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 .
Response to Amendment
This Final Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks/Amendments filed on 29 December, 2025. The amendments have been entered.
Disposition of Claims
Claims 6-11, 13-14, and 17-18 are pending.
Claims 1-5, 12, and 15-16 have been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 6-9, 11, 14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STUDER (AT 410111 B – published 25 February, 2003; see English machine translation), in view of STANYO (US 1,883,057 – published 18 October, 1932).
As to claim 6, STUDER discloses a heat exchange system having a modular construction(pg. 1-2 – “The object of the invention is to provide an installation for wastewater which has an integrated heat exchanger. This heat exchanger should be in direct contact with the wastewater”; pg. 3 -- “In the present exemplary embodiments, the installation according to the invention extracts heat from the wastewater 11. It is, of course, entirely within the scope of the inventive concept to extract heat from large sewer pipes without dry weather gutters using the inventive installation.” ), comprising:
a wastewater pipeline (5) carrying the wastewater (pg. 3 – “standardized sewer pipes or Sewer pipe elements 5 of a sewage structure”);
a plurality of heat exchanger modules(2; figure 4) arranged one behind the other (figure 4), in the wastewater pipeline (pg. 6 – “For example, heat exchanger elements 2 are fixed on site in the bed 6 of a sewer pipe 5”; figures 1-2), each of the heat exchange modules comprising a supply portion (7’) having a supply connection port (33), a return pipe portion (7’’) having a return connection port (34) and a heat exchanger chamber(interior of the plates; pg. 5 – “The first embodiment according to Figure 1 shows a heat exchanger element 2 which has two rounded stainless steel plates 35. These stainless steel plates 35 are spaced apart by stainless steel baffles 32. One stainless steel plate 35 serves as an exchange surface 20 between wastewater 11 and heat exchange medium 31, the other stainless steel plate 35 serves as a base for supporting and fastening the heat exchange element 2 on a bed 6 of a sewer system. The stainless steel baffles 32 serve to generate a high flow velocity for high heat absorption of the heat exchange medium 31.” and “The stainless steel plate 35 serves as a heat exchanger 20 between wastewater 11 and the heat exchange medium 31 and the U-profile serves on the one hand as a baffle 32 to generate a high flow velocity for a high heat absorption of the heat exchange medium 31 and on the other hand it serves as a base for supporting and fastening the heat exchanger element 2 on a bed 6 of a sewer system.”) that fluidically connects the supply connection port of the supply pipe portion to the return connection port of the return pipe portion (pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figure 4),
the respective supply pipe portions of the individual heat exchanger modules being interconnected fluidically so that a downstream end of one of the supply pipe portions is interconnected fluidically to an upstream end of another one of the supply pipe portions to form a supply pipe (figure 4), and the respective return pipe portions of the individual heat exchanger modules being interconnected fluidically so that a downstream end of one of the return pipe portions is interconnected fluidically to an upstream end of another one of the return pipe portions to form a return pipe (figure 4), and
a feed pipe (7) carrying a heat exchange fluid through the entire feed pipe and into the supply pipe at a downstream end of the feed pipe (pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figures 4), so that the heat exchange fluid can flow from the supply connection ports of the supply pipe to the return connection ports of the return pipe vis the heat exchange chamber (figure 4), and wherein
the heat exchange chambers of the heat exchanger modules carryout heat exchange between the wastewater in the wastewater pipeline and the heat exchange fluid passing between the supply connection ports of the supply pipe and the return connection ports of the return pipe (pg. 1-2 – “The object of the invention is to provide an installation for wastewater which has an integrated heat exchanger. This heat exchanger should be in direct contact with the wastewater”; pg. 3 -- “In the present exemplary embodiments, the installation according to the invention extracts heat from the wastewater 11. It is, of course, entirely within the scope of the inventive concept to extract heat from large sewer pipes without dry weather gutters using the inventive installation.”; pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figure 4).
However, STUDER does not disclose wherein the feed pipe is disposed in the supply pipe portion.
STANYO, however, is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the applicant (MPEP § 2141.01(a) – I; see pg. 7 which directs the pipe routing design subject-matter to achieve a uniform through-flow of the instant application; see col. 1, lines 34-37 of STANYO), to provide introduction of the refrigerant at a point remote form the point of greatest suction to equalize flow of the refrigerant through the coils (col. 1, lines 34-37). STANYO teaches a heat exchange module including a supply pipe portion (17) with a feed pipe (20) disposed therein (figure 6; col. 2, line 87 – col. 3, line 11), such that the heat exchange fluid flows through the entire feed pipe prior to being supplied to the supply pipe portion at a downstream end of the feed pipe (col. 2, line 87 – col. 3, line 11). In addition to providing equalized flow of refrigerant (col. 2, lines 34-37), such configuration provides effective cooling (col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify STUDER, in view of the teachings of STANYO, to provide equalized fluid flow through the system and effective cooling.
As to claim 7, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, further discloses wherein a fluid flow of the heat exchange fluid in the feed pipe is directed counter to a fluid flow of the heat exchange fluid in the supply pipe (figure 4).
As to claim 8, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, further discloses wherein the supply pipe is fed with the heat exchange fluid at a downstream end of the feed pipe (figure 4; pg. 4-5).
As to claim 9, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, further discloses wherein a sum of the lengths of the feed pipe, the supply pipe, and the return pipe, in each heat exchanger module is the same (figure 4 which includes a plurality of the same heat exchanger modules, 2, shown in figure 3).
As to claim 11, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, further discloses wherein the feed pipe is formed in one piece (pg. 5-6, wherein STUDER provides welding of elements together).
As to claim 14, STUDER discloses a method for producing a heat exchanger system having a modular construction (pg. 1-2 – “The object of the invention is to provide an installation for wastewater which has an integrated heat exchanger. This heat exchanger should be in direct contact with the wastewater”; pg. 3 -- “In the present exemplary embodiments, the installation according to the invention extracts heat from the wastewater 11. It is, of course, entirely within the scope of the inventive concept to extract heat from large sewer pipes without dry weather gutters using the inventive installation.” ), comprising the steps of:
arranging a plurality of heat exchanger modules (2) one behind another (figure 4),
each of the heat exchanger modules having a heat exchanger chamber(interior of the plates; pg. 5 – “The first embodiment according to Figure 1 shows a heat exchanger element 2 which has two rounded stainless steel plates 35. These stainless steel plates 35 are spaced apart by stainless steel baffles 32. One stainless steel plate 35 serves as an exchange surface 20 between wastewater 11 and heat exchange medium 31, the other stainless steel plate 35 serves as a base for supporting and fastening the heat exchange element 2 on a bed 6 of a sewer system. The stainless steel baffles 32 serve to generate a high flow velocity for high heat absorption of the heat exchange medium 31.” and “The stainless steel plate 35 serves as a heat exchanger 20 between wastewater 11 and the heat exchange medium 31 and the U-profile serves on the one hand as a baffle 32 to generate a high flow velocity for a high heat absorption of the heat exchange medium 31 and on the other hand it serves as a base for supporting and fastening the heat exchanger element 2 on a bed 6 of a sewer system.”), a supply pipe portion (7’) having a supply connection port (33) providing fluid communication from the supply pipe portion to the heat exchanger chamber (pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figure 4) and a return pipe portion (7’’) having a return connection port (34) providing fluid communication from the heat exchanger chamber to the return pipe portion at each heat exchanger module (pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figures 4),
fluidically interconnecting the respective supply pipe portions of the individual heat exchanger modules so that a downstream end of one of the supply pipe portions is interconnected fluidically to an upstream end of another one of the supply pipe portions to form a supply pipe (figure 4), and fluidically interconnecting the respective return pipe portions of the individual heat exchanger modules so that a downstream end of one of the return pipe portions is interconnected fluidically to an upstream end of another one of the return pipe portions to form a return pipe (figure 4), and
providing a heat exchange fluid passes through the entire feed pipe before entering the supply pipe at a downstream end of the feed pipe (pg. 4 – “The embodiment according to Figures 3 and 4 shows exemplary heat exchange elements 2 with a circuit 3 for a heat exchange medium 31, wherein the circuit 3 has baffles 32 for generating a high flow velocity for high heat absorption. The flow direction of the heat exchange medium 31 between the baffles 32 is indicated by flow arrows. For example, the heat exchange medium 31 flows in a meandering manner in a plane from an inlet 33 to an outlet 34. Inlet 33 and outlet 34 connect the heat exchange medium 31 in an advantageously closed circulation circuit to a heat pump 4. The connection from the heat pump 4 is made, for example, via a supply pipe 7, the connections to the heat pump 4 are made, for example, via one or two supply pipes 7', 7".”; figures 4).
However, STUDER does not disclose wherein the feed pipe is introduced into the supply pipe portions.
STANYO, however, is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the applicant (MPEP § 2141.01(a) – I; see pg. 7 which directs the pipe routing design subject-matter to achieve a uniform through-flow of the instant application; see col. 1, lines 34-37 of STANYO), to provide introduction of the refrigerant at a point remote form the point of greatest suction to equalize flow of the refrigerant through the coils (col. 1, lines 34-37). STANYO teaches a heat exchange module including a supply pipe portion (17) with a feed pipe (20) disposed therein (figure 6; col. 2, line 87 – col. 3, line 11), such that the heat exchange fluid flows through the entire feed pipe prior to being supplied to the supply pipe portion at a downstream end of the feed pipe (col. 2, line 87 – col. 3, line 11). In addition to providing equalized flow of refrigerant (col. 2, lines 34-37), such configuration provides effective cooling (col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify STUDER, in view of the teachings of STANYO, to provide equalized fluid flow through the system and effective cooling.
As to claim 17, STUDER, as modified by STANYO previously provided wherein the feed pipe is inserted into the supply pipe portions (see rejection of claim 14) wherein the supply pipe portions have been interconnected fluidically to form the supply pipe (see rejection of claim 14), further discloses wherein the feed pipe is formed as one piece.
As to claim 18, STUDER, as modified by STANYO previously provided wherein the feed pipe is extended through the supply pipe portions (see rejection of claim 6) wherein the supply pipe portions have been interconnected fluidically to form the supply pipe (see rejection of claim 6), further discloses wherein the feed pipe is formed as one piece.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STUDER (AT 410111 B – published 25 February, 2003; see English machine translation), in view of STANYO (US 1,883,057 – published 18 October, 1932) and TARAS (US 2011/0127023 A1).
As to claim 10, STUDER, as modified, does not further expressly disclose wherein a cross-sectional area of the supply pipe portion minus a cross-sectional area of the feed pipe is the same size as the cross-sectional area of the feed pipe.
However, TARAS teaches the feed pipe being arranged within the supply pipe, wherein the supply pipe is larger in diameter than the feed pipe diameter, as a result. TARAS, further, teaches wherein various design characteristics, such as the changes in diameter (i.e., cross-sectional area) of the feed pipe and diameter(i.e., cross-sectional area) of the supply pipe are selected to fall within a desired optimal performance range to optimally distribute heat exchange fluid and prevent or significantly reduce refrigerant maldistribution amongst the heat exchanger tubes (par. [0019]). Therefore, changes to the diameters of the feed pipe and the supply pipe to be within the claimed optimal design parameter range, is a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, changes to the diameters to achieve falling in this optimal design parameter range results in uniform fluid distribution and prevention or significant reduction in maldistribution to the heat exchanger tubes. Particularly, TARAS teaches the range of the design parameter,
(
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
/
D
s
u
p
p
l
y
p
i
p
e
)
2
,
is within the range of 0.02 to 0.95. As a simple example, the cross-sectional area of the supply pipe is 1inch and the cross-sectional area of the feed pipe is 0.5inch. As such, the associated diameters of the example area applied to the relationship defined by TARAS, and achieve:
0.02
≤
(
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
/
D
s
u
p
p
l
y
p
i
p
e
)
2
≤
0.95
(
0.5
/
1
)
2
= 0.25
, which satisfies the design characteristic by falling within the optimal range. More so, such an example which is taught to fall within the optimal design parameter of TARAS achieves the claimed invention. Particularly, the claim, which is directed to a cross-sectional area of pipes, i.e., a diameter of the pipe, defines the equation:
D
s
u
p
p
l
y
p
i
p
e
-
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
=
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
Again, in the example, the cross-sectional area of the supply pipe is 1inches and the cross-sectional area of the feed pipe is 0.5inches. As such, the associated diameters of the example area applied to the claimed relationship achieves:
D
s
u
p
p
l
y
p
i
p
e
-
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
=
D
f
e
e
d
p
i
p
e
1
i
n
-
0.5
i
n
=
0.5
i
n
, which satisfies the requirements of the claimed invention. This provides one having ordinary skill within the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify STUDER, in view of TARAS, to have the cross-sectional areas of the defined claimed range/relationship, as it involves only adjusting the dimensions of the components disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify STUDER, in view of TARAS, to make the cross-sectional area of the supply pipe portion minus a cross-sectional area of the fed pipe to be the same size as the cross-sectional area of the feed pipe as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP § 2144.05 – II.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STUDER (AT 410111 B – published 25 February, 2003; see English machine translation), in view of STANYO (US 1,883,057 – published 18 October, 1932) and UHRIG (US2012/0186796 A1 – published 26 July, 2012).
As to claim 13, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, discloses wherein the feed pipe is intended to be formed of materials that have high resistance to corrosion and erosion (pg. 4 – “Advantageously, the heat exchange elements 2 consist at least partially of stainless steel. Stainless steel is durable and highly resistant to corrosion and erosion. Stainless steel has a sufficiently high thermal conductivity coefficient to be used as an exchange surface. With knowledge of the present invention, other heat-conductive, durable and corrosion and erosion-resistant materials can of course also be used, e.g. B Materials known to the person skilled in the art with corrosion- and abrasion-resistant coatings with good thermal transmittance coefficients.”), such as stainless steel.
UHRIG, however, is within the field of endeavor provided a heat exchanger applied to waste water pipelines (abstract). UHRIG teaches wherein plastics are a known material to provide corrosion resistance, like stainless steel (pg. 29). The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See MPEP § 2144.07. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify STUDER to provide the material of the feed pipe as a plastic material based on known recognition within the art of the suitability for the intended purpose.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STUDER (AT 410111 B – published 25 February, 2003; see English machine translation), in view of STANYO (US 1,883,057 – published 18 October, 1932) and AZZOUZ (WO 2018/100300 A1 – published 7 June, 2018; see English machine translation for citations)
As to claim 15, STUDER, as modified by STANYO, does not further provide wherein the feed pipe is configured so that portions of an outside periphery of the feed pipe touch an inside periphery of the supply pipe portion.
AZZOUZ, however, is within the field of endeavor of a heat exchanger module (abstract). AZZOUZ teaches wherein a feed pipe (14) is arranged within a supply pipe portion (7 and/or 19), wherein guide rings (26; figure 3-4; pg. 6 – “More specifically, at least one partition wall is advantageously formed by a component of the closed annular conformation spacer. Such a component of the spacing device is in particular arranged in a closed ring”; pg. 7 – “As an indication, a component shaped ring portion extends in particular over an angular range less than or equal to 180 ° around the longitudinal axis of the first conduit.”; pg. 14 – “Such components 21a, 21b spacing devices 21 are in particular shaped as closed rings 26, which surround the first duct 14 being closed on them”) are disposed on the feed pipe(figure 3-4) to touch and inside periphery of the supply pipe portion(figure 3-4, wherein the outside geometry of the guide ring, 26, is shown to match the outside geometry of the supply pipe, 19). The guide rings, as taught by AZZOUZ, are used to maintain the distance between the feed pipe and the supply pipe, so as to leave the channel therebetween for circulation of the refrigerant (pg. 3 – “In other words, the dispensing device comprises the first conduit which is surrounded by the second conduit at a distance transverse to the longitudinal axis of the first conduit, so as to provide the channel between them. The channel is thus delimited between the first conduit and the second conduit. The spacing device is interposed between the first duct and the second duct to maintain them at a transverse distance from one another by leaving the channel between them. The channel forms an intermediate chamber between the first duct and the second duct, the refrigerant discharged from the first duct through the orifice or openings being able to circulate inside the duct prior to its evacuation from the second duct through the duct. or passages). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill within the art, prior to the date the invention was effectively filed, to modify STUDER, with the teachings of AZZOUZ to include the guide rings, as claimed, for these reasons.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 29 December, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
At page 7, Applicant states STUDER argues, “there is nothing in Studer to suggest that the supply pipes 7, 7’ and the return pipe 7” are divided into longitudinal sections that are connected to a corresponding heat exchanger element 2 to form a module that can be assembled with other such modules to form a heat exchanger system”. However, the disclosure of STUDER is clear, and the argument is not persuasive, in view of the evidence shown within figures 3 and 4. Particularly, figure 3 shows a section of one heat exchanger element (pg. 3 – “Figure 3 shows a section through the surface of a part of a heat exchanger element according to Figure 1”), wherein a system is build-up of multiple heat exchanger elements positioned adjacent to one another (pg. 4 – “Figure 4 shows a section through the surface of parts of heat exchanger elements connected to one another to form a heat exchanger unit according to Figures 1 and 3). More so, each of the supply pipes and return pipes, associated with individual heat exchanger elements (2; pg. 4 – “The heat exchange elements 2 and the circuits 3 can be coupled together” ; pg. 6, -- “The heat exchanger elements 2 can be e.g. B can be mounted individually. I.e. For example, heat exchanger elements 2 are fixed on site in the bed 6 of the sewer pipe 5, inlets 33 and outlets 34 of circuits 3 are connected ton site to supply pipes 7, 7’, 7”, and circuits 3 of adjacent heat exchanger elements 2 are welded together in areas of (SS’) on site. The heat exchanger elements 2 can also be installed as factory-preassembled water pipe units. These water pipe units are intermediate products for the construction of water pipes. That is, heat exchanger elements 2 are factory-mounted in the bed 6 of sewer pipe element 5, inlets 33 and outlets 34 of circuits 3 are factory-connected to supply pipes 7, 7’, 7” of this sewer pipe element 5, and on-site supply pipes 7, 7’,7” of adjacent sewer pipe elements are connected to each other, and circuits 3 of adjacent sewer pipe elements 5 are welded together on site in areas SS’”), which are connected to one another at the location of SS’, which delineates individual heat exchanger modules, used to be built up into the heat exchanger system. See figure 4, wherein the delineation between different heat exchanger modules is clear, so as to include sections of the supply and return pipes , 7, 7’, and 7”. For this, the argument presented is not persuasive based on the evidence of record, as disclosed by STUDER.
At page 8, Applicant argues against different solutions taught by STANYO and states, “Stanyo explains that this alternative has “exactly the same effect” thereby raising the question of why one would choose the more complicated option of Fig. 6. There is no suggestion of reconfiguring the Fig. 6 embodiment of Stanyo to open the closed end of the header 17 in Fig. 6 and then extending the nipple 19 into other headers that communicate with other heat exchanger chambers. This hypothetical reconfiguration is inconsistent with the stated objective of providing improved refrigerating units that are compact inform and that can be made into standard sizes”. First, there is no requirement within setting forth a prima facie case of obviousness to discuss why one having ordinary skill within the art would pick a particular solution of another taught solution within the same teaching reference. See MPEP § 2142 and §2143. Second, the disclosure of desirable alternatives does not necessarily negate a suggestion for modifying the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2143. 01 – I. As such, the argument directed to why one having ordinary skill in the art would “choose the more complicated option of Fig. 6” is not persuasive. More so, the allegations are directed to individual teachings of the references and not the combination of references set forth within the rejection. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Where a rejection of a claim is based on two or more references, a reply that is limited to what a subset of the applied references teaches or fails to teach, or that fails to address the combined teaching of the applied references may be considered to be an argument that attacks the reference(s) individually. See MPEP § 2145. The argument is solely presented with regards to the teachings of STANYO, and not the combination of STUDER, in view of STANYO. For this reason, the argument presented at page 8 is not persuasive, for the above reasons.
At page 9, Applicant argues again, “It is not clear why the person skilled in the art and familiar with Studer would turn to Stanyo to use the more complex of two functionally identical options disclosed by Stanyo, particularly when the objective of Stanyo is to provide compact units of standard sizes”. Again, there is no requirement within setting forth a prima facie case of obviousness to discuss why one having ordinary skill within the art would pick a particular solution of another taught solution within the same teaching reference. See MPEP § 2142 and §2143. Further, again, the disclosure of desirable alternatives does not necessarily negate a suggestion for modifying the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2143. 01 – I. As such, the argument remains unpersuasive for the above reasons.
At page 9, Applicant again argues ‘the combination of Studer and Stanyo would not suggest a system comprised of heat exchanger modules arranged one behind the other” as characterized by independent claim 6. However, the evidence of record does suggest that the combination would yield obviousness of the claimed invention. See rejection of claim 6, at least, for full mapping of the claim with the prior art. More so, as explained above STUDER provides the system of heat exchanger modules arranged adjacent to one another and connected with respective portions of the supply and return pipe portions, in view of the sectioning of the modules along SS’ (figure 4 of STUDER, at least). This necessarily provides wherein the heat exchangers are arranged one behind the other. More so, STANYO teaches a plurality of heat exchanger modules (13) which are connected to one another with the supply pipe portion having the pipe-in-pipe configuration suggested by the claim. Applicant does not point to any particular portion, with evidence, to explain why the combination does not suggest the limitations of claim 6. As such, the evidence of record, as presented previously and herein, necessarily teaching the requirements of the claimed invention to reasonably set forth a prima facie case of obviousness.
At page 9, Applicant argues the prior art does not provide “the feed pipe is formed in one piece”. As stated above, the formed product (as forming into one piece is a product-by-process claim which necessarily requires the resulting product to be one piece) of STUDER is a feed pipe of one piece, in view of the welding of the components together. This results in a one piece feed pipe. For this reasons, the argument is not persuasive in light of the evidence of record, and that of pages 5-6 of STUDER previously cited with regards to this claim rejection.
At pages 9-10, Applicant argues with respect to claim 14. Similarly to that set forth with regards to the rejection of claim 6, the evidence of record does suggest that the combination would yield obviousness of the claimed invention. See rejection of claim 14, at least, for full mapping of the claim with the prior art. More so, as explained above STUDER provides the system of heat exchanger modules arranged adjacent to one another and connected with respective portions of the supply and return pipe portions, in view of the sectioning of the modules along SS’ (figure 4 of STUDER, at least). This necessarily provides wherein the heat exchangers are arranged one behind the other. More so, STANYO teaches a plurality of heat exchanger modules (13) which are connected to one another with the supply pipe portion having the pipe-in-pipe configuration suggested by the claim. Applicant does not point to any particular portion, with evidence, to explain why the combination does not suggest the limitations of claim 14. As such, the evidence of record, as presented previously and herein, necessarily teaching the requirements of the claimed invention to reasonably set forth a prima facie case of obviousness.
At pages 10-11, Applicant states dependent claims are not taught by the combination or other prior art relied upon. Such arguments are not persuasive, in view of the above rebuttal.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA M MARONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8588. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7AM to 4PM, EST.
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.
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763 2/19/2026
JENNA M. MARONEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763