Appeal 2007-2815
Application 10/498,809
1548 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (citation omitted). Thus, when given its broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the Specification, claim 29
encompasses vehicle heating/cooling systems in which the named refrigerant
circuit components are interconnected (1) “such that ambient air . . . can . . .
partially or fully be used as a heat source . . . in a heat pump mode,”
(2) “such that . . . coolant circulated from the vehicle drive system can . . .
partially or fully be used as a heat source . . . in a heat pump mode,”
(3) “such that ambient air . . . can . . . partially or fully be used as . . . a heat
sink in . . . a comfort cooling mode,” and (4) “such that . . . coolant
circulated from the vehicle drive system can . . . partially or fully be used as
. . . a heat sink in . . . a comfort cooling mode.”
2. PRIOR ART
The Examiner relies on the following reference:
Burk US 2001/0013409 A1 Aug. 16, 2001
3. ANTICIPATION
Claims 29 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Burk. The Examiner states that Figures 5 through 8 of Burk
disclose all of the structures required in claim 29 (Answer 3).
Regarding claim 29’s functional limitations, the Examiner states that
Figure 8 shows that Burk’s system meets the limitation of being capable of
partially or fully using ambient air as a heat source in a heat pump mode (id.
at 5). The Examiner cites Figure 6 as showing that Burk’s system is capable
of partially or fully using coolant circulated from the vehicle drive system as
a heat source in heat pump mode (id.). The Examiner cites Figure 5 as
showing that Burk’s system is capable of using ambient air as a heat sink in
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013