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 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.
Claims 1-8, 10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okazaki (US 2012/0180510).
As to claim 1, Okazaki discloses an energy efficient heat pump for an HVAC system, comprising:
a working fluid circuit 101 configured to circulate a working fluid, wherein the circuit includes a compressor 1, a first heat exchanger 2, a second heat exchanger 3, and a reversing valve 7, wherein the reversing valve is configured to adjust a flow direction of the working fluid through the circuit; and
an ejector system comprising an ejector 4 configured to receive a first flow of the working fluid from the circuit as a suction fluid at inlet 42, receive a second flow of working fluid as a motive fluid at inlet 41, and direct a combined flow of the first and second flows toward the compressor (Fig. 5).
As to claim 2, Okazaki discloses:
the working fluid circuit comprising an expansion valve 11 on a circuit line between the first and second exchangers 2-3 wherein a first circuit portion extends from the second heat exchanger 3 to the expansion valve 11 and a second circuit portion extends from the expansion valve 11 to the first heat exchanger 2 (Fig. 5); and
the ejector system comprising a first conduit from the first circuit portion to the ejector to a chamber inlet 42 and a second conduit extending from the second circuit portion to a nozzle inlet 41 of the ejector (Fig. 5).
As to claim 3, Okazaki discloses a compressor suction conduit with a gas-liquid separator 5, wherein an outlet conduit extends from diffuser 45 of ejector 4 to direct the combined flow to the gas-liquid separator 5 (Figs. 5 and 10).
As to claim 4, Okazaki discloses separating vapor and liquid working fluid at separator 5 and directing the vapor working fluid to the compressor 1 and the liquid working fluid to the reversing valve 7 (Fig. 5).
As to claim 5, Okazaki discloses a valve 14 along the first conduit and a valve 13 along the second conduit.
As to claim 6, Okazaki discloses the first exchanger 2 exchanging heat with a supply air flow (paragraph 63) and the second exchanger 3 exchanging heat with an ambient air flow (paragraph 109).
As to claim 7, Okazaki discloses a cooling mode (Fig. 8), a heating mode (Fig. 7), and an ejector heating mode (Fig. 5) as claimed.
As to claim 8, Okazaki discloses operating in the ejector heating mode based on sensed data indicative of operating parameters of the heat pump (paragraph 43).
As to claim 10, Okazaki discloses operating in the ejector heating mode based on an ambient temperature being less than a threshold (paragraphs 60-62).
As to claims 12-20, the claims are rejected in view of Okazaki for the same reasons as discussed in the rejections above.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okazaki as applied in the rejections above.
As to claim 9, Okazaki teaches temperature-based control of the ejector heating mode (paragraphs 60-62) rather than a pressure-based control as claimed. However, absent any disclosure of criticality or unexpected result provided by the claimed feature, such is considered to be functionally equivalent as it arrives at the same control as that of Okazaki in a manner involving predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. Because these two control configurations were art-recognized equivalents at the time of the invention in those applications where it is immaterial whether pressure or temperature is used to select an operation mode, one of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to modify Okazaki to utilize a pressure-based selection of the ejector heating mode in the manner as claimed.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okazaki as applied in the rejections above, and further in view of Schydlo (US 2015/0033777).
As to claim 11, Okazaki does not explicitly teach an intermediate exchanger as claimed. However, Schydlo teaches that it is known to utilize an intermediate exchanger ZK which exchanges heat between gas refrigerant from a separator and liquid refrigerant for an ejector (Fig. 1) in order to reduce energy losses (paragraph 30). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Okazaki to utilize an intermediate exchanger as claimed and taught by Schydlo in order to further increase the energy efficiency of the system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 ET.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571)270-5054. 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.
/JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights