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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/28/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 19, applicant’s argument that reference to Materna does not disclose a wall upstream or downstream with respect to the fins to accelerate or slow down the flow, has been carefully considered but is not found to be persuasive.
Materna discloses (figure A) that the heat exchanger comprises a first profiled wall which is disposed upstream of the first plurality of fins and which is configured so as to guide and slow down the first air flow entering the heat exchanger through the first plurality of fins (the first profiled wall extends an angle to enlarge the inlet, hence capable of slowing down the first air flow entering the finned portion) and a second profiled wall which is disposed downstream of the second plurality of fins and which is configured so as to accelerate the second air flow exiting the heat exchanger through the second plurality of fins (the second profiled wall extends at an angle to narrow the outlet through the second air flow exits the heat exchanger, hence capable of accelerating the flow at the exit).
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 1, 4, 12, 13 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malone et al. (US 6,935,419B2) in view of Yang et al. (US 10,285,305). .Malone et al. discloses (figures 2A and 5C) a turbomachine (a machine system that includes a fan 90 + a heat exchanger) comprises a heat exchanger comprising a support wall (100) extending in a longitudinal direction and a first plurality of fins (102U) that each rise from an external surface of the support wall and intended to be swept by a first air flow (51), characterized in that the heat exchanger comprises, downstream of the first plurality of fins (38) in the longitudinal direction a second plurality of fins (102D) that each rise from the external surface of the support wall (100), the first and the second plurality of fins being distinct to each other separated by a space. Regarding claims 1 and 15, Malone does not disclose that the first fin and the second fin are separated by at least a distributor, in the longitudinal direction, which are configured such that the first air flow circulates outside the second plurality of fins and along the longitudinal direction and a second air flow circulates in one hand outside the first plurality of fins and along the longitudinal direction, and n the other hand through the second plurality of fins along the longitudinal direction via the distributor, wherein the distributor comprises internal paths through which the distributor crossed by the first air flow and the second airflow.
Yang discloses (figures 1-5) a heat exchanger for cooling first and second portions, wherein the first portion (21) and the second portion (23) is separated by a distributor (70,80) in a longitudinal direction, which are configured such that the first air flow circulates outside the second portion and along the longitudinal direction and a second air flow circulates in one hand outside the first portion and along the longitudinal direction, and in the other hand through the second portion along the longitudinal direction via the distributor (70,80), wherein the distributor comprises internal paths (flow paths within necks 70,80) through which the distributor crossed by the first air flow and the second airflow (column 2, lines 33-59) for a purpose of enhancing the cooling of the first and second portions since each portion is cooled by fresh air that is not preheated by any upstream portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Yang’s teaching in Malone’s device for a purpose of enhancing the cooling of the first and second portions since each portion is cooled by fresh air that is not preheated by any upstream portion.
Regarding the limitation of “ for a turbomachine” in claim 1, it has been held that a preamble is denied the effect of a limitation where the claim is drawn to a structure and the portion of the claim following the preamble is a self-contained description of the structure not depending for completeness upon the introductory clause. Kropa v. Robie, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951).
Regarding claim 4, the combination device of Malone and Yang et al. would discloses (figures 1, 3 and 5 of Yang) that the distributor (70,80) comprises a first ramp (70) arranged downstream of the first portion (21) and which rises from the external surface of the support wall ( the distributor is placed on top of the support wall 20, see figure 1), being inclined, so that the first air flow exiting from the first portion is directed toward an outside of the heat exchanger. (column 2, lines 42-48, first air enters at inlet 42 and exit at 52).
Regarding claim 12, Malone et al. discloses (figure 5c) that each fin of the first and second plurality of fins (102U and 102D) are distinctively continuous and rectilinear each along a longitudinal direction. (figure 5C and 5E)
Regarding claim 13, the method of forming the device “produced by additive manufacturing” is not germane to the issue of the patentability itself. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In this case, the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a heat exchanger of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In this case, the heat exchanger in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from the combination device of Malone in view of Yang et al. though the prior heat exchanger was made by a different process.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Malone in view of Yang et al. further discloses that the first air flow circulating outside the second plurality of fins circulates outside of the heat exchanger and the second air flow circulating outside the first plurality of fins circulates outside the heat exchanger. (the flows in upper channels 42 and 52 circulate outside with the first and second plurality of fins and outside of the heat exchanger, in which the heat exchangers comprises fins, support wall, partitions 36,66 and deflector 70,80, everywhere else is considered outside of the heat exchanger).
Regarding claim 17, the combination device of Malone in view of Yang et al. further discloses (figure 4 of Yang) that the heat exchanger comprising a first profiled panel (36) and a second profiled panel (66) extending in a direction parallel to the support wall, the first portion extending between the support wall and the first profiled panel and the second portion extend between the support wall and the second profiled panel to form flow channels for the first air flow and second air flow respectively. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use Yang’s teaching in Malone’s device for a purpose of forming flow channels for the first air flow and the second air flow. Regarding claim 18, the combination device of Malone in view of Yang et al. further discloses that the first and second profiled panels (36, 66) are connected by the distributor.(70,80, see figures 4 and 5 of Yang).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Materna (US 6,668,915) in view of Malone et al. (US 6,935,419). Materna discloses (figure 11 and figure A shown below, column 1, lines 13-36 and column 25, lines 10-15) a heat exchanger comprising a first plurality of fins (1150d, 1180a, see figure A) and intended to be swept by a first air flow, and, downstream of the first plurality of fins (1150d) in the longitudinal direction a second plurality of fins (1180a), first and the second plurality of fins being separated at least partly by a distributor ( a whole section is interpreted to be a distributor, figure A), in the longitudinal direction, which are configured such that the first air flow circulates outside the second plurality of fins (1180a) and a second air flow circulating outside the first plurality of fins (1150d) passes through the second plurality of fins (1180a) along the longitudinal direction, passes through the second plurality of fins. Materna further discloses (figure A) that the heat exchanger comprises a first profiled wall which is disposed upstream of the first plurality of fins and which is configured so as to guide and slow down the first air flow entering the heat exchanger through the first plurality of fins (the first profiled wall extends an angle to enlarge the inlet so to slow down the first air flowing through) and a second profiled wall which is disposed downstream of the second plurality of fins and which is configured so as to accelerate the second air flow exiting the heat exchanger through the second plurality of fins (the second profiled wall extends at an angle to narrow the outlet through the second air flow exits the heat exchanger). Regarding the limitation of “ for a turbomachine”, it has been held that a preamble is denied the effect of a limitation where the claim is drawn to a structure and the portion of the claim following the preamble is a self-contained description of the structure not depending for completeness upon the introductory clause. Kropa v. Robie, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951).
Materna is silent about a support wall, that has both the first and plurality of fins, each rises from the external surface of the support wall. Malone et al. discloses (figure 5C) a heat exchanger that has a plurality of first and second fins (102U, 102D), each rises from a support wall (100) for a purpose of supporting a plurality of fins in a heat exchanger so that the support wall can be cooled. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Malone’s teaching in Materna’s device for a purpose of supporting a plurality of fins in a heat exchanger so that the support wall can be cooled.
PNG
media_image1.png
624
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: the modified figure corresponds to figure 11 with limitation shown.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is allowed.
Claims 2-3, 5-11 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record either taken singularly or in combination fails to disclose the invention as claimed. In particular, references to Materna, Malone and Yang are the closet prior art but fail to disclose first profiled wall, second profiled wall to slow down or accelerate the flow and the distributor is crossed by the first air flow and the second air flow (claims 2-3, 7); a plurality of stacks extending between the first profiled wall portion and the first ramp (claims 5-6, 9 and 11), the second profiled wall portion comprising through orifices into which passages open (claims 8, 10) and an opening or a recess in which the heat exchanger with the first profiled and second panels is installed, the first wall being connected upstream of a first panel to a segment of the annular wall (claims 14-15) in combination with other limitations in the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THO V DUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-4793. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 10-6PM.
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, Atkisson Jianying can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/THO V DUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights