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 subject matter of this application admits of illustration by a drawing to facilitate understanding of the invention. Applicant is required to furnish a drawing under 37 CFR 1.81(c). No new matter may be introduced in the required drawing. 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).
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: “a heat sensor on generator” in claim 1 is grammatically incorrect. “speaker allowed for” in claim 9 is grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
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: “reporting module” in claims 1-16.
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.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-16 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.
Claims 1-16 recite limitation “reporting module” which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. There is no definition of the reporting module recited aside from "is located within the generator control unit or the processor of the heating efficiency system." Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 1 recites "a heating efficiency system control unit further or an internal control device of the generator comprising a screen with an interface and a processor" unclear if the alternatives each include screen, interface, and processor or if just the "internal control device of the generator" does in the claim language.
Claims 2-16 are also rejected by virtue of dependence.
Claim 4 recites "comprises a relay that provides communication between the circulation pump and the processor", but the specification describes communication of the processor with the relay, which is used to power the circulation pump, rather than provide communication between the processor and the circulation pump.
Regarding claim 5, the pressure gauge in claim 1 and then pressure sensor in claim 5 appear to be directed to the same component, given that in the spec no real definition is given to the use of the gauge or where it actually is located, rendering the second instance (in claim 5) unclear.
Claim 5 recites "already activated circulation pumps.", but only one circulation pump has been recited.
Claim 7 recites "a temperature sensor on the generator", but it is unclear how/whether this differs from the heat sensor on the generator recited in claim 1.
Claim 8 recites "a three-way valve", but it is unclear how/whether this differs from the three-way valve recited in claim 1.
Claim 11 recites "a motor temperature". It is unclear whether this motor is different from the diesel engine of the generator in the claimed invention.
Claim 15 recites a calorimeter and electric meter but with not description of where they are located in the system, and there is not illustration of this in any drawings, rendering the overall structure with their inclusion unclear.
Claim 16 recites a "0-1 electric valve". It is unclear what this means.
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) 1-8 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al (CN111706453A) in view of Skiles et al (US 10,119,487 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Ye teaches an efficient heating management system integrated into a diesel engine generator (40) that enables heat of engine block water using heat obtained from an external heat source (60) (Figures 1-5; Paragraphs 003-007, and 0054+ [of English translation]), comprising: a circulation pump (e.g., 23 or pump on line 61), a heat sensor that measures a temperature of water coming from the external heat source (See temperature sensor in path from 60 to 10 in Figure 1), water transfer pipes (illustrated in Figure 1), a two-part heat exchanger (10) where the waters do not mix but heat transfer is allowed to be performed (Figures 1; Paragraphs 0056-0058), a pressure sensor/gauge (See four pressure sensors in Figure 1), a flow sensor (See two flow sensors in Figure 1), a heating efficiency system control unit or an internal control device of the generator (30) comprising a processor configured for the efficient heating management system (Paragraphs 0056, 0064, 0066, 0069+),
a temperature/heat sensor on the diesel engine generator (See temperature sensor described in Paragraphs 0071-0072), a generator recirculation pump (13, or 23 in the alternative if the circulation pump is considered to be the pump on line 61), a three-way motorized and/or non-motorized valve (50) and a reporting module (undefined and the controller 30 may be interpreted as integrally having "reporting" functions as to the states of the generator and system in general).
Ye does not teach that the control unit/device comprises a screen with an interface.
Skiles teaches an efficient heating management system integrated with a diesel engine (Figures 1-2+), which includes a heating efficiency system control unit further or an internal control device of the generator comprising a screen with an interface and a processor configured for the efficient heating management system, in order to allow user control and to provide information to the user (See controller description in Col. 14, line 54 – Col. 15 [and Col. 17-18]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Ye, such that the control unit/device comprises a screen with an interface, as suggested and taught by Skiles, in order to allow user control and to provide information to the user.
Regarding claim 2, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches a primary inlet, primary outlet, a secondary inlet and a secondary outlet circuit of the two-part heat exchanger (See Figure 1 for clear illustration of inlet and outlet structure of the heat exchanger, which can be interpreted in multiple manners given the lack of specificity in the claim language).
Regarding claim 3, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 2 as discussed above, and Ye teaches that the circulation pump is located on a pipeline connected to the primary inlet of the two-part heat exchanger (See Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 3 as discussed above, and Ye teaches that the circulation pump located on a primary inlet line of the two-part heat exchanger comprises an electrical control connection between the circulation pump and the processor (all of the pumps in the system are controlled by 30).
Regarding claim 5, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches that the processor is capable of being used with a software that activates the circulation pump on an external heat source side when data read by a pressure sensor falls below a pressure value defined by a user in the software via a screen, and increasing a speed of already activated circulation pumps (software is not stored in a processor, and therefore the processor need only be capable of performing the recited functions in this case, which a processor of a control unit such as "30" disclosed by Ye is).
Regarding claim 6, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches that the processor is capable of being used with a software that that activates the circulation pump on the external heat source when the data obtained from the flow sensor is below a flow rate defined by a user in the software via the screen (software is not stored in a processor, and therefore the processor need only be capable of performing the recited functions in this case, which a processor of a control unit such as "30" disclosed by Ye is).
Regarding claim 7, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches the processor is capable of being configured to stop the circulation pumps by closing relays of the circulation pump on an external heat source side and the circulation pump on a generator side when a desired temperature level of the generator is reached, as detected by a temperature/heat sensor on the generator (the claim does not recite configuration of the processor to perform the steps, nor does it recite software/instructions saved to a memory which are then executed by the processor, and the processor of Ye is capable of being used to perform the recited functions).
Regarding claim 8, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches a three-way valve on a generator side before the two-part heat exchanger that enables the system to be deactivated by the processor (previously cited 50).
Regarding claim 11, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches the processor which is capable of performing the steps recited in claim 11 (the claim does not recite configuration of the processor to perform the steps, nor does it recite software/instructions saved to a memory which are then executed by the processor, and the processor of Ye is capable of being used to perform the recited functions).
Regarding claim 12, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches the processor which is capable of performing the steps recited in claim 12 (the claim does not recite configuration of the processor to perform the steps, nor does it recite software/instructions saved to a memory which are then executed by the processor, and the processor of Ye is capable of being used to perform the recited functions).
Regarding claim 13, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 12 as discussed above, and Ye teaches the processor which is capable of performing the steps recited in claim 13 (the claim does not recite configuration of the processor to perform the steps, nor does it recite software/instructions saved to a memory which are then executed by the processor, and the processor of Ye is capable of being used to perform the recited functions).
Regarding claim 14, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, and Ye teaches that the processor is capable of being used with a software that that performs the recites steps (software is not stored in a processor, and therefore the processor need only be capable of performing the recited functions in this case, which a processor of a control unit such as "30" disclosed by Ye is).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al (CN111706453A) in view of Skiles et al (US 10,119,487 B1) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of official notice.
Regarding claim 9, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, but does not disclose a speaker capable of generating an audible warning (the condition recited does not need to be disclosed by the prior art because the claim is constructed such that a mere capability/allowance of generating an audible warning is all that is recited).
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the engine control art for an engine and/or engine cooling system to include a speaker capable of generating an audible warning, in order to prevent system damage or danger to users. Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ye to include a speaker capable of generating an audible warning in order to prevent system damage or danger to users, since it is old and well known in the in order to prevent system damage or danger to users.
Regarding claim 10, the modified system of Ye discloses the invention of claim 1 as discussed above, but does not disclose the heating efficiency system control unit further or the internal control device of the generator further comprising wired and wireless communication protocols.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the engine control art for an engine and/or engine cooling system’s controller to include wired and wireless communication protocols in order to allow information transmission to various locations as well as control operation from various locations. Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ye to include wired and wireless communication protocols for the controller, since it is old and well known in the engine control art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN R STECKBAUER whose telephone number is (571)270-0433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30-7:30 PST.
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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/KEVIN R STECKBAUER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights