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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 4/15/2025 and 7/23/2026 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) 4-7, 10, 12, and 13 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 3, recites “etemperature” and should recite - - temperature - - .
Claim 10 recites “it” and should recite - - the air - - .
Claim 12 recites “it” and should recite - - the flow of compressed air - - .
Claim 13, line 6, recites “it” and should recite - - the air - - .
Claim 13, line 9, recites “it” and should recite - - the flow of cooled air - - .
Claim 13, line 13, recites “it” and should recite - - the flow of compressed air - - .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 5-7 are objected to as being dependent from an objected claim.
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) 18 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 18 recites “A vehicle”. It is unclear if this is the same vehicle as recited in parent claim 1. For purposes of examination “A vehicle” will be considered - - The vehicle - - .
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) 1, 3, 11, 18-20, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 20120023893) in view of Bureau et al. (US 20020088246) and Jung et al. (US 20120179297).
Per claim 1, Yoo teaches a system for supplying cooled air in a vehicle, the system comprising:
an air cycle machine, ACM, comprising an air compression stage (220) arranged to receive and compress a flow of air so as to produce a flow of compressed air, a heat exchange stage (250) arranged to cool said compressed air, and an air expansion stage (230) arranged to expand air received from the heat exchange stage so as to output a flow of cooled air having a temperature lower than a temperature of the air received by the air compression stage;
an airflow path (air path shown in figure 3) configured to direct the cooled air from the ACM to one or more parts of the vehicle;
a phase change material, PCM, heat exchanger (260) arranged to further cool the air prior to said air reaching at least one part of the vehicle among said one or more parts (130), in addition to cooling provided by the ACM and
but fails to explicitly teach
a controller configured to control an extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air in dependence on a load on the system.
However, Bureau teaches a refrigeration system configured to control (via control of 258) an extent to which a PCM heat exchanger (232) further lowers a temperature of cooled air in dependence on a load of a refrigeration system (“pull-down mode”, para. 0044) for maximum refrigeration capacity (para. 0044). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure to control an extent to which a PCM heat exchanger further lowers a temperature of cooled air in dependence on a load of a refrigeration system, as taught by Bureau in the invention of Yoo in order to advantageously maximize refrigeration capacity (para. 0044).
Regarding the use of a controller, Jung teaches using a controller in a cooling system increases efficiency (para. 0013). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a controller, as taught by Jung in the combined teachings, in order to advantageously increase system efficiency (para. 0013).
When the use of a controller taught by Jung is combined with the system of Yoo, as modified, configured to control the extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air in dependence on the load on the system, the result is a controller configured to control an extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air in dependence on a load on the system, as claimed.
Per claim 3, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Yoo, as modified, teaches the PCM heat exchanger (260) but fails to explicitly teach a first bypass flow path configured to permit at least a portion of air flowing along the airflow path to bypass the PCM heat exchanger; and
a flow control mechanism operable to control a flow rate of air along the first bypass flow path relative to a flow rate of air passing through the PCM heat exchanger,
wherein the controller is configured to control the flow control mechanism in dependence on the load on the system, so as to control the extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air prior to said air reaching the at least one part of the vehicle.
However, Bureau teaches a refrigeration system including a first bypass flow path (air path when 258 is closed) configured to permit at least a portion of air flowing along the airflow path to bypass the PCM heat exchanger; and a flow control mechanism (258) operable to control a flow rate of air along the first bypass flow path relative to a flow rate of air passing through the PCM heat exchanger,
wherein the refrigeration system is configured to control the flow control mechanism in dependence on the load on the system, so as to control the extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air prior to said air reaching the at least one part of the vehicle (“pull-down mode”, para. 0044) for maximum refrigeration capacity (para. 0044). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide
a first bypass flow path configured to permit at least a portion of air flowing along the airflow path to bypass the PCM heat exchanger; and
a flow control mechanism operable to control a flow rate of air along the first bypass flow path relative to a flow rate of air passing through the PCM heat exchanger,
wherein the refrigeration system is configured to control the flow control mechanism in dependence on the load on the system, so as to control the extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air prior to said air reaching the at least one part of the vehicle, as taught by Bureau in the invention of Yoo, as modified, in order to advantageously provide maximum refrigeration capacity (para. 0044).
Regarding the controller, Jung teaches using a controller in a cooling system increases efficiency (para. 0013). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a controller, as taught by Jung in the combined teachings, in order to advantageously increase system efficiency (para. 0013).
When the Jung controller is combined with the system configured to control the flow control mechanism in dependence on the load on the system, so as to control the
extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air prior to said air reaching the at least one part of the vehicle, the result is wherein the controller is configured to control the flow control mechanism in dependence on the load on the system, so as to control the extent to which the PCM heat exchanger further lowers the temperature of the cooled air prior to said air reaching the at least one part of the vehicle, as claimed.
Per claim 11, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Yoo, as modified, teaches wherein the PCM heat exchanger (260) is disposed along the airflow path between the ACM (220, 230) and the one or more parts of the vehicle (130), so as to further cool the flow of cooled air from the ACM before the air reaches the one or more parts (130).
Per claim 18, Yoo, as modified, teaches the vehicle (“vehicle”, para. 0025) comprising the system according to claim 1.
Per claim 19, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 18. Further, Yoo, as modified, teaches wherein the vehicle is an aircraft (“aircraft”, para. 0027).
Per claim 20, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Yoo, as modified, teaches wherein the part (130) of the vehicle comprises a cockpit (the aircraft cockpit is considered a part of the cabin).
Per claim 22, claim 22 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is rejected in a similar manner.
Further, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 20120023893) in view of Bureau et al. (US 20020088246) and Jung et al. (US 20120179297) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Derouineau et al. (US 20080264084).
Per claim 15, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Yoo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein the airflow path is a recirculation airflow path configured to direct air from the one or more parts of the vehicle back to the air compression stage of the ACM, so as to recirculate air within the vehicle.
However, Derouineau teaches a cooling system wherein an airflow path is a recirculation airflow path (48, 49) configured to direct air from a part (42) of a vehicle (“aircraft”, para. 0018) back to an air compression stage (52) of an ACM (44), so as to recirculate air within the vehicle (see figure 2A) for maintaining vehicle temperature and pressure efficiently (para. 0019). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an airflow path is a recirculation airflow path configured to direct air from a parts of a vehicle back to an air compression stage of an ACM, so as to recirculate air within the vehicle, as taught by Derouineau in the invention of Yoo, as modified, in order to advantageously maintain vehicle temperature and pressure efficiently (para. 0019).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 20120023893) in view of Bureau et al. (US 20020088246) and Jung et al. (US 20120179297) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Veilleux (US 20100326085).
Per claim 16, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 15. Further, Yoo, as modified, teaches the ACM but fails to explicitly teach wherein the ACM is an electric air cycle machine, E-ACM.
However, Veilleux teaches a vehicle including an ACM as an electric air cycle machine (para. 0018) for providing on-board power to the vehicle (para. 0018). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an E-ACM, as taught by Veilleux in the invention of Yoo, as modified, in order to advantageously provide on-board power to a vehicle (para. 0018).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al. (US 20120023893) in view of Bureau et al. (US 20020088246) and Jung et al. (US 20120179297) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Derouineau et al. (US 20080264084) and Veilleux (US 20100326085).
Per claim 17, Yoo, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Yoo, as modified, fails to explicitly teach the airflow path is a recirculation airflow path configured to direct air from the one or more parts of the vehicle back to the air compression stage of the ACM, so as to recirculate air within the vehicle; the air cycle machine is an electric air cycle machine, E-ACM; and
the E- ACM is a closed-loop E-ACM.
Regarding the recirculation airflow path, Derouineau teaches a cooling system wherein an airflow path is a recirculation airflow path (48, 49) configured to direct air from a part (42) of a vehicle (“aircraft”, para. 0018) back to an air compression stage (52) of an ACM (44), so as to recirculate air within the vehicle (see figure 2A), the ACM is a closed loop ACM (“closed cooling loop”, para. 0020) for maintaining vehicle temperature and pressure efficiently (para. 0019). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an airflow path is a recirculation airflow path configured to direct air from a parts of a vehicle back to an air compression stage of an ACM, so as to recirculate air within the vehicle, the ACM is a closed loop ACM, as taught by Derouineau in the invention of Yoo, as modified, in order to advantageously maintain vehicle temperature and pressure efficiently (para. 0019).
Regarding the E-ACM, Veilleux teaches a vehicle including an ACM as an E-ACM (para. 0018) for providing on-board power to the vehicle (para. 0018). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an ACM as an E-ACM, as taught by Veilleux in the combined teachings, in order to advantageously provide on-board power to a vehicle (para. 0018).
When the Veilleux E-ACM is combined with the closed-loop ACM of Yoo, as modified, the result is the E- ACM is a closed-loop E-ACM, as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4-10 and 12-14 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:
Hu (US 20040159118) teaches a cooling system including a phase change material.
Wijaya et al. (US 10,179,498) teaches a cooling system including a phase change material.
Bartlett (US 9643468) teaches a cooling system including a phase change material.
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
