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 04/11/2025 and 08/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
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, “a plurality of compressors” recited in claim 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim Interpretation Under 35 USC §112
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.
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: “temperature measuring devices” in claim 12.
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.
Claim limitation “temperature measuring devices” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C.112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “devices” coupled with functional language “temperature measuring” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 12 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
A number of temperature measuring devices treated as meaning temperature sensors. See spec page 10, lines 6-7.
A control unit treated as meaning a portion of a controller. See spec page 11.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 1 and 4-13 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 1, last line calls for the limitation of “a characteristic variable” which is confusing as it is unclear how it relates to the previous recitation of “at least one parameter that is characteristic of a change in the first temperature”.
Claim 1 calls for the limitation of “measuring a first temperature”; and “a starting temperature is determined” without providing the apparatus for carrying the cited function i.e temp sensor or control device,
Claim 4 recites the limitation "a compressor" in line 2 is same or different than compressor of claim 1. For examination purposes, is considered as same and considered as -- the compressor --.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "oil" in line 2 is same or different than oil of claim 1. For examination purposes, is considered as same and considered as -- the oil --.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the oil level" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "oil" in line 2 is same or different than oil of claim 1. For examination purposes, is considered as same and considered as -- the oil --.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the oil level" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 calls for the limitation of “a plurality of compressors” which is confusing as it claims plurals while a single compressor has been previously claimed in claim 1 above.
Claim 12 calls for the limitation of “an oil separator” which is confusing as it is unclear how it relates to the previous recitation of an oil separator above in claim 1.
Claim 12 calls for the limitation of “an oil collecting container” which is confusing as it is unclear how it relates to the previous recitation of
An oil collecting container above in claim 1.
Claim 13 calls for the limitation of “a compressor” which is confusing as it is unclear how it relates to the previous recitation of a compressor above in claim 1
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 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 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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-7 and 9-13 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG et al. (DE 4140625) in view of KATO et al. (US 2021/0207859).
In regards to claim 1, JUNG discloses a method for controlling a fill level (Figs. 1-2) of an oil separator (separating device 3) for a cooling circuit (refrigerant circuit; Figs. 1-2), comprising: connecting a controllable valve (valve 4) downstream of an outlet of the oil separator (3) through which oil is fed into an oil collecting container (crankcase of the compressor 1; par. 10), wherein, after the valve (4) is opened, measuring a first temperature (temperature T at a first temperature sensor T1) in a line between the valve (4) and the oil collecting container (crankcase of the compressor 1), specifying a limit value (a predetermined limit value) for at least one parameter (T) that is characteristic of a change in the first temperature (T at sensor T1), and closing the valve (4) as soon as the parameter exceeds the specified limit value (a predetermined limit value is reached, valve 4 is closed; par. 11) characterized in that the oil separator (3) is connected downstream of a compressor (a compressor 1) on an outlet side of the outlet (as can be seen in Fig. 1), but fails to explicitly teach that a starting temperature is determined and a difference between a current temperature and the starting temperature is used as a characteristic variable.
KATO teaches an apparatus wherein that a starting temperature (defines temperatures T2, T3 and T4 as initial temperatures; par. 84) is determined (via temperature sensors 34, 44 and 54) and a difference between a current temperature and the starting temperature (difference between the above-described initial temperature and the detected current temperature; par. 85) is used as a characteristic variable (refer to par. 85).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of JUNG such that a starting temperature is determined and a difference between a current temperature and the starting temperature is used as a characteristic variable as taught by KATO in order to ensure heat absorption from the heat medium while preventing freezing of the heat medium (par. 7 of KATO).
In regards to claim 4, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, JUNG teaches wherein a compressor (1) of the cooling circuit is supplied with oil from the oil collecting container (crankcase of the compressor 1) by means of a regulation of the oil level in the compressor (1).
In regards to claim 6, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, JUNG teaches wherein furthermore a second temperature (T1) is measured (via T1) in a region upstream of the valve (4) and the difference between the first (T2) and the second (T1) temperature is used as a characteristic parameter.
In regards to claim 7, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 6. Further, JUNG teaches wherein the second temperature (T1) is measured in a line (a line 7) between the oil separator (3) and the valve (4).
In regards to claim 9, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, JUNG teaches wherein the opening of the valve (4) is carried out cyclically (Valve 4 opens periodically at predetermined time intervals; pars. 6 and 10).
In regards to claim 10, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, JUNG teaches wherein a cycle length (predetermined time intervals or a predetermined limit value; pars. 10-11) is determined as a function of a capacity of the compressor (refer to par. 11).
In regards to claim 11, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, JUNG teaches in which a minimum and/or a maximum time for opening the valve (4) is predetermined (refer to par. 10).
In regards to claim 12, JUNG as modified discloses a system (Figs. 1-2), comprising an oil separator (separating device 3) and an oil collecting container (crankcase of the compressor 1) connected downstream on the outlet side via a valve (valve 4), further comprising a number of temperature measuring devices (a first temperature sensor T1, a second temperature sensor T2) and a control device (controller 5), adapted for carrying out the method according to claim 1.
In regards to claim 13, JUNG as modified discloses a cooling circuit (Figs. 1-2) comprising a compressor (1) and a heat exchanger (condenser 2), wherein a refrigerant line connects the compressor (1) on the outlet side to the heat exchanger (2), further comprising a system according to claim 12.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG et al. (DE 4140625) in view of KATO et al. (US 2021/0207859), further in view of Renz (US 5894740).
In regards to claim 5, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein a plurality of compressors of the cooling circuit are supplied with oil from the oil collecting container by means of a separate regulation of the oil level in the respective compressor.
Renz teaches a refrigerating plant (Figs. 1-2) wherein a plurality of compressors (18, 20, 22) of the cooling circuit (a refrigerant circuit) are supplied with oil from the oil collecting container by means of a separate regulation (valves 76, 78, 80) of the oil level in the respective compressor (18, 20, 22), (col.4, lines 46-52).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of JUNG such that a plurality of compressors of the cooling circuit are supplied with oil from the oil collecting container by means of a separate regulation of the oil level in the respective compressor as taught by Renz in order to recover again the predominant portion of the oil passed to the main stream during compression and to supply this to the compressor (col.3, lines 9-12 of Renz).
In regards to claim 8, JUNG as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 7, but fails to explicitly teach wherein a third temperature is further measured in an inlet region of the oil separator, and the third temperature is used in determining the characteristic parameter and/or the limit value.
Renz teaches a refrigerating plant (Figs. 1-2) wherein a third temperature (a temperature sensor 82) is further measured in an inlet region of the oil separator (28), (col.4, lines 53-55), and the third temperature is used in determining the characteristic parameter and/or the limit value (col.4, lines 53-55).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of JUNG such that a third temperature to be further measured in an inlet region of the oil separator, and the third temperature is used in determining the characteristic parameter and/or the limit value as taught by Renz in order to recover again the predominant portion of the oil passed to the main stream during compression and to supply this to the compressor (col.3, lines 9-12 of Renz).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARTHA TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-0590. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. 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.
/M.T/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763