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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 5/23/2025 was/were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 7-10 and 13 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites “fluidly connect to the heating flow path” and should recite - - fluidly connecting to the heating flow path - - .
Claim 8, line 4, recites “chill-heating unit” and should recite - - cooling-heating unit - - .
Claim 13 recites “the secondary cooling-heating units are shutdown in the second mode” and should recite - - the one or more of the secondary cooling-heating units are shutdown in the second mode - -
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 9-10 are objected to as being dependent from an objected claim.
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 supplemental heating unit in claim 11 and 17.
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.
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(s) 5, 11, and 17 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recite(s) “wherein when operating at least one of the one or more primary cooling-heating units, the at least one of the one or more primary cooling-heating units operate at or about maximum conditioning capacity prior to activating any of the one or more secondary cooling-heating units”. Said recitation is a method step in an apparatus claim. Per MPEP 2173.05(p), section II “A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph”.
Claim limitation “supplemental heating unit” in claim 11 and 17 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
(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) 1, 3-4, 6-9, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rosen et al. (US 2022/0003427).
Per claim 1, Rosen teaches a heating-cooling system, comprising:
a heating flow path (40) for a first process fluid (fluid in 40),
a cooling flow path (60) for a second process fluid,
cooling-heating units (plurality of 70) each fluidly connected to the heating flow path and to the cooling flow path,
each of the cooling-heating units including a refrigerant circuit with
a compressor (“compressor”, para. 0019),
an expander (inherent),
a condenser (71) for heating the first process fluid, and
an evaporator (72) for cooling the second process fluid,
the cooling-heating units including:
a primary cooling-heating unit (uppermost 70 shown in figure 1), and
one or more secondary cooling-heating units (second uppermost 70 shown in figure 1),
the primary cooling-heating unit (uppermost 70) and the secondary cooling-heating units (second uppermost 70) being fluidly connected to the heating flow path (40) such that when active, a heating load is prioritized to the primary cooling-heating unit (uppermost 70) over the secondary cooling-heating unit (second uppermost 70) (i.e. when only the uppermost 70 is used during heating) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085).
Per claim 3, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the primary cooling-heating unit (uppermost 70 as shown in figure 1) is a single primary cooling-heating unit and the secondary cooling-heating unit (second uppermost 70 as shown in figure 1) is a single secondary cooling-hearing unit.
Per claim 4, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen teaches
wherein the one or more primary cooling-heating units are two or more primary cooling-heating units (uppermost 70 and third uppermost 70 as shown in figure 1) fluidly connected to the heating flow path (40) in parallel (see figure 1), and the one or more secondary cooling-heating units are two or more of secondary cooling-heating units (second uppermost and fourth uppermost 70 as shown in figure 1) fluidly connected to the cooling flow path (60) in parallel (see figure 1).
Per claim 6, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the primary cooling-heating unit has an inlet (see annotated figure below) and an outlet (see annotated figure below) each fluidly connected to the heating flow path (40), and the one or more secondary cooling-heating units have an inlet that fluidly connects to the heating flow path between the inlet and the outlet of the one or more primary cooling-heating units (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
824
749
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Per claim 7, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 6. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the secondary cooling-heating unit has an outlet fluidly (see annotated figure below) connecting to the heating flow path (40), and the outlet of primary cooling-heating unit (see annotated figure below) fluidly connect to the heating flow path (40) between the inlet (see annotated figure below) and the outlet (see annotated figure below) of the secondary cooling-heating unit (second uppermost 70 as shown in figure 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
850
653
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Per claim 8, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen teaches
a controller (80) for the heating-cooling system,
the controller configured to selectively operate the heating-cooling system in each of a plurality of modes that include:
a first mode in which the primary cooling-heating unit is shutdown and the secondary cooling-heating unit is active (when the uppermost 70 is off and the second uppermost 70 is on as shown in figure 1) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085),
a second mode in which the secondary cooling-heating unit is shutdown and the one or more primary cooling-heating unit is active (when the uppermost 70 is active and the second uppermost 70 is off as shown in figure 1) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085), and
a third mode in which the secondary cooling-heating unit is active and the primary cooling-heating unit is active (when the uppermost and second uppermost 70 are active as shown in figure 1) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085).
Per claim 9, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 8. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the controller (80) is configured to selectively operate the heating-cooling system in each of a plurality of modes based on one or more of a heating demand for the first process fluid (40) and a cooling demand for the second process fluid (60) (“The number of heat pumps 70 of the thermal energy extraction assembly 1 may be selected based on a heat pump capacity needed for providing a maximum desired heating and/or cooling demands”, para. 0077).
Per claim 12, Rosen teaches a method of controlling a heating-cooling system, the heating-cooling system including
a heating flow path (40) for a first process fluid (fluid circulating in 40),
a cooling flow path (60) for a second process fluid (fluid circulating in 60), and
cooling-heating units (plurality of 70) that are each fluidly connected to the heating flow path and to the cooling flow path (see figure 1),
the cooling-heating units including
a primary cooling-heating units (uppermost 70 shown in figure 1) and
a secondary cooling-heating units (second uppermost 70 shown in figure 1),
the method comprising:
selectively operating the heating-cooling system in a plurality of modes including:
a first mode,
wherein operating the heating-cooling system in a first mode includes the secondary cooling-heating unit heating the first process fluid and cooling the second process fluid (when the second uppermost 70 is operating) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085),
a second mode,
wherein operating in the second mode includes the primary cooling-heating unit heating the first process fluid and cooling the second process fluid (when the uppermost 70 is operating) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085),
a third mode,
wherein operating in the third mode include the secondary cooling-heating unit and the primary cooling-heating unit each heating the first process fluid and cooling the second process fluid (when the uppermost and second uppermost 70 are operating) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085; “The control unit 80 may be configured to set the thermal energy extraction assembly 1 in both the heating mode and in the cooling mode at a specific point in time”, para. 0086),
wherein the primary cooling-heating unit operating at or about maximum conditioning capacity in the third mode (when the uppermost is operating a maximum capacity and the second uppermost 70 is operating) (“The control unit 80 is configured to individually control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70. The control unit 80 may individually set each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in an on mode or in an off mode. Hence, the control unit 80 may control each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in a binary manner setting each of the plurality of heat pumps 70 in either the on mode or in the off mode. Alternatively, the control unit 80 may be configured to individually adjust the heat pumping capacity of each of the plurality of heat pumps 70.”, para. 0085).
Per claim 13, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 12. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the primary cooling-heating unit is shutdown in the first mode (when only the second uppermost 70 is operating), and the secondary cooling-heating unit is shutdown in the second mode (when only the uppermost 70 is operating).
Per claim 14, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 12. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the selectively operating of the heating-cooling system in the plurality of modes is based on a conditioning demand for one or more of the first process fluid and the second process fluid (“The number of heat pumps 70 of the thermal energy extraction assembly 1 may be selected based on a heat pump capacity needed for providing a maximum desired heating and/or cooling demands”, para. 0077).
Per claim 15, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 12. Further, Rosen teaches wherein the conditioning demand includes a heating demand for the first process fluid (“The number of heat pumps 70 of the thermal energy extraction assembly 1 may be selected based on a heat pump capacity needed for providing a maximum desired heating and/or cooling demands”, para. 0077).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosen et al. (US 2022/0003427) in view of Funakoshi et al. (JP2005-337626) and Meister (US 20100287960).
Per claim 2, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen teaches the primary and secondary cooling-heating units but fails to explicitly teach wherein one or more of: the one or more secondary cooling-heating units have a smaller load capacity than the primary cooling-heating units, and the compressor in each of the one or more secondary cooling-heating units is a different compressor type from the compressor in the primary cooling-heating units.
Regarding the use of different capacity heat pumps, Funakoshi teaches a heat pump system wherein a secondary unit has a smaller load capacity than a primary unit (“And the maximum capacity of heat output of at least one heat pump circuit of the plurality of heat pump circuits is set to be larger than the maximum capacity of heat output of other heat pump circuits”) for reduced power consumption and increased efficiency (pg. 7 of translation). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a secondary unit with a smaller load capacity than a primary unit, as taught by Funakoshi in the invention of Rosen, in order to advantageously reduce power consumption and increase efficiency (pg. 7 of translation).
When the different capacity heat pumps of Funakoshi are combined with the primary and secondary cooling-heating units of Rosen, the result is wherein one or more of: the one or more secondary cooling-heating units have a smaller load capacity than the primary cooling-heating units, as claimed.
Regarding the different compressors, Meister teaches using different types of compressors in primary (M1) and secondary (M2) cooling-heating units (“As desired, different compressor makes can be installed in the same modules,”, para. 0031) for easily matching cooling/heating requirements of a space (para. 0006). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a different type of compressor as taught by Meister in the primary and secondar cooling-heating units of Rosen, as modified, in order to advantageously easily match cooling/heating requirements of a space (para. 0006).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosen et al. (US 2022/0003427) in view of Saeguse et al. (WO2024062536).
Per claim 5, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen fails to explicitly teach wherein when operating at least one of the one or more primary cooling-heating units, the at least one of the one or more primary cooling-heating units operate at or about maximum conditioning capacity prior to activating any of the one or more secondary cooling-heating units.
However, Saegusa teaches an air conditioning system wherein when operating a primary cooling-heating unit (5a), the primary cooling-heating unit operates at maximum prior to activating a secondary cooling-heating unit (5b) (“When the target capacity assigned to the first heat source machine among the operating heat source machines reaches the maximum operating capacity, the stopped second heat source machine is activated”, pg. 10 of translation) for increasing the efficiency of the system (pg. 9 of translation). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to, when operating a primary cooling-heating unit, operate the primary cooling-heating unit at a maximum prior to activating a secondary cooling-heating unit, as taught by Seagusa in the invention of Rosen, in order to advantageously increase the efficiency of the system (pg. 9 of translation).
Claim(s) 11 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosen et al. (US 2022/0003427) in view of He et al. (US 20210206235).
Per claim 11, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rosen fails to explicitly teach one or more of:
one or more supplemental heating units fluidly connected to the heating flow path, the one or more supplemental heating units configured to provide supplemental heating of the first process fluid; and
one or more supplemental cooling units fluidly connected to the cooling flow path, the one or more supplemental cooling units configured to provide supplemental cooling of the second process fluid.
However, He teaches a heating-cooling system including a supplemental heating unit (40) connected to a heating flow path (46), the supplemental heating unit configured to provide supplemental heating of a first process fluid (“coolant”, para. 0057) for maintaining a desired temperature of the process fluid (para. 0057). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a supplemental heating unit connected to a heating flow path, the supplemental heating unit configured to provide supplement heating of a first process fluid, as taught by He in the invention of Rosen, in order to advantageously maintain a desired temperature of the process fluid (para. 0057).
Per claim 17, Rosen meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 12. Further, Rosen teaches the operation of the heating-cooling system in the third mode but herein the operation of heating-cooling system in the third mode includes one or more of: heating, with one or more supplemental heating units of the heating-cooling system, the first process fluid, and cooling, with one or more supplemental cooling units of the heating-cooling system, the second process fluid.
However, He teaches operating a heating-cooling system includes heating, with a supplemental heating unit (40) of the heating-cooling system, a first process fluid (“coolant”, para. 0057) for maintaining a desired temperature of the process fluid (para. 0057). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to operate a heating-cooling system include, with a supplemental heating unit, a first process fluid, as taught by He in the invention of Rosen, in order to advantageously maintain a desired temperature of the process fluid (para. 0057).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Brockmann et al. (EP 3076110) teaches a heating and cooling system including a primary and secondary cooling-heating unit.
Moreau (US 20120125039) teaches a heating and cooling system including a primary and secondary cooling-heating unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J TEITELBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5142. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am-4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571) 272-66816681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID J TEITELBAUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights