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 (IDS) submitted on 09/09/2025 was filed after the filing date of the instant application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 3-4 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.
The recitation of “…the evaporator and condenser comprise a dual function device…” (claim 3) is unclear. The recitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the dual function device refers to a separate structure including the evaporator and the condenser, or if it refers to the evaporator and the condenser each having a dual function. When reviewing Applicant’s disclosure, more specifically par.58, Applicant discloses that “…FIG. 2 shows a schematic view of an example of a sorption device 200 including a combined evaporator and condenser that includes a combined evaporator and condenser chamber 211 that is configured to perform both functions of evaporation and condensation and a housing 217.” Therefore, for examination purposes, the recitation won’t be examined as a separate device besides the evaporator ant the condenser, but as the evaporator and the condenser being combined and performing both functions of evaporation and condensation. Correction is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the flow" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the limitation has been considered as --a flow--.
The recitation of “…wherein the evaporator and condenser comprise an evaporator…and a separate condenser…” (claim 4) is unclear. The recitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the recitation is trying to claim a second evaporator and a second condenser separate from the ones previously claimed in claim 1. For examination purposes, the entirety of claim 4 will be examined as follows: --…wherein the evaporator and condenser comprise the evaporator fluidly coupled to the sorber bed chamber for a flow of vapor from the evaporator into the sorber bed chamber for sorption by the sorbent material, and the condenser separate and fluidly coupled to the sorber bed chamber for the flow of vapor desorbed from the sorbent material into the condenser to regenerate the sorbent material.--.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 14-15, 17, 26 and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tabata (WO 2013/021994 A1, refer to attached translation).
Regarding claim 1, Tabata discloses a sorption device (refer to fig.7) comprising:
a sorber bed chamber (25) having a sorbent material disposed therein (refer to pg.1, par.2, wherein an adsorbent such as silica gel or zeolite is coated or filled on a substrate) and configured to sorb and desorb vapor from a refrigerant, the sorber bed chamber configured to exchange heat with a regenerative fluid (through heat exchanger 11) to effect desorption of the refrigerant from the sorbent material;
an evaporator (29) and condenser (27) fluidly coupled to the sorber bed chamber (by means of 22a, 23a) and configured to evaporate the refrigerant for sorption by the sorbent material of the sorber bed (refer to pg.12, par.13) and configured to condense vapor from the sorbent material of the sorber bed (refer to pg.12, par.14);
wherein the sorber bed chamber, the evaporator and condenser are configured to provide a sealed refrigerant flow path (refer to fig.7).
Regarding claim 3, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the evaporator and condenser comprise a dual function device configured to facilitate evaporation and condensation (refer to fig.10, and pg.13, par.3, wherein the system may be a suction type heat pump 20C being a condenser/evaporator integral type adsorption type heat pump in which one heat transfer tube 29a is used not only as an evaporator but also as a condenser).
Regarding claim 4, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the evaporator and condenser comprise the evaporator (29) fluidly coupled to the sorber bed chamber (25) for a flow of vapor from the evaporator into the sorber bed chamber for sorption by the sorbent material (refer to pg.12, par.13), and the condenser (27) separate and fluidly coupled to the sorber bed chamber for the flow of vapor desorbed from the sorbent material into the condenser to regenerate the sorbent material (refer to pg.12, par.14).
Regarding claim 5, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 3. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the condenser (27) is fluidly coupled to the evaporator (by means of conduit 31) for the flow of the refrigerant from the condenser after condensation, to the evaporator (refer to fig.7).
Regarding claim 14, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the regenerative fluid comprises a hot gas, waste gas or fluid (refer to fig.7).
Regarding claim 15, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the sorber bed chamber (25) is housed in a housing (21) configured to receive heat transfer fluid that flows through the housing, outside the sorber bed chamber to facilitate indirect heat exchange with the sorber bed chamber (refer to fig.7).
Regarding claim 17, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the sorber bed chamber comprises a thin film of ceramic (refer to pg.6, par.6, wherein it is possible to impregnate magnesium hydroxide into a fibrous sheet (nonwoven fabric or woven fabric) such as ceramic, or to provide it as a surface layer).
Regarding claim 26, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses a plurality of control valves configured to control the flow of vapor into and out of the sorber bed chamber (valves 22a, 23a, fig.7) and to control the flow of the refrigerant and heat transfer fluids (115, 116, 215, 216 and 3a-3d, fig.1).
Regarding claim 29, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the evaporator and condenser includes a combined evaporator and condenser chamber (20C, fig.10) used in a housing (21) configured to receive heat transfer fluid that flows through the housing, outside the combined evaporator and condenser chamber to facilitate indirect heat exchange with fluid in the combined evaporator and condenser chamber (refer to fig.10, and pg.13, par.3, wherein the system may be a suction type heat pump 20C being a condenser/evaporator integral type adsorption type heat pump in which one heat transfer tube 29a is used not only as an evaporator but also as a condenser).
Regarding claim 30, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein one or both of turbulators and flappers are utilized in association with one or more of the sorber bed chamber, and the evaporator and condenser to facilitate effective heat transfer (in the instant case, refer to valves 22a and 23a as in fig.7).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 6, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabata (WO 2013/021994 A1) in view of Minhas (US 2015/0059368).
Regarding claim 2, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses the sorbent material, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the sorbent material is fixed on an internal surface of a wall of the sorber bed chamber.
However, Minhas teaches a utilization of waste heat using fiber sorbent system, comprising a sorbent material (30) fixed on an internal surface of a wall of a sorber bed chamber (refer to fig.5), in order for a thermal fluid to provide the necessary heat transfer to permit the adsorption and desorption of the working fluid into the adsorbent (refer to par.52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tabata such that the sorbent material is fixed on an internal surface of a wall of the sorber bed chamber in view of the teachings by Minhas, in order to optimize a heat transfer effect of the sorption device.
Regarding claim 6, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses a plurality of sorber bed chambers (25A, 25B, fig.11), each of the sorber bed chambers fluidly coupled to the evaporator (29) and condenser (27), but fails to explicitly disclose having a sorbent material fixed on respective internal surfaces of walls thereof.
However, Minhas teaches a utilization of waste heat using fiber sorbent system, comprising a sorbent material (30) fixed on an internal surface of a wall of a sorber bed chamber (refer to fig.5), in order for a thermal fluid to provide the necessary heat transfer to permit the adsorption and desorption of the working fluid into the adsorbent (refer to par.52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tabata by providing a sorbent material fixed on respective internal surfaces of walls thereof in view of the teachings by Minhas, in order to optimize a heat transfer effect of the sorption device.
Regarding claim 13, Tabata as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Tabata as modified discloses wherein the sorbent material is directly deposited or synthesized on the internal surface of the wall of the sorber bed chamber (refer to fig.5 as taught by Minhas).
Regarding claim 19, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses the sorbent material, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the sorbent material is shaped into cylinders or discs within the sorber bed chamber, the cylinders or discs having a respective cylindrical hole extending therethrough to facilitate diffusion of the vapor from the refrigerant.
However, Minhas teaches a utilization of waste heat using fiber sorbent system, comprising a sorbent material (30) shaped into cylinders (refer to figs.5-6) and having a respective cylindrical hole extending therethrough (34, 44), in order for a thermal fluid to provide the necessary heat transfer to permit the adsorption and desorption of the working fluid into the adsorbent (refer to par.52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tabata such that the sorbent material is shaped into cylinders or discs within the sorber bed chamber, the cylinders or discs having a respective cylindrical hole extending therethrough as taught by Minhas to facilitate diffusion of the vapor from the refrigerant, in order to optimize a heat transfer effect of the sorption device.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabata (WO 2013/021994 A1) in view of Meunier (US 5,477,705).
Regarding claims 7 and 9, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses wherein the sorbent material comprises a solid sorbent (silica gel or zeolite, pg.1, par.2), a binder material (refer to pg.1, par.3, wherein a binder is used to bring the adsorbent into close contact with the fin sheet of the base material and the fins of the heat exchanger) and a conductive additive (refer to pg.3, par.9), but fails to explicitly disclose a hygroscopic salt.
However, Meunier teaches a refrigerating and heating apparatus using a solid sorbent, wherein the sorbent material includes a hygroscopic salt (refer to col.5, lines 36-39, wherein the material can incorporate a chemical reaction salt, e.g. calcium chloride).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize that incorporating a hygroscopic salt to the sorbent material, it will enhance its performance in moisture capture, heat storage, and other adsorption applications due to its strong hygroscopicity and chemical affinity for water.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tabata by incorporating a hygroscopic salt, in order to enhance its performance in moisture capture, heat storage, and other adsorption applications due to its strong hygroscopicity and chemical affinity for water in view of the teachings by Meunier along with the knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration.
Regarding claim 8, Tabata as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 7. Further, Tabata as modified discloses wherein a structural reinforcement is utilized with the sorbent material (refer to fins 12).
Claim(s) 18, 22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabata (WO 2013/021994 A1) in view of Thimmaiah (WO 2019/144242 A1, refer to attached translation).
Regarding claim 18, Tabata meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Tabata discloses the evaporator and the condenser but fails to explicitly disclose comprising thin-walled metal, and wherein an internal surface of the evaporator includes a capillary surface pattern or modification to facilitate capillary action and evaporation of the refrigerant, and an internal surface of the condenser includes a condenser surface pattern or modification to facilitate drop-wise condensation of the refrigerant.
However, Thimmaiah teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a heat exchanger having thin-walled metal (refer to fig.3, and pg.2, par.8, wherein the tubes are comprised of a material selected from the group of: aluminum, copper, steel, ceramic-plastics, synthetic graphite, and polymeric composites) and wherein an internal surface of the heat exchanger includes a surface pattern or modification (refer to fig.3), in order to optimize heat transfer (refer to pg.2, par.5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tabata such that the evaporator and the condenser comprises thin-walled metal, and each of an internal surface of the evaporator and the condenser includes a modification in view of the teachings by Thimmaiah to facilitate capillary action and evaporation of the refrigerant and to facilitate drop-wise condensation of the refrigerant, in order to optimize heat transfer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANA M VAZQUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/ANA M VAZQUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
