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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the fluid permeable body, said internal pathway extending through said fluid permeable body, HVAC, Air Source Heat Pump or ORC system must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 39, 45, and 47 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“said blades include a rip region” in claim 39, appears to be an error for “said blades include a tip region”,
“An HVAC, Air Source Heat Pump or ORC system” in claims 45 and 47, appears to be an error for “a Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC), Air Source Heat Pump or organic Rankine cycle (ORC) system”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 31-38 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.
Regarding claim 31, the recitation of “one or more of said blades includes an internal blade pathway through which working fluid can flow” is unclear since claim 28 already recites “wherein the fan and the heat exchanger each include an internal pathway through which working fluid can flow”. Therefore, it’s unclear if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28 or different. To expedite prosecution, Examiner interprets the above to read as if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28.
Regarding claim 32, the recitation of “said blade comprises one or more internal walls, said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway” is unclear since claim 28 already recites “wherein the fan and the heat exchanger each include an internal pathway through which working fluid can flow” and claim 31 recites “wherein one or more of said blades includes an internal blade pathway through which working fluid can flow”. Therefore, it’s unclear if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28 and part of the “internal blade pathway” of claim 31 or different. To expedite prosecution, Examiner interprets the above to read as if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28 and the same “internal blade pathway” of claim 31.
Regarding claim 33, the recitation of “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway that is serpentine in two dimensions within said blade” is unclear since claim 28 already recites “wherein the fan and the heat exchanger each include an internal pathway through which working fluid can flow” and claim 31 recites “wherein one or more of said blades includes an internal blade pathway through which working fluid can flow”. Therefore, it’s unclear if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28 and part of the “internal blade pathway” of claim 31 or different. To expedite prosecution, Examiner interprets the above to read as if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” of claim 28 and the same “internal blade pathway” of claim 31.
Claims 34-38 are rejected at least insofar as they are dependent on rejected claim(s), and therefore include the same error(s).
Claim 46 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.
Regarding claim 46, the recitation of “said blades include an internal blade pathway through which working fluid can flow” is unclear since the claim already recites “the fan and the heat exchanger each include an internal pathway through which working fluid can flow” and also recites “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway”. Therefore, it’s unclear if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” part of the “internal blade pathway” recited in “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway” or different. To expedite prosecution, Examiner interprets the above to read as if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” and the same “internal blade pathway” recited in “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway”.
Claim 47 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.
Regarding claim 47, the recitation of “said blades include an internal blade pathway through which working fluid can flow” is unclear since the claim already recites “the fan and the heat exchanger each include an internal pathway through which working fluid can flow” and also recites “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway”. Therefore, it’s unclear if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” part of the “internal blade pathway” recited in “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway” or different. To expedite prosecution, Examiner interprets the above to read as if the “internal blade pathway” is part of the “internal pathway” and the same “internal blade pathway” recited in “said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway”.
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.
Claims 28-32, 34-37, 39 and 42-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Azzouz (US20190170158A1: cited by Applicant).
Regarding claim 28, Azzouz teaches a heat transfer system (see Figure 1) comprising: a fan (5), and a heat exchanger (8) arranged relative to the fan (5) so that the fan (5) is operable to blow or draw air over and/or through the heat exchanger (8: see Figure 1), wherein the fan (5) and the heat exchanger (8) each include an internal pathway (21a of 5 and internal pathway of 8a) through which working fluid can flow (see Figure 3 and ¶ [0116]), the respective internal pathways being coupled to one another so that working fluid can flow through the fan and the heat exchanger for heat transfer between the working fluid and air surrounding said heat transfer system (see at least ¶ [0116]).
Regarding claim 29, Azzouz further teaches wherein the fan (5) comprises a hollow axle (18: see Figure 2), a hollow hub (9) fluidly coupled to the axle (18) so that working fluid can flow through the axle and the hub (see at least ¶ [0126]), and a plurality of blades (10) extending radially from the hub (see Figure 3); at least said axle being of a heat conducting material so that heat transfer can occur between working fluid flowing through said axle and the air (see at least ¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 30, Azzouz further teaches wherein said hollow hub (9) and/or said blades (10) is/are of a heat conducting material (see at least ¶ [0017]), and optionally at least one of said blades is hollow and fluidly coupled to said hub so that working fluid can flow into and out of said hollow blade for heat transfer with the air.
Regarding claim 31, Azzouz further teaches wherein one or more of said blades (10) includes an internal blade pathway (21a) through which working fluid can flow (see Figure 3), and said internal blade pathway (21a) includes a plurality of perturbators (35) operable to increase perturbations in working fluid flowing through the internal blade pathway (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 32, Azzouz further teaches wherein said blade (10) comprises one or more internal walls (see in Figure 3(d) where the blades include internal walls that forms the turns in the pathway (21a)), said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway that is serpentine in one dimension within said blade, said internal blade pathway being serpentine in one dimension that extends lengthwise between a leading edge and a trailing edge of said blade (see Figure 3(d) where 21a serpentine in one dimension that extends lengthwise between a leading edge and a trailing edge of 10).
Regarding claim 34, Azzouz further teaches wherein said internal blade pathway (21a) comprises an inlet for ingress of working fluid and an outlet for egress of working fluid, wherein:(i) said inlet is located in a first blade and said outlet is located in a second blade that is radially spaced from said first blade so that said internal blade pathway extends through more than one blade (see in Figure 3(d) where 21a of the blades include an inlet (19a) for ingress of working fluid located in a first blade and an outlet (19b) for egress of working fluid located in a second blade that is radially spaced from said first blade so that said internal blade pathway extends through more than one blade), or (ii) said inlet and said outlet are located in the same blade so that said internal blade pathway extends through a single blade.
Regarding claim 35, Azzouz further teaches wherein said hub includes an internal baffle (28: see Figure 5) having a first side (side of 19a) and a second side (side of 19b), wherein said baffle subdivides said hollow hub into a first manifold (27 of 19a) proximate said first side of said baffle and a second manifold (27 of 19b) proximate said second side of said baffle (see Figure 5), each said manifold including a plurality of ports at spaced locations about a peripheral wall of the hub (see Figure 5 (g) where each manifold includes a plurality of ports for the fluid to flow to the blades).
Regarding claim 36, Azzouz further teaches wherein said ports enable fluid communication between said hub (9) and the inlet and the outlet of said internal blade pathway (see Figure 5 where the first manifold (27 of 19a) enables fluid communication between 9 and inlet of blades while the second manifold (27 of 19b) enables fluid communication between 9 and outlet of blades).
Regarding claim 37, Azzouz further teaches wherein a port (19a) in said first manifold (27 of 19a) is in fluid communication with said inlet (see Figure 5), and a port (19b) in said second manifold (27 of 19b) is in fluid communication with said outlet (see Figure 5).
Regarding claim 39, Azzouz further teaches wherein said blades include a rip region, and the tip region of at least one of said blades comprises a winglet (see in Figure 7 where 10a and 10b include in the tip region (i.e. near 11b) a winglet).
Regarding claim 42, Azzouz further teaches wherein said heat exchanger (8) comprises a fluid permeable body (the part of 8 that extends between 16c and 17c), said internal pathway extending through said fluid permeable body (Examiner notes that it’s inherent to Azzouz’s radiator (8) to have pipes where said internal pathway extending and fins which together define fluid permeable body).
Regarding claims 43 and 44, Azzouz further teaches wherein said internal pathway through said heat exchanger comprises a length of piping through which working fluid can flow for heat exchange between the pipe and the air, comprising a plurality of vanes through which said length of piping extends, said vanes being thermally coupled to said piping (Examiner notes that it’s inherent to Azzouz’s radiator (8) to have a length of piping through which working fluid can flow for heat exchange between the pipe and the air while comprising a plurality of vanes through which said length of piping extends).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 38 and 45 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azzouz (US20190170158A1: cited by Applicant) as applied to claims 28 or 37 above, and further in view of Bastian (US20160091255A1).
Regarding claim 38, Azzouz does not teach wherein: (i) sidewalls of one or more of said blades are provided with a plurality of ribs, and/or (ii) an external surface of said hub is provided with a plurality of ribs.
Bastian teaches a fan (see Figure 2) comprising blades (104) that are provided with a plurality of ribs (118and/or 140).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the blades of Azzouz with a plurality of ribs, as taught by Bastian, such provision would provide the benefit of an increase in surface area for turbulent air to interact with the blades so as to provide a more rapid and/or efficient thermal exchange with ambient air.
Regarding claim 45, Azzouz does not teach an HVAC, Air Source Heat Pump or ORC system comprising a heat transfer system according to claim 28.
However, it’s old and well known in the art to use Azzouz’s heat transfer system in an air conditioning system, as evidenced by Bastian, see Bastian’s ¶ [0031] i.e. “In one embodiment of the present invention a pump may be fluidically connected to outlet pipe 112 to assist in the transfer of cooled heat holding media to a device or situation where cooling is desired (e.g., an air conditioning unit, etc”).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Azzouz’s heat transfer system with an HVAC, Air Source Heat Pump or ORC system, since as evidenced by Bastian, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of having an HVAC, Air Source Heat Pump or ORC system with an efficient heat transfer system.
Claims 40 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azzouz (US20190170158A1: cited by Applicant) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of DENG (US 20090314466 A1).
Regarding claim 40, Azzouz does not teach wherein said heat exchanger defines a recess in which at least part of said fan is located.
However, it’s old and well known in the art for heat exchangers to define a recess in which at least part of a fan is located, as evidenced by DENG, see DENG’s Figure 8 where the heat exchanger (30) defines a recess (39) in which at least part of a fan (50) is located, see also Figure 1.
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heat exchanger of Azzouz to define a recess in which at least part of said fan is located, since as evidenced by DENG, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of increasing heat transfer rate since most of the airflow produced by the fan flow through heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 41, Azzouz does not teach wherein said fan is enclosed within a void defined inside said heat exchanger.
However, it’s old and well known in the art for heat exchangers to have a fan that is enclosed within a void defined inside the heat exchanger, as evidenced by DENG, see DENG’s Figure 8 where the heat exchanger (30) has a void (39) in which a fan (50) is enclosed, see also Figure 1.
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the heat exchanger of Azzouz to have a fan that is enclosed within a void defined inside the heat exchanger, since as evidenced by DENG, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of increasing heat transfer rate since most of the airflow produced by the fan flow through heat exchanger.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 33 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 46 and 47 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 33, 46, and 47 are containing allowable subject matter since Azzouz in view of DANG or Bastian fails to teach said internal walls being configured to provide an internal blade pathway that is serpentine in two dimensions within said blade, wherein said blade has a leading edge, a trailing edge, and first and second sidewalls extending between said leading and trailing edges; said internal blade pathway being serpentine in a first dimension that extends longitudinally between said leading edge and said trailing edge, and in a second dimension that extends transversely between said first and second sidewalls.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHALED AL SAMIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-8685. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30AM~3:30PM, M-F (E.S.T.).
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 (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.
/KHALED AHMED ALI AL SAMIRI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights