (201, 202) (see Figures 1, 3, and 4) with a controllable valve for the coolant (301), however, this does not disclose a housing cooler.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-9965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am-4pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469) 295-9278. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Mary A Davis/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights