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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 4/27/2026. Claims 1-7, 11-14 and 16 are pending for consideration in this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
The objections to the claims have been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. The rejections pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-5, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liyong et al. (CN205300327U) and Long (CN206488670U) in view of Nilsson (US2008/0029257).
Regarding Claim 1, Liyong teaches a brazed plate heat exchanger [fig 1] comprising
a plurality of first and second heat exchanger plates [3, 4], wherein the first heat exchanger plates are formed with a first pattern of ridges and grooves, and the second heat exchanger plates are formed with a second pattern of ridges and grooves providing contact points between at least some crossing ridges and grooves of neighboring plates forming interplate flow channels for fluids to exchange heat, said interplate flow channels being in selective fluid communication through port openings [11, 12, 13, 14; 0020; fig 1];
wherein the first pattern of ridges and grooves is different from the second pattern of ridges and grooves, so that an interplate flow channel volume on one side of the first heat exchanger plates is different from the interplate flow channel volume on the opposite side of the first heat exchanger plates [0024; see fig 1];
where at least some of the ridges and grooves of the first pattern extend in a first angle and at least some of the ridges and grooves of the second pattern extend in a second angle different from the first angle [by inspection at fig 1];
wherein the first angle is measured towards one short side of the first heat exchanger plates and the second angle is measured towards the opposite short side of the second heat exchanger plates [0020; fig 1];
and braze joints between the first and second heat exchanger plates are elongated and arranged in a first orientation in the interplate flow channels having bigger volume and in a second orientation in the interplate flow channels having smaller volume, wherein the first orientation and the second orientation are different [0020-0024; fig 1; where the recited limitations are inherent. The limitations at issue are the natural result of the combination of elements explicitly disclosed by the prior art. For example, the prior art discloses a first plate formed with a first pattern of ridges and grooves with one pattern and a second plate formed with a second pattern of ridges and grooves with a second pattern and where when said plates are arranged flow channels having different volumes are created. One skilled in the art would conclude that when said plates are alternatively laid, the braze joints between the plates are arranged in a first orientation on a side having a bigger volume and the braze joints between the plates are arranged in a second orientation on a side having a smaller volume whereby first and second orientations are different]. See MPEP 2112
Liyong does not teach the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°, the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°, and a difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°, the second pattern of ridges and grooves comprise first grooves formed with a first depth and second grooves formed with a second depth different from the first depth.
However, Long teaches a brazed plate type heat exchanger [0006] having where an angle of the pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70° , the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70° [0007; 0015; Regarding “…where the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°,” a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would recognize that it would have been obvious to modify the system of Long to disclose a second plate where the second plate having where the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70° . Furthermore, it has been held that duplication of working parts of a device involve only routine skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04 VIB)] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a heat exchanger having an improved heat exchange efficiency [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Liyong to have the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°, the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°, and a difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°in view of the teachings of Long where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a heat exchanger having an improved heat exchange efficiency.
For clarity, the limitation “…a difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°, is inherent because the limitation(s) at issue are the natural result of the combination of elements explicitly disclosed by the prior art. For example, the prior, in combination, discloses the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°, the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 25-70°. One skilled in the art would conclude that when said plates are alternatively laid, the difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°. See MPEP 2112
Lastly, Nilsson teaches a plate heat exchanger [0001] having a pattern of ridges and grooves comprise first grooves formed with a first depth and second grooves formed with a second depth different from the first depth [0027-0029; fig 8] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a heat exchanger having improved efficiency while maintaining a high mechanical strength [0007].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Liyong to have the second pattern of ridges and grooves comprise first grooves formed with a first depth and second grooves formed with a second depth different from the first depth in view of the teachings of Nilsson where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a heat exchanger having improved efficiency while maintaining a high mechanical strength.
Regarding Claim 2, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein the interplate flow channels on one side of the first heat exchanger plates have a different cross section area than on the opposite side [0024; where differing flow channel volumes necessarily have differing cross sectional areas].
Regarding Claim 3, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein at least a central main heat exchanging section of the first heat exchanger plates exhibits the first angle, wherein at least a central main heat exchanging section of the second heat exchanger plates exhibits the second angle [As modified above, see the rejection of claim 1 for detailed discussion].
Regarding Claim 4, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein the first heat exchanger plates are symmetric [0020; fig 1].
Regarding Claim 5, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein the grooves of the first heat exchanger plates are formed with identical corrugation depth [See fig 2].
Regarding Claim 11, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Nilsson teaches wherein the first and second heat exchanger plates are provided with different corrugation depths [0027-0029; fig 8; where the differing depths can be applied to the first and/or second heat exchanger].
Regarding Claim 13, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and teaches wherein the first pattern is a first herringbone pattern or a first pattern of obliquely extending straight lines and the second pattern is a second herringbone pattern or a second pattern of obliquely extending straight lines, and wherein ridges and grooves of the first and second patterns extend from one long side of the heat exchanger plates to the other [0020; fig 4].
Regarding Claim 14, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein the first and second heat exchanger plates are arranged alternatingly, wherein every other plate is the first heat exchanger plate and every other plate is the second heat exchanger plate throughout the heat exchanger [0020; fig 4].
Regarding Claim 16, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Liyong teaches wherein media is evaporated or condensed in the interplate flow channels of smaller volume, wherein liquid media is conducted to the interplate flow channels of bigger volume [0024].
For clarity, the claim appears to be a recitation of intended use. The prior art structure as modified above is capable of preforming as intended. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitation. MPEP 2114
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liyong et al. (CN205300327U), Long (CN206488670U) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sjodin et al. (US2019/0346220).
Regarding Claim 6, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above but does not explicitly teach wherein a depth of the grooves of the first heat exchanger plate is in the range of 0.6-2 mm.
However, Sjodin teaches a plate heat exchanger [0001] having wherein a depth of the grooves of the first heat exchanger plate is in the range of 0.6-2 mm [0039] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a heat exchanger having desired pressure drop and heat transfer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Liyong to have wherein a depth of the grooves of the first heat exchanger plate is in the range of 0.6-2 mm in view of the teachings of Sjodin where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a heat exchanger having desired pressure drop and heat transfer.
Regarding Claim 7, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 6 above and Nilsson teaches wherein the first depth of the second heat exchanger plate is in the range of 0.6-3 mm, and the second depth of the second heat exchanger plate is in the range of 30-80% of the first depth [0029; claim 1].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liyong et al. (CN205300327U), Long (CN206488670U) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Skoog (US4489778).
Regarding Claim 12, Liyong, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above but does not explicitly teach wherein the heat exchanger plates are provided with different corrugation widths.
However, Skoog teaches a plate heat exchanger [col 1, lines 4-13] having wherein the heat exchanger plates [1, 2] are provided with different corrugation widths [col 2, lines 42-60; by inspections at figs 1 & 2] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a heat exchanger that obtains approximately the desired change of temperature of the fluid [col 3, lines 11-29].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Liyong to have wherein the heat exchanger plates are provided with different corrugation widths in view of the teachings of Skoog where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a heat exchanger that obtains approximately the desired change of temperature of the fluid.
Response to Arguments
A)
On pages 6-7 of the remarks, Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Liyong et al. (CN205300327U, hereinafter “Liyong”) as modified by Long (CN206488670U, hereinafter “Long”) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257, hereinafter “Nilsson”) does not teach or suggest “a difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°.” In particular, Applicant argues that “wherein the first angle is measured towards one short side of the first heat exchanger plates and the second angle is measured towards the opposite short side of the second heat exchanger plates.” Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, it is first established that based upon [0042]-[0045] and figs 6a-7b of the disclosure, that the claims are drawn to plates having a herringbone pattern as shown in fig 6a and fig 7a. Liyong clearly shows in fig 1 plates 3 and 4 having a herringbone pattern similar to the herringbone pattern claims by Applicant. Therefore, structural limitations with respect to ridges and grooves of the first pattern extending in a first angle and ridges and grooves of the second pattern extending in a second angle are met. Applicant’s assertion that the examiner was measuring the first angle and the second angle from the same end of the heat exchanger has no merit. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
With respect to the limitation “…a difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is in a range of 2-35°”, the limitation appears in 0012 of the disclosure and in claim 10 of the published application (US2023/0036224). There is no detailed discussion of how the difference between the first angle of the first pattern of ridges and grooves and the second angle of the second pattern of ridges and grooves is determined. 0012 simply discloses that if first and second patterns are herringbone patterns having ridges and grooves with angles within certain ranges then the difference between the first angle and the second angles are a consequence drawn therefrom. Accordingly, the prior art reference at minimum “suggests” the limitation.
B)
On page 7 of the remarks, Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Liyong et al. (CN205300327U, hereinafter “Liyong”) as modified by Long (CN206488670U, hereinafter “Long”) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257, hereinafter “Nilsson”) does not teach or suggest “brazed joints” and/or “elongated brazed joints.” Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Liyong teaches a 0019 that respective plates are stacked and brazed sequentially. It has been held that a difference is shape is no significant absent persuasive evidence that the shape is significant. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B). Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Also, the claim is drawn to an apparatus having plates that are connected by brazing impart product-by-process limitation. How the plate heat exchanger is made is not critical to the apparatus itself, as patentability of an apparatus lies in the structure of the apparatus rather than how the structure is made. MPEP 2113
C)
On pages 7 and 8 of the remarks, Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Liyong et al. (CN205300327U, hereinafter “Liyong”) as modified by Long (CN206488670U, hereinafter “Long”) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257, hereinafter “Nilsson”) does not teach or suggest “angles of 70-120 degrees. In particular, Applicant argues that Long teaches a single plate and presumably Applicant is arguing that the teachings of Long cannot be applied to two plates. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Applicant is directed to (MPEP 2144.04 VIB) where it has been held that duplication of working parts of a device involve only routine skill in the art. As such, applying the teachings of Long to an additional plate is obvious. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
D)
On page 8 of the remarks, Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Liyong et al. (CN205300327U, hereinafter “Liyong”) as modified by Long (CN206488670U, hereinafter “Long”) and Nilsson (US2008/0029257, hereinafter “Nilsson”) does not teach or suggest “having grooves of different depths and different angles.” In particular, Applicant argues that Liyong teaches against having grooves of different depths. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Liyong at fig 1 teaches grooves of different angles as the plates have a herringbone configuration. With respect to Applicant’s assertion that Liyong teaches against having grooves of differing depths, 0024 of Liyong simply states that the depth of the grooves (ripples) has the same depth. This disclosure does not teach against having grooves of differing depths. Thus, the teaching of Nilsson having a plate heat exchanger where the grooves having differing depths provides a heat exchanger with improved efficiency is motivation to make proffered combination. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
E)
On pages 8-9 of the remarks, Applicant's arguments with respect to the application of Sjodin et al. (US2019/0346220) does not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
F)
On pages 8-9 of the remarks, Applicant's arguments with respect to the application of Skoog (US4489778) does not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
For at least the reasons above, claims 1-7, 11-14 and 16 remain rejected.
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 LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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, Jerry Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights