failed to make out a prima facie case of anticipation.
In addition, Frohlich argues that item 6 of the Toshiba reference meets the limitation of a
heater assembly for charging the phase change material with heat energy. However, as
explained in the Toshiba reference, heater 6 heats oil 5, that subsequently charges the latent heat
storage material. Thus, it is not the heater 6 that charges the latent heat storage material, it is the
oil4. For this additional reason, Frohlich has failed to demonstrate that the Toshiba reference as
applied anticipates Baldwin claims 20 and 40. Since Frohlich has failed to sufficiently make out
a prima facie case of anticipation with respect to Baldwin independent claims 20 and 40, we
need not address those claims that depend on claims 20 and 40.
Howell reference
Frohlich argues that Baldwin claims 20, 26-28, 40 and 46-48 are anticipated by Howell5
(motion at 13). Baldwin claims 20 and 40 are independent claims. The remaining claims
depend either directly or indirectly from claims 20 and 40.
Baldwin claims 20 and 40 recite “a layer of phase change material” and “a heater
assembly positioned on one side of the layer of phase change material.” Frohlich argues that the
thermally conductive material, shown in Howell as item 17, is a layer of phase change material.
Frohlich provides no explanation, nor does Frohlich direct us to evidence that would demonstrate
that the thermally conductive material is the same as, or a subset of a phase change material.
4 Even if we were to assume that the oil and the heater together form a heater
assembly, it has not been sufficiently explained, nor is it evident that the “heater assembly” is
positioned on one side of the latent heat material. Note, the oil is positioned on more than one
side of the latent heat material.
5 GB 2035764A, published 18 June 1980 (Frohlich Ex. 2009).
- 14 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007