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 .
Claims 1-20 are cancelled and claims 21-40 are new.
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 31 recites “a third unit including a third heat exchanger, the third unit being in fluid communication with the first unit and the third unit”. Instead of –the first unit and the second unit--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-27 and 29-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 9,879,881. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because cited claims while inclusive of, a fan, coil, and valve does not explicitly recite the types of heat exchangers of instant claims 26-27 and 37-38, the 3-way or solenoid valve of claims 23 and 32, or fan control of claim 35. However a coil wrapped tank or separate heat exchanger are both old and well known arrangements for supplying the heat of a heat pump to a water tank, a 3-way valve is an old and well known type of valve, and adjusting a fan speed based on a sensed temperature is and old and well known type of fan control, all evidenced below by under sections §102 or 103. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said features in order to employ the invention. In other words to literally make/use the invention of the cited patent claims one must select a heat exchanger structure, a valve structure, and fan control in order to use the invention, here resulting in increased efficiency.
Claims 21-27 and 29-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 9,945,582. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the cited patent while includes a refrigerant circuit and refrigerant does not explicitly recite a compressor, however it is understood in the context of a heat pump water heater that a compressor is included in the refrigeration cycle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided ‘582 with a compressor in order to provide compression to the refrigeration cycle. Further while inclusive of, a fan, coil, and valves the cited claims do not explicitly recite the types of heat exchangers of instant claims 26-27 and 37-38, the 3-way or solenoid valve of claims 23 and 32, or fan control of claim 35. However a coil wrapped tank or separate heat exchanger are both old and well known arrangements for supplying the heat of a heat pump to a water tank, a 3-way valve is an old and well known type of valve, and adjusting a fan speed based on a sensed temperature is and old and well known type of fan control, all evidenced below by under sections §102 or 103. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said features in order to employ the invention. In other words to literally make/use the invention of the cited patent claims one must select a heat exchanger structure, a valve structure, and fan control in order to use the invention, here resulting in increased efficiency.
Claims 21-27 and 29-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4-9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,871,307. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because cited claims while inclusive of, a fan, coil, and valve does not explicitly recite the types of heat exchangers of instant claims 26-27 and 37-38, the 3-way or solenoid valve of claims 23 and 32, or fan control of claim 35. However a coil wrapped tank or separate heat exchanger are both old and well known arrangements for supplying the heat of a heat pump to a water tank, a 3-way valve is an old and well known type of valve, and adjusting a fan speed based on a sensed temperature is and old and well known type of fan control, all evidenced below by under sections §102 or 103. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said features in order to employ the invention. In other words to literally make/use the invention of the cited patent claims one must select a heat exchanger structure, a valve structure, and fan control in order to use the invention, here resulting in increased efficiency.
Claims 21-27 and 29-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,203,683. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because cited claims while inclusive of, a fan, coil, and valve does not explicitly recite the types of heat exchangers of instant claims 26-27 and 37-38, the 3-way or solenoid valve of claims 23 and 32, or fan control of claim 35. However a coil wrapped tank or separate heat exchanger are both old and well known arrangements for supplying the heat of a heat pump to a water tank, a 3-way valve is an old and well known type of valve, and adjusting a fan speed based on a sensed temperature is and old and well known type of fan control, all evidenced below by under sections §102 or 103. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided said features in order to employ the invention. In other words to literally make/use the invention of the cited patent claims one must select a heat exchanger structure, a valve structure, and fan control in order to use the invention, here resulting in increased efficiency.
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.
Claim 35 is 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 35 recites “The heat pump system of claim 31, wherein the third unit includes a fan coupled to the third heat exchanger and the heat pump system is further configured to: determine a temperature at the output of the third heat exchanger; and adjust a speed of the second fan based on the temperature.” The second fan lacks antecedent basis and the claim is unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21-25, 27, and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dempsey et al (US 2013/0104574).
Regarding claim 21, Dempsey discloses heat pump system comprising:
an outdoor unit (14) including a first heat exchanger (20) and a compressor (20);
a water tank (28);
a second heat exchanger (42), the second heat exchanger in fluid communication with the first heat exchanger and the compressor, the second heat exchanger configured to heat water in the water tank;
an air handler unit (16) including a third heat exchanger (24), the third heat exchanger in fluid communication with the first heat exchanger and the compressor; and
a valve (38) configurable in a first configuration and a second configuration, wherein in the first configuration, the valve is configured to direct a flow of refrigerant received from the outdoor unit to the second heat exchanger (42),
wherein in the second configuration, the valve (38) is configured to direct a flow of refrigerant received from the outdoor unit to the third heat exchanger (24).
Regarding claim 22, Dempsey discloses the valve (38) is operable to either direct flow of refrigerant to the second heat exchanger or cause the refrigerant to bypass the second heat exchanger ([0017] refrigerant does not circulate through line circuit 34).
Regarding claim 23, Dempsey discloses the valve (38) is a 3-way or solenoid valve ([0015]).
Regarding claim 24, Dempsey discloses water is circulated from the second heat exchanger to the water tank ([0018]).
Regarding claim 25, Dempsey discloses heated water is stored in the water tank ([0018]).
Regarding claim 27, Dempsey discloses the second heat exchanger (42) is separate from the water tank (28) and in thermal communication with the water tank.
Regarding claim 29, Dempsey discloses a fan (26) coupled to the third heat exchanger (24); and a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature at the output of the third heat exchanger (“temperature sensors (not shown) for providing signals of temperature sensed by the various components of the system 10 during space heating or cooling” [0016]; In embodiments, the controller 44 senses the temperature of the interior space 5” [0018]; from the previous quotes the system includes sensing of the space 5 which is the output of the third heat exchanger).
Regarding claim 30, Dempsey discloses the outdoor unit further comprises a reversing valve (“a reversing valve (not shown)” [0017]); and wherein outbound refrigerant from the outdoor unit flows from the compressor or from the first heat exchanger.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dempsey et al (US 2013/0104574) in view of Pierce (US 4,452,050).
Regarding claim 26, Dempsey discloses the heat pump system of claim 21, but lacks that the second heat exchanger is wrapped around the external surface of the water tank.
Pierce discloses a second heat exchanger (10) is implemented as a tubular structure wrapped around an external surface of the water tank.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Dempsey with the tubular wrapped type heat exchanger of Pierce in order to provide an increased efficiency heat exchange arrangement as explained in Pierce columns 1 and 2.
Claim(s) 28, 31-36, and 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dempsey et al (US 2013/0104574) in view of Kunimoto et al (US 2004/0144528).
Regarding claim 28, Dempsey discloses the heat pump system of claim 21, but is silent concerning a fan associated with the first heat exchanger (20). Kunimoto discloses a heat pump type water heater having a fan (32) coupled to a first/outdoor heat exchanger (5) and wherein a speed of the fan is adjusted based on a temperature of water in the water tank ([0116]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Dempsey with a fan and control thereof in order to match source heat with required heat, which is to say provide heat from the outdoor environment commensurate with system need. The examiner also notes that the breadth of the claim includes mere on/off operation of the fan. For example a system which merely turns on at a request for heat, e.g. a water tank thermostat, that includes a fan satisfies the claim. The control of speed being either on (some speed) or off (zero speed).
Regarding claim 31, Dempsey discloses a heat pump system comprising:
a first unit (14) including a compressor (18) and a first heat exchanger (20);
a second unit (12) including a water tank (28) and a second heat exchanger (42) in thermal communication with the water tank, the second unit being in fluid communication with the first unit;
a third unit (16) including a third heat exchanger (24), the third unit being in fluid communication with the first unit and the second unit;
a first temperature sensor configured to determine temperature of water inside the second unit (“Based upon a network of sensory inputs sensing several parameters, the microprocessor may, in embodiments, selectively operate the outdoor assembly 14, indoor assembly 16, and hot-water module 12” and “receiving, via a sensor, a control signal indicative of a call for the hot water heating” said sensors are ); and
a valve (38) configurable in a first configuration and a second configuration, wherein in the first configuration, the valve is configured to direct a flow of refrigerant received from the first unit to the second heat exchanger (42),
wherein in the second configuration, the valve (38) is configured to direct a flow of refrigerant received from the first unit to the third heat exchanger (24).
While Dempsey discloses the sensor provides a signal indicative of a call for the hot water heating the sensor is not explicitly stated to determine the temperature within the tank.
Kunimoto discloses a heat pump water heater including a temperature sensor (51) to determine the water temperature within tank (62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Dempsey with a temperature sensor for the water tank in order to maintain a set point temperature therein.
Regarding claim 32, Dempsey discloses the valve (38) is a 3-way or solenoid valve ([0015]).
Regarding claim 33, Dempsey discloses water is circulated from the second heat exchanger to the water tank ([0018]).
Regarding claim 34, Dempsey discloses the valve (38) is operable to either direct flow of refrigerant to the second heat exchanger or cause the refrigerant to bypass the second heat exchanger ([0017] refrigerant does not circulate through line circuit 34).
Regarding claim 35, Dempsey discloses the third unit includes a fan (26) coupled to the third heat exchanger (24) and the heat pump system is further configured to:
determine a temperature at the output of the third heat exchanger (“temperature sensors (not shown) for providing signals of temperature sensed by the various components of the system 10 during space heating or cooling” [0016]; In embodiments, the controller 44 senses the temperature of the interior space 5” [0018]; from the previous quotes the system includes sensing of the space 5 which is the output of the third heat exchanger).
Dempsey is silent concerning adjusting a speed of the second fan based on the temperature. The examiner takes official notice that adjusting fan speed based on temperature is old and well known. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Dempsey with fan speed control based on temperature in order to match heat exchange with demand, e.g. activating the fan when heat exchange is requested and ceasing fan operation when heat exchange is not requested. Thus providing for adjusting speed between a speed and zero speed. Matching heat exchange with demand further increases efficiency, e.g. operating a fan when air flow therefrom is not desired is wasteful of energy.
Regarding claim 36, Dempsey discloses heated water is stored in the water tank ([0018]).
Regarding claim 38, Dempsey discloses the second heat exchanger (42) is separate from the water tank (28) and in thermal communication with the water tank.
Regarding claim 39, Dempsey discloses the outdoor unit further comprises a reversing valve (“a reversing valve (not shown)” [0017]); and wherein outbound refrigerant from the outdoor unit flows from the compressor or from the first heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 40, Dempsey discloses a fan (26) coupled to the third heat exchanger (24); and a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature at the output of the third heat exchanger (“temperature sensors (not shown) for providing signals of temperature sensed by the various components of the system 10 during space heating or cooling” [0016]; In embodiments, the controller 44 senses the temperature of the interior space 5” [0018]; from the previous quotes the system includes sensing of the space 5 which is the output of the third heat exchanger).
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dempsey et al (US 2013/0104574), Kunimoto et al (US 2004/0144528), and in view of Pierce (US 4,452,050).
Regarding claim 37, Dempsey discloses the heat pump system of claim 21, but lacks that the second heat exchanger is wrapped around the external surface of the water tank.
Pierce discloses a second heat exchanger (10) is implemented as a tubular structure wrapped around an external surface of the water tank.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Dempsey with the tubular wrapped type heat exchanger of Pierce in order to provide an increased efficiency heat exchange arrangement as explained in Pierce columns 1 and 2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Barger (US 2006/0179874) bypass of water subsystem
Pendergrass (US 5,628,200) reversible heat pump water heater
Nelson et al (US 2010/0209084) tank mounted coil heat pump
Bourne et al (US 4,693,089) reversible heat pump water heater with tank bypass
Harmon et al (US 7,155,922) heat pump water heater with water tank bypass
Ecker et al (US 4,336,692) fan speed control of 23 relative to water temperature
Tamaki et al (US 9,377,224) reversible heat pump water heater
Hayashi et al (US 7,594,409) hot water heater with heat pump
Gerteis (US 3,308,877) heat pump water heater with fan control
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-4:00 PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 5712707740. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights