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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/23/2026 has been entered.
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) 1, 3-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) and Mercer (US PGPub No. 2017/0130974).
Regarding claim 1, Yanik discloses a condenser module (condenser 200, Figs. 2A-2C) of a heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning (HVAC) system, comprising:
a first slab comprising a first plurality of tubes (outer coils 210) configured to receive a refrigerant from a compressor of the HVAC system (the outer coils 210 are one of the four condenser coils, see paragraph 0019, that receive compressed refrigerant from a compressor), wherein the first plurality of tubes is arrayed along a first dimension of the first slab (along a first height of the outer coils 210, see annotated figure in claim 16 below); and
a second slab comprising a second plurality of tubes (inner coils 212) configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (the inner coils 212 are one of the four condenser coils, paragraph 0019, that receive compressed refrigerant from a compressor), wherein the second plurality of tubes is arrayed along a second dimension of the second slab (along a second height of the inner coil 212, see annotated figure in claim 16 below), the second slab is oriented at an acute angle relative to the first slab (an angle between the coils 210 and 212 in the front view of Fig. 2B), and the second dimension is greater than the first dimension (the height of the inner coils 212 is a hypotenuse of a triangle the front view of Fig. 2B and is longer than the height of the outer coils 210).
Yanik fails to disclose a second slab comprising a second plurality of tubes, wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor; and
a first plurality of microchannel tubes and a second plurality of microchannel tubes.
Wallet-Laily (Fig. 2) discloses a first slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to upright posts 12) and a second slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to reinforcement struts 20) comprising a second plurality of tubes (22), wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (each tube 22 receives refrigerant).
The embodiment Figs. 3A-3B of Yanik discloses that (paragraph 0020) the auxiliary coil 314 being independently provided, placed away from, and nested between the inclined slab 310.
Paragraph 0019 of Yanik discloses that “It will be understood that the size of condenser 200 is matched to unit capacity by varying the size of cooling coils 210, 212 in condenser 200, and larger or smaller condensers may be used depending upon the unit capacity”.
Therefore, the inner coil 212 in embodiment Figs. 2A-2C of Yanik may be modified to entirely include the coil 216 in view of the teaching of Wallet-Laily to increase the size of the condenser 200. Further, the auxiliary coil 214 may be independently provided and nested between the first coil 210 and 212 in the same manner as shown in Fig. 3B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second slab comprising a second plurality of tubes, wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor in Yanik’s embodiment Figs. 2A-2C as taught by Wallet-Laily in order to utilize maximum heat exchange space for performing heat exchange to condense the refrigerant without the space being taken for the auxiliary coil.
Mercer discloses at least one coil 25 of the heat exchanger assembly 24 is a microchannel heat exchanger (paragraph 0051).
Therefore, the coils 210 and 212 may comprise microchannel as taught by Mercer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided where the first plurality of tubes, the second plurality of tubes, or both, comprise microchannel tubes in Yanik as taught by Mercer since microchannels provide more surface area per unit volume compared to conventional coil/tubes.
Regarding claim 3, Yanik as modified in claim 1 further discloses wherein the first plurality of microchannel tubes comprises a first number of microchannel tubes, the second plurality of microchannel tubes comprises a second number of microchannel tubes, and the second number of microchannel tubes is greater than the first number of microchannel tubes (the inner coils 212 modified in view of Wallet-Laily has more number of horizontal microchannel tubes than the outer coils 210 as shown in Fig. 2A because the modified inner coils 212 is longer in the second dimension).
Regarding claim 4, Yanik as modified in claim 1 further discloses a condenser fan housing (cabinets 224), wherein the first slab is coupled to the condenser fan housing (the coils 210 are coupled in a panel 218 of the cabinets 224).
Regarding claim 5, Yanik as modified in claim 4 further discloses a condenser fan supported by the condenser fan housing (220), wherein the condenser fan is configured to direct a first air flow across the first slab and a second air flow across the second slab during operation of the condenser fan (“Fans 220 draw cooling air in through louvers 222 or openings on panels 218 on sides of cabinets 224 that house cooling coils 210,212”, paragraph 0019).
Regarding claim 7, Yanik fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first slab and the second slab are arranged in a parallel fluid flow arrangement.
Mercer further discloses wherein the first slab and the second slab are arranged in a parallel fluid flow arrangement (tubes 44 or 44b are parallelly arranged, Figs. 5 and 6).
It has been held that a "simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results” is obvious. In this instance the prior art (Mercer) provides for the known element of heat exchanger that is parallelly arranged. It is known in the art to substitute the coil 210 and 212 in Yanik for the parallel tubes 44 or 44b of Mercer. The result of the substitution would have been predictable to perform the heat exchange between the air and refrigerant. MPEP 2143 B.
Regarding claim 8, Yanik as modified in claim 1 further discloses wherein the first slab is an exterior slab of the condenser module, and the second slab is an interior slab of the condenser module (the outer coils 210 and the inner coils 212).
Claim(s) 10-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476).
Regarding claim 10, Yanik discloses a condenser module (condenser 200, Figs. 2A-2C) of a heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning (HVAC) system, comprising:
a first heat exchanger slab (outer coils 210) and a second heat exchanger slab (inner coils 212), wherein the first heat exchanger slab comprises a first plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 210) configured to receive a first portion of a first refrigerant flow (a first portion of the refrigerant flowing in the condenser 200), the first plurality of tubes is arrayed along a first dimension of the first heat exchanger slab (a first height of the outer coil 210, see annotated figure in claim 16 below), the second heat exchanger slab comprises a second plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 212) configured to receive a respective amount of a second portion of the first refrigerant flow (a second portion of the refrigerant flowing in the condenser 200), the second heat exchanger slab is oriented at an acute angle relative to the first heat exchanger slab (an angle between the coils 210 and 212 in the front view of Fig. 2B), and the second plurality of tubes is arrayed along a second dimension of the second heat exchanger slab (a second height of the inner coil 212, see annotated figure in claim 16 below) that is greater than the first dimension of the first heat exchanger slab (the height of the inner coils 212 is a hypotenuse of a triangle the front view of Fig. 2B and is longer than the height of the outer coils 210); and
a third heat exchanger slab (another outer coils 210 on an opposite side) and a fourth heat exchanger slab (another inner coils 212 on the opposite side), wherein the third heat exchanger slab comprises a third plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 210) configured to receive a third portion of a second refrigerant flow (a third portion of the refrigerant flowing in the condenser 200), the third plurality of tubes is arrayed along a third dimension of the third heat exchanger slab (a third height of the another outer coils 210), the fourth heat exchanger slab comprises a fourth plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 212) configured to receive a respective amount of a fourth portion of the second refrigerant flow (a fourth portion of the refrigerant flowing in the condenser 200), the fourth heat exchanger slab is oriented at an acute angle relative to the third heat exchanger slab (an angle between the another coils 210 and 212 in the front view of Fig. 2B), and the fourth plurality of tubes is arrayed along a fourth dimension of the fourth heat exchanger slab (a fourth height of the another inner coils 212) that is greater than the third dimension of the third heat exchanger slab (the height of the another inner coils 212 is a hypotenuse of a triangle the front view of Fig. 2B and is longer than the height of the another outer coils 210).
Yanik fails to disclose a second heat exchanger slab comprising a second plurality of tubes, each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive a respective amount of a second portion of the first refrigerant flow; and
the fourth heat exchanger slab comprises a fourth plurality of tubes, each tube of the fourth plurality of tubes is configured to receive a respective amount of a fourth portion of the second refrigerant flow.
As noted in claim 1 above, Yanik (Figs. 3A-3B) discloses a second slab (an inclined slab 310 of coils) comprising a second plurality of tubes (the coils in the slab) wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (the coils/slab 310 is a condenser that receives compressed refrigerant from a compressor, paragraph 0020).
Wallet-Laily (Fig. 2) discloses a first slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to upright posts 12 on one side of a mirror plane M) and a second slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to reinforcement struts 20 on the one side of the mirror plane M) comprising a second plurality of tubes (22), wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (each tube 22 receives refrigerant); and
a third slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to upright posts 12 on another side of the mirror plane M) and a fourth slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to reinforcement struts 20 on the other side of the mirror plane M) comprising a second plurality of tubes (22), wherein each tube of the fourth plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (each tube 22 receives refrigerant).
The embodiment Figs. 3A-3B of Yanik discloses that (paragraph 0020) the auxiliary coil 314 being independently provided, placed away from, and nested between the inclined slab 310.
Paragraph 0019 of Yanik discloses that “It will be understood that the size of condenser 200 is matched to unit capacity by varying the size of cooling coils 210, 212 in condenser 200, and larger or smaller condensers may be used depending upon the unit capacity”.
Therefore, the inner coil 212 in embodiment Figs. 2A-2C of Yanik may be modified to entirely include the coil 216 in view of the teaching of Wallet-Laily to increase the size of the condenser 200. Further, the auxiliary coil 214 may be independently provided and nested between the first coil 210 and 212 in the same manner as shown in Fig. 3B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second heat exchanger slab comprising a second plurality of tubes, each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive a respective amount of a second portion of the first refrigerant flow; and
the fourth heat exchanger slab comprises a fourth plurality of tubes, each tube of the fourth plurality of tubes is configured to receive a respective amount of a fourth portion of the second refrigerant flow in Yanik’s embodiment Figs. 2A-2C as taught by Wallet-Laily in order to utilize maximum heat exchange space for performing heat exchange to condense the refrigerant without the space being taken for the auxiliary coil.
Regarding claim 11, Yanik as modified in claim 10 further discloses wherein the first heat exchanger slab, the second heat exchanger slab, the third heat exchanger slab, and the fourth heat exchanger slab are arranged to form an inverted M-shaped configuration (inverted M, see Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 12, Yanik as modified in claim 10 further discloses wherein a first arrangement of the first heat exchanger slab and the second heat exchanger slab (an arrangement of a pair of the coils 210 and 212 on left side of Fig. 2B) and a second arrangement of the third heat exchanger slab and the fourth heat exchanger slab (an arrangement of another the pair of the coils 210 and 212 on right side of Fig. 2B) are symmetric to one another about a central axis of the condenser (an vertical axis in the orientation of Fig. 2B between the coil pair and the another coil pair and they are symmetric as shown in Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 13, Yanik as modified in claim 10 further discloses a pair of opposing condenser modules comprises a first condenser module and a second condenser module (see annotated figure below) disposed opposite one another relative to a central axis of the condenser (see annotated figure below), the respective first condenser module of a first pair of opposing condenser modules comprises the first heat exchanger slab (“1st slab”, see annotated figure below) and the second heat exchanger slab (“2nd slab”, see annotated figure below), and the respective second condenser module of the first pair of opposing condenser modules comprises the third heat exchanger slab (“3rd slab”, see annotated figure below) and the fourth heat exchanger slab (“4th slab”, see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yanik fails to disclose a plurality of condenser modules, wherein the plurality of condenser modules is arranged in pairs of opposing condenser modules.
Yanik further discloses that the nature or number of discrete elements or positions may be altered or varied (paragraph 0029).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would simply duplicate the condenser 200 in Fig. 2B so that the resultant structure has a plurality of condenser modules (plurality of condenser 200) wherein the plurality of condenser modules is arranged in pairs of opposing condenser modules (the original condenser 200 and the duplicated condenser 200 each has the first condenser module and the second condenser module arranged oppositely about the central axis in the annotated figure above) in order to increase cooling capacity or increase heat exchange area of the condenser.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a plurality of condenser modules, wherein the plurality of condenser modules is arranged in pairs of opposing condenser modules, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 14, Yanik as modified in claim 13 further discloses wherein the first condenser modules are arrayed along a longitudinal axis of the condenser (an axis along the “first length” in annotated figure in claim 16 below), the second condenser modules are arrayed along the longitudinal axis (the “1st slab” and “2nd slab” both arrayed along the “first length” in annotated figure in claim 16 below), and wherein the respective first condenser module and the respective second condenser module of each pair of opposing condenser modules are disposed on opposite sides of the condenser ((the first condenser module and the second condenser module are disposed respectively on left and right side of the condenser 200) and are arrayed along a lateral axis of the condenser extending crosswise to the longitudinal axis (the first condenser module and the second condenser module are arrayed in a horizontal axis of Fig. 2B crossing the axis along the “first length” in annotated figure in claim 16 below).
Regarding claim 15, Yanik as modified in claim 13 further discloses wherein each condenser module of the plurality of condenser modules comprises two condenser fans (the left side coil pair includes two fans 220; and the right side coil pair also includes two fans 220).
Regarding claim 16, Yanik discloses a heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning (HVAC) system (air conditioning, paragraph 0002), comprising:
a condenser (200) comprising a first slab (outer coil 210) and a second slab (inner coil 212), wherein the first slab comprises a first plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 210) extending along a first length of the first slab (see annotated figure below), the first plurality of tubes is configured to receive a refrigerant from a compressor of the HVAC system (the outer coil 210 is one of the four condenser coils, see paragraph 0019, that receives compressed refrigerant from a compressor), the first slab comprises a first height transverse to the first length (see annotated figure below), the second slab comprises a second plurality of tubes (the tubes in the coils 212) extending along a second length of the second slab (see annotated figure below), the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (the inner coil 212 is one of the four condenser coils, see paragraph 0019, that receives compressed refrigerant from a compressor), the second slab is oriented at an acute angle relative to the first slab (an angle between the coils 210 and 212 in the front view of Fig. 2B), and the second slab comprises a second height that is transverse to the second length (see annotated figure below) and that is greater than the first height of the first slab (the height of the inner coil 212 is a hypotenuse of a triangle the front view of Fig. 2B and is longer than the height of the outer coil 210).
PNG
media_image2.png
726
633
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Yanik fails to disclose each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor.
As noted in claim 1 above, Wallet-Laily (Fig. 2) discloses a first slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to upright posts 12) and a second slab (heat exchanger 4 adjacent to reinforcement struts 20) comprising a second plurality of tubes (22), wherein each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor (each tube 22 receives refrigerant).
The embodiment Figs. 3A-3B of Yanik discloses that (paragraph 0020) the auxiliary coil 314 being independently provided, placed away from, and nested between the inclined slab 310.
Therefore, the inner coil 212 in embodiment Figs. 2A-2C of Yanik may be modified to entirely include the coil 216 in view of the teaching of Wallet-Laily. Further, the auxiliary coil 214 may be independently provided and nested between the first coil 210 and 212 in the same manner as shown in Fig. 3B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided each tube of the second plurality of tubes is configured to receive the refrigerant from the compressor in Yanik’s embodiment Figs. 2A-2C as taught by Wallet-Laily in order to utilize maximum heat exchange space for performing heat exchange to condense the refrigerant without the space being taken for the auxiliary coil.
Regarding claim 17, Yanik as modified in claim 16 further discloses a condenser fan housing (see annotated figure below), a first support member (see annotated figure below), and a second support member (see annotated figure below), wherein the second support member is coupled to the condenser fan housing (see annotated figure below), a first end of the first slab is coupled to the condenser fan housing (top end of the outer coils 210 is connected to the “condenser fan housing”), a second end of the first slab is coupled to the first support member (bottom end of the outer coils 210 is connected to the “first support member), a third end of the second slab is coupled to the first support member (bottom end of the inner coils 212 is connected to the “first support member”), and a fourth end of the second slab is coupled to the second support member (top end of the inner coils 212 is connected to the “second support member”).
PNG
media_image3.png
398
448
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Yanik in claim 17 further discloses a base (see annotated figure above), wherein the first support member is coupled to the base (see annotated figure above), such that the first slab and the second slab are elevated from the base to form an interior space within the HVAC system (the coils 210 and 212 are elevated from the base within an interior space formed by the cabinets 224).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) and Mercer (US PGPub No. 2017/0130974) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Han (KR 100756018 B1).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Han (KR 100756018 B1).
Regarding claim 2, Yanik as modified in claim 1 fails to disclose wherein the second dimension is greater than the first dimension by at least 5 percent, by at least 10 percent, or by at least 15 percent of the first dimension.
Regarding claim 19, Yanik as modified in claim 16 fails to disclose wherein the acute angle is at least 35 degrees.
Han discloses an angle θ between a vertical condensing coil 5 and an inclined condensing coil 5 is 35-55 degrees and preferably 45 degrees (Fig. 4 and page 7 of the translation).
Therefore, when the preferred angle of 45 degrees is applied between the coils 210 and 212 and when the height of coil 210 is one unit, the height of the coil 212 is square root of 2 or 1.4142 units which is 41.4% of the first dimension or the height of coil 210.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the second dimension is greater than the first dimension by at least 5 percent, by at least 10 percent, or by at least 15 percent of the first dimension in claim 2; and wherein the acute angle is at least 35 degrees in claim 19 in Yanik as taught by Han in order to make space for the fan since the angle/height of the coils directly increases/decrease the diameter of the fan.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Mercer (US PGPub No. 2017/0130974).
Regarding claim 20, Yanik as modified in claim 16 fails to explicitly disclose, the second plurality of tubes, or both, have a multiple pass flow arrangement.
Mercer further discloses a plurality of tubes have a multiple pass flow arrangement (the parallel tubes 44 or 44b define multiple passes over the heat exchanger 24, Figs. 5 and 6).
It has been held that a "simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results” is obvious. In this instance the prior art (Mercer) provides for the known element of heat exchanger that has a multiple pass flow arrangement. It is known in the art to substitute the coil 210 and 212 in Yanik for the parallel tubes 44 or 44b having multiple passes of Mercer. The result of the substitution would have been predictable to perform the heat exchange between the air and refrigerant. MPEP 2143 B.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Singh (US PGPub No. 2019/0093953).
Regarding claim 21, Yanik as modified in claim 10 further discloses a first condenser module and a second condenser module, wherein the first condenser module comprises the first heat exchanger slab and the second heat exchanger slab, the second condenser module comprises the third heat exchanger slab and the fourth heat exchanger slab, and the first condenser module and the second condenser module are disposed on opposite sides of a central axis of the condenser, and wherein the central axis is a vertical axis (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
398
448
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Yanik fails to disclose the condenser comprises a structural support member extending along the vertical axis, and the second heat exchanger slab and the fourth heat exchanger slab are engaged with opposite sides of the structural support member.
Singh (Figs. 10 and 14) discloses that an A-shaped heat exchanger having bundles 43 comprises a structural support member (keel plate 102, Fig. 14) extending along the vertical axis (the plate 102 extends vertically and centered between the bundles 43), and the second heat exchanger slab (one bundle 43) and the fourth heat exchanger slab (another bundle 43) are engaged with opposite sides of the structural support member (on opposite sides of the plate 102).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a structural support member extending along the vertical axis, and the second heat exchanger slab and the fourth heat exchanger slab are engaged with opposite sides of the structural support member in Yanik as taught by Singh in order to protect the angled coils 212 from damage.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanik (US PGPub No 2010/0199714) in view of Wallet-Laily (US PGPub No. 2019/0162476) and Singh (US PGPub No. 2019/0093953) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Carey (US Patent No. 5,067,560).
Regarding claim 22, Yanik as modified in claim 21 further discloses wherein: the first plurality of tubes, the second plurality of tubes, the third plurality of tubes, and the fourth plurality of tubes extend along a longitudinal axis of the condenser (at least a length, width or thickness of the coils 210 and 212 of the tube may be aligned and extend along the direction of “first length” in annotated figure in claim 16 above,
the first condenser module and the second condenser module are arranged along a lateral axis of the condenser extending crosswise to the longitudinal axis (the first condenser module and the second condenser module in the annotated figure in claim 21 above have a width and extending in horizontal direction of Fig. 2B crosswise to the “first length” in annotated figure in claim 16),
a respective first end of the second heat exchanger slab (bottom end of the “second slab” in annotated figure in claim 21 above) and a respective second end of the second heat exchanger slab, opposite the respective first end of the second heat exchanger (top end of the “second slab” in claim 21 above), is engaged with the structural support member (the top end is engaged with one side of the keel plate 102 as taught by Singh), and
a respective first end of the fourth heat exchanger slab (bottom end of the “fourth slab” in annotated figure in claim 21 above), and a respective second end of the fourth heat exchanger slab (top end of the “fourth slab” in claim 21 above) is engaged with the structural support member (the top end is engaged with another side of the keel plate 102 as taught by Singh).
Yanik fails to disclose a respective first end of the second heat exchanger slab is offset from the first heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis, and
a respective first end of the fourth heat exchanger slab is offset from the third heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis.
Carey (Fig. 3) discloses a respective first end of the second heat exchanger slab (bottom end 68 of an interior coil 56) is offset from the first heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis (is offset from a bottom end 70 of an exterior coil 54 by a space 64 along a horizontal axis), and
a respective first end of the fourth heat exchanger slab (bottom end 68 of an interior coil 58) is offset from the third heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis, and a respective second end of the fourth heat exchanger slab is engaged with the structural support member (is offset from a bottom end 70 of an exterior coil 60 by a space 66 along a horizontal axis).
Carey (col. 5, lines 2-6) further discloses “The space 64, 66 has a minimum dimension to prevent impinging airflows from the lower portion of the condensers 56, 58 from impinging on and interfering with airflow from the lower portion 70 of the condenser coils 54, 60”.
Therefore, it is expected that providing the offset as claimed in each bottom ends between the coils 210 and 212 in Yanik as taught by Carey prevents interference of airflows through the lower portions of each of the coils 210 and 212.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a respective first end of the second heat exchanger slab is offset from the first heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis, and a respective first end of the fourth heat exchanger slab is offset from the third heat exchanger slab along the lateral axis in Yanik as taught by Carey in order to prevent interference of airflows through the lower portions of each of the coils 210 and 212.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10 and 16 (with respected to the coils 310 in embodiment Fig. 3 of Yanik) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument (i.e., a new reference, Wallet-Laily US 2019/0162476, teaches that the entire heat exchanger 4 including both the vertical slab and tilted slab flowing the same coolant/refrigerant performs heat exchange with flowing air). Fig. 3 of Yanik is only relied upon an alternate location of the auxiliary coil 314 away from the W or V shaped heat exchanger.
In response to applicant’s argument that the modification of Yanik cannot be considered a simple modification of existing condensers and instead plainly amounts to a redesign of the existing condenser (pages 10-11 of remarks), Paragraph 0017 of Yanik discloses contexts or goals of the plurality of embodiments presented in the specification but does not preclude any modification or redesign of the condenser. Further, paragraph 0019 of Yanik discloses “It will be understood that the size of condenser 200 is matched to unit capacity by varying the size of cooling coils 210, 212 in condenser 200, and larger or smaller condensers may be used depending upon the unit capacity”. Therefore, it is evidenced that the change in size of the coil 212 does not substantially redesigning the condenser of Yanik.
In response to applicant’s argument that the motivation of “in order to utilize maximum heat exchange space for condensing the refrigerant without the space being taken for the auxiliary coil” in the office action cannot be considered the articulated reasoning to sustain a prima facie case of obviousness (page 12 of remarks), the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, utilizing an entire surface of both the vertical slab and tilted slab in Yanik as taught by Wallet-Laily inherently increases available heat exchange surface of the condenser. Therefore, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, the heat exchange between the air and the refrigerant can be done more efficiently as a result of the increased heat exchange surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FOR K LING whose telephone number is (571)272-8752. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 am to 5 pm.
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, Jianying Atkisson 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.
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/F.K.L/Examiner, Art Unit 3763