DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 6, the limitation "the first expansion units" contains a typographical error and should read as '-- the first expansion unit --'. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "a first expansion unit," and "a second expansion unit" in claims 1 and 6.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The "first expansion unit" is sufficiently described in the specification as an expansion valve or an electronic expansion valve (see pages 12-13, specification).
The "second expansion unit" is sufficiently described in the specification as an additional expansion valve or an electronic expansion valve (see pages 12-13, specification).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9 and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itou et al. (US 2014/0238067 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Itou discloses an operation method of a vapor injection heat pump system (see heat pump air conditioner 1, fig. 1, abstract and paragraph 93) which includes a compressor (compressor 11), an indoor heat exchanger (heat exchanger 12), an outdoor heat exchanger (exterior heat exchanger 20, see paragraph 138), an evaporator (evaporator 23), and a vapor injection module (integration valve 14, valve 13, separator 141b, see fig. 1), and in which the vapor injection module includes a first expansion valve unit (expansion valve 13, fig. 1 and paragraph 104), a gas-liquid separator (separator 141b, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 38, 106), and a second expansion valve unit (expansion valve 17 and valve 15, see fig. 1), the operation method comprising an operation of performing control:
in a first heating mode which is a non-vapor injection heating mode (see fig. 1); or a second heating mode which is a vapor injection heating mode (vapor supplied via valve member 18 and through 11b to compressor 11, see fig. 2 and paragraphs 101-102, 106), wherein,
in the operation of performing control, a refrigerant introduced into the vapor injection module is controlled to expand in the first expansion valve unit (refrigerant expanded by valve 13, see paragraphs 104-105), not expand after passing through the gas-liquid separator (refrigerant not expanded by passing through valve 15 after passing through separator 141b, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 130-131), and pass through the second expansion valve unit in the first heating mode (refrigerant passed through open valve 15 or expanded by valve 17, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 106, 129), and the refrigerant introduced into the vapor injection module is controlled to expand primarily in the first expansion valve unit (refrigerant expanded by valve 13, see paragraphs 104-105), pass through the gas-liquid separator (see refrigerant passed through separator 141b, fig. 2), and then expand secondarily in the second expansion unit in the second heating mode (refrigerant expanded by passing through valve 17 after passing through separator 141b, see fig. 2 and paragraphs 135, 106, 129).
In regards to claim 2, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that in the operation of performing control, when the first heating mode is performed for a predetermined time and then switched to the second heating mode (see cooling/dehumidification/heating modes being repeatedly performed for predetermined period of time, one mode after another, figs. 1-3 and paragraph 209):
an end time of the first heating mode and a start time of the second heating mode are set to be the same; or
the end time of the first heating mode is set to be later than the start time of the second heating mode (this is a contingent limitation in a method claim, see MPEP 2111.04; Also see figs. 1-3, for first valve 13 being controlled at the same time as second valves 15, 17; and heating modes after the cooling/dehumidification mode, fig. 2 and paragraphs 94-95).
In regards to claim 3, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that in the operation of performing control:
the second heating mode is performed for a predetermined time and then switched to the first heating mode (see cooling/dehumidification/heating modes being repeatedly performed for predetermined period of time, one mode after another, figs. 1-3 and paragraph 209); and
an end time of the first heating mode and a start time of the second heating mode are set to be the same; or
the end time of the second heating mode is set to be later than the start time of the first heating mode (see figs. 1-3, for first valve 13 being controlled at the same time as second valves 15, 17; and cooling/dehumidification mode performed after heating modes and all the operation modes repeated for predetermined period, see paragraphs 209 and figs. 1-3).
In regards to claim 4, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that the operation of performing control in the first heating mode for a predetermined time and then control in the second heating mode (see cooling/dehumidification/heating modes being repeatedly performed for predetermined period of time, one mode after another, figs. 1-3 and paragraph 209) or
perform direct control in the second heating mode according to a pressure difference between an inlet side pressure and an outlet side pressure of the compressor (this is an alternative limitation, see MPEP 2173.05).
In regards to claim 6, Itou discloses a vapor injection heat pump system (see heat pump air conditioner 1, fig. 1, abstract and paragraph 93) comprising:
a compressor (compressor 11);
an indoor heat exchanger (heat exchanger 12);
an outdoor heat exchanger (exterior heat exchanger 20, see paragraph 138);
an evaporator (evaporator 23);
a controller (ECU controller 40); and
a vapor injection module (integration valve 14, valve 13, separator 141b, see fig. 1), wherein the vapor injection module includes: a first expansion valve unit (expansion valve 13, fig. 1 and paragraph 104) which blocks a flow of a condensed refrigerant or expands and transfers the condensed refrigerant (refrigerant passed through and/or expanded by opening/closing valve 13, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 104-105) according to a first heating mode which is a non-vapor injection heating mode (see fig. 1) or a second heating mode which is a vapor injection heating mode (vapor supplied via valve member 18 and through 11b to compressor 11, see fig. 2 and paragraphs 101-102, 106);
a gas-liquid separator (separator 141b, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 38, 106) which separates the refrigerant received from the first expansion valve unit (expansion valve 13) into a gas phase refrigerant and a liquid phase refrigerant (see fig. 1 and paragraph 106); and
a second expansion valve unit (expansion valve 17 and valve 15, see fig. 1) which allows the condensed refrigerant to pass therethrough or expand (refrigerant passed through valve 15 or expanded by passing through valve 17, see paragraphs 106 and 129-131) or allows the liquid phase refrigerant separated in the gas-liquid separator to expand according to the first heating mode or the second heating mode (this is an alternative limitation, see MPEP 2173.05), and
the controller controls the refrigerant introduced into the vapor injection module to expand in the first expansion valve units (refrigerant expanded by valve 13, see paragraphs 104-105), not expand after passing through the gas-liquid separator (refrigerant not expanded by passing through valve 15 after passing through separator 141b, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 130-131), and pass through the second expansion valve unit in the first heating mode (refrigerant passed through open valve 15 or expanded by valve 17, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 106, 129) and
controls the refrigerant introduced into the vapor injection module to expand primarily in the first expansion unit (refrigerant expanded by valve 13, see paragraphs 104-105) and expand secondarily in the second expansion unit after passing through the gas-liquid separator in the second heating mode (refrigerant expanded by passing through valve 17 after passing through separator 141b, see fig. 2 and paragraphs 135, 106, 129).
In regards to claim 7, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses that the controller sets a control time for the first expansion unit and a control time for the second expansion unit to be the same or sets the control time for the first expansion unit to be later than the control time for the second expansion unit (see figs. 1-3, for first valve 13 being controlled at the same time as second valves 15, 17) when the first heating mode is performed for a predetermined time (see cooling/dehumidification operation modes of fig. 1 being performed for a predetermined period of time, paragraph 209) and then switched to the second heating mode (see heating modes after the cooling/dehumidification mode, fig. 2 and paragraphs 94-95).
In regards to claim 8, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses that the controller sets a control time for the first expansion unit and a control time for the second expansion unit to be the same or sets the control time for the second expansion unit to be later than the control time for the first expansion unit (see figs. 1-3, for first valve 13 being controlled at the same time as second valves 15, 17) when the second heating mode is performed for a predetermined time (see heating operation modes of figs. 2-3 being performed for a predetermined period of time, paragraph 209) and then switched to the first heating mode (cooling/dehumidification mode performed after heating modes and all the operation modes repeated for predetermined period, see paragraphs 209 and figs. 1-3).
In regards to claim 9, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses that the controller performs control in the first heating mode for a predetermined time (see figs. 1-3, for first valve 13 being controlled at the same time as second valves 15, 17, wherein the cooling or dehumidification operation modes of fig. 1 being performed for a predetermined period of time, paragraph 209) or perform direct control in the second heating mode (see fig. 2) according to a pressure difference between an inlet side pressure and an outlet side pressure (see paragraph 11) of the compressor (see paragraphs 47-49).
In regards to claim 11, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that in the first heating mode, the first expansion unit expands the refrigerant by adjusting an opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105; Also see the opening degree of valve 13), and the second expansion valve unit allows the refrigerant to pass by fully opening (refrigerant passed through fully open valve 15, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 106, 129).
In regards to claim 12, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that in the second heating mode, the first expansion unit expands the refrigerant by adjusting an opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105; Also see the opening degree of valve 13), and the second expansion valve unit by reducing the opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant blocked by closing valve 15, see fig. 2 and paragraph 224; Also see opening of valve 17 decreased, paragraph 150).
In regards to claim 13, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that in the second heating mode, the first expansion valve unit expands the refrigerant as a middle-pressure refrigerant (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105), and the second expansion valve unit expands the refrigerant as a low-pressure refrigerant (intermediate pressure refrigerant further expanded to low pressure by the second expansion valve 17, see fig. 2 and paragraph 175).
In regards to claim 14, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses that in the first heating mode, the first expansion unit expands the refrigerant by adjusting an opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105; Also see the opening degree of valve 13), and the second expansion valve unit allows the refrigerant to pass by fully opening (refrigerant passed through fully open valve 15, see fig. 1 and paragraphs 106, 129).
In regards to claim 15, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses that in the second heating mode, the first expansion unit expands the refrigerant by adjusting an opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105; Also see the opening degree of valve 13), and the second expansion valve unit by reducing the opening extent to meet the target control value (refrigerant blocked by closing valve 15, see fig. 2 and paragraph 224; Also see opening of valve 17 decreased, paragraph 150).
In regards to claim 16, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses that in the second heating mode, the first expansion valve unit expands the refrigerant as a middle-pressure refrigerant (refrigerant expanded by valve 13 to intermediate pressure, see paragraphs 104-105), and the second expansion valve unit expands the refrigerant as a low-pressure refrigerant (intermediate pressure refrigerant further expanded to low pressure by the second expansion valve 17, see fig. 2 and paragraph 175).
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou (US 2014/0238067 A1) as applied to claim 4 above and further in view of Ali (US 2017/0074567 A1).
In regards to claim 5, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 4 and further discloses that the operation of performing control performs:
control in the second heating mode (see vapor supply via 11b and valve 18, fig. 2) when a pressure difference between an inlet side pressure and an outlet side pressure of the separator changes (this is a contingent limitation in a method claim, see MPEP 2111.04; Also see paragraphs 149 and 157-160); and
control in the first heating mode (see restriction of vapor supply and operation of valve 15, fig. 1) when the pressure difference is smaller than or equal to the predetermined reference pressure (this is a contingent limitation in a method claim, see MPEP 2111.04; Also see paragraph 204 and fig. 1).
However, Itou does not explicitly teach that the vapor injection is based on compressor discharge pressure.
Ali discloses a controller (controller 210) configured to control second heating mode of supplying flash gas to the compressor (by opening flash gas bypass valve 155, see paragraphs 37 and 39) when a pressure difference between the inlet side pressure and the outlet side pressure of the compressor is greater than a predetermined reference pressure (when compressor discharge pressure measured by sensor 220 exceeds the threshold value at step 415, fig. 4, pulse valve is actuated at step 420, fig. 4 and paragraph 46); and control in the first heating mode of blocking supply of flash gas to the compressor (by closing bypass valve 155, see paragraph 25) when the pressure difference is smaller than or equal to the predetermined reference pressure (deactivating valve at step 430 when measured pressure falls below threshold at step 425, see fig. 4).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reprogrammed the controller of Itou to perform control of second heating mode when a pressure difference between the inlet side pressure and the outlet side pressure of the compressor is greater than a predetermined reference pressure; and control in the first heating mode when the pressure difference is smaller than or equal to the predetermined reference pressure based on the teachings of Ali in order to mix the flash gas from separator with refrigerant in the intermediate stage of the compressor to cool the refrigerant before the refrigerant is received by high pressure stage of the compressor (see paragraph 25, Ali).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou (US 2014/0238067 A1) as applied to claim 9 above and further in view of Ali (US 2017/0074567 A1).
In regards to claim 10, Itou teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses that the controller performs control in the second heating mode (see vapor supply via 11b and valve 18, fig. 2) when a pressure difference between the inlet side pressure and the outlet side pressure of the separator changes (paragraphs 149 and 157-160); and control in the first heating mode (see restriction of vapor supply and operation of valve 15, fig. 1) when a pressure difference is smaller than or equal to a reference pressure (see paragraph 204 and fig. 1).
However, Itou does not explicitly teach that the vapor injection is based on compressor discharge pressure.
Ali discloses a controller (controller 210) configured to control second heating mode of supplying flash gas to the compressor (by opening flash gas bypass valve 155, see paragraphs 37 and 39) when a pressure difference between the inlet side pressure and the outlet side pressure of the compressor is greater than a predetermined reference pressure (when compressor discharge pressure measured by sensor 220 exceeds the threshold value at step 415, fig. 4, pulse valve is actuated at step 420, fig. 4 and paragraph 46); and control in the first heating mode of blocking supply of flash gas to the compressor (by closing bypass valve 155, see paragraph 25) when the pressure difference is smaller than or equal to the predetermined reference pressure (deactivating valve at step 430 when measured pressure falls below threshold at step 425, see fig. 4).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reprogrammed the controller of Itou to perform control of second heating mode when a pressure difference between the inlet side pressure and the outlet side pressure of the compressor is greater than a predetermined reference pressure; and control in the first heating mode when the pressure difference is smaller than or equal to the predetermined reference pressure based on the teachings of Ali in order to mix the flash gas from separator with refrigerant in the intermediate stage of the compressor to cool the refrigerant before the refrigerant is received by high pressure stage of the compressor (see paragraph 25, Ali).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERAJ A SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-3027. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 9:00-1:00 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 on 571-270-7740. 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.
/MERAJ A SHAIKH/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights