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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/31/2026 has been entered.
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed 01/31/2026. The objection to the drawings have been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. The objection to the specification has been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. The objection to the claim has been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. Claims 11 and 18 have been canceled. Claims 22-23 are new. Claims 1, 3-10, 14-17, 19 and 21-23 remain pending for consideration on the merits.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-10, 15-17, 19 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20180224193 A1, hereinafter “Jung”), and further in view of Jung et al. (US 20190120538 A1, hereinafter “Jung 538”).
Regarding Claim 1, Jung teaches an adiabatic body [Fig. 2] comprising:
a first plate [10];
a second plate [20] spaced apart from the first plate to form a vacuum space [50] between the first plate and the second plate [¶ 0037; Fig. 2; plates provide walls for vacuum space 50];
an insulated foam body [90] provided at a periphery of the first and second plates [Fig. 5; ¶ 0075-0076; mold 90 is provided at a peripheral portion of the adiabatic body and may be made of foaming urethane]; and
While Jung generally discloses the known technique of implementing a heater to attain an effective heat transfer coefficient [¶ 0063], Jung does not explicitly disclose a heater disposed at the insulated foam body, wherein the heater is separated from the second plate and the heater is not in direct contact with the second plate.
However, Jung 538 teaches a refrigerator with a vacuum space [Fig. 1] comprising at least a first plate [110] and a second plate [120] with a vacuum space [130] disposed therebetween [Fig. 4; ¶ 0050-0051]. Jung further discloses a hot pipe [350] disposed at the periphery of the second plate with the outer case [200], wherein Jung teaches the hot pipe serves to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116]. Furthermore, Jung 538 discloses that the hot pipe [350] should be arranged adjacent to a place the supporting portion [140] is mounted to, therefore providing that the hot pipe [350] may be spaced apart from the plate [120] [¶ 0116]. Jung 538 further emphasizes, in the alternative, that the unit may be attached to the outside surface of the wall, arranged adjacent to the outside surface of the wall, or arranged adjacent to a contact point of the supporting portion to the wall [¶ 0023]. Accordingly, the term “adjacent to” in the prior art must contain some different weight than the term “contact” as they are listed as different configurations to fulfill the same function of reducing temperature drop of the outer surface [Alternatively, the limitation requiring separation of the heater from the second plate may be considered an obvious design choice regarding a rearrangement of parts [MPEP 2144.04 VI.C], as the precise position of the heater would not impact the operation of the device in a non-predictable manner (i.e. the heating of the plate is obviously proportional to the distance from the heater). A review of the instant specification provided no criticality regarding the position of the heater relative to the second plate, further implying that the precise location of the heater is not critical to the operation of the invention, leading to predictable modification. Lastly, the current interpretation of the heater (pipe 350) in Jung 538, being circular/elliptical, may make contact with the plate 120 negligible, as the plate and the heater only touch at a single tangential point, therefore prompting Jung 358 to specify that the hot pipe 350 only be adjacent to the plate]. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the heater as claimed by known methods and that in combination, the heater 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. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116].
Therefore, it is a simple mechanical expedient that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Jung to have a heater disposed at the insulated foam body, in view of the teachings of Jung 538, where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system.
Claim 2 canceled
Regarding Claim 3, Jung, as modified, teaches the vacuum adiabatic body of claim 1 above and Jung teaches wherein the heater is disposed next to a gasket [80] [¶ 0077-0078] [While the heater is taught by Jung 538 and the gasket is taught by Jung, the proposed modification to incorporate the heater of Jung 538, presented above in Claim 1, necessarily positions said heater within proximity of plate 10 and/or 20. Thus, a heater disposed within the enlarged portion of Fig. 5 of Jung, is considered to be disposed next to gasket 80].
Regarding Claim 4, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 1 above and Jung teaches wherein the insulated foam body [90] insulates a periphery of the adiabatic body [¶ 0076; peripheral adiabatic part 90 is provided at a peripheral portion of the vacuum body].
Regarding Claim 5, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 1 above and Jung teaches wherein the first plate includes a plurality of layers [32] [¶ 0045; Fig. 5; plurality of radiation resistance sheets 32 are disposed between member 10 and 20], and one of the plurality of layers is an internal panel disposed at an outer side of the vacuum space [¶ 0045; plate 10 or 20 may be considered to be the outermost layer of the plurality of plates], and
Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater [350] is configured to provide heat to the internal panel [¶ 0111-0116; Jung 538 teaches that the heaters provide heat to the panel 120, disposed at the outer side of the vacuum space].
Regarding Claim 6, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 1 above and Jung teaches wherein, the second plate [20] includes an external panel disposed at an outer side of the vacuum space [¶ 0037; member 20 provides a wall for the vacuum part], and the heater is disposed in an internal space having the external panel as a boundary [Fig. 5; ¶ 0037-0038; the proposed modification to incorporate the heater of Jung 538, presented above in Claim 1, necessarily positions said heater within proximity of plate 10 and/or 20. Thus, a heater disposed within the enlarged portion of Fig. 5 of Jung, is considered to be within an internal space, with plates 20, 85, and 10 obviously providing an external boundary].
Regarding Claim 7, Jung as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 6 above and Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater is configured to prevent dew formation at a front portion of the second plate [¶ 0111-0116; heater 350 prevents the formation of dew on the outer case].
Regarding Claim 8, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 7 above, and Jung 538 wherein the heater is disposed next to an area at which the second plate and a side plate branch apart [See Jung Fig. 2; apparent from inspection that plates 10 and 20 are joined via a side plate; see enlarged portions of Fig. 2. Therefore, upon inspection of Fig. 5 of Jung, the section view therefore shows that the foam body 90 is surrounding an area in which the second plate and the side plate branch apart at frame 70. Thus, providing a heater as in Jung 538 to the second plate therefore disposes the heater in an area next to the branch point in Jung].
Regarding Claim 9, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 7 above and Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater [350] is next to the external panel [120] [¶ 0111-0116; Fig. 8].
Regarding Claim 10, Jung as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 7 above, and Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater is disposed next to an area at which a side plate and the external panel branch apart [See Jung Fig. 2; apparent from inspection that plates 10 and 20 are joined via a side plate; see enlarged portions of Fig. 2. Therefore, upon inspection of Fig. 5 of Jung, because the second plate is acting as the external panel, the section view therefore shows that the foam body 90 is surrounding an area in which the external panel and the side plate branch apart at frame 70. Thus, providing a heater as in Jung 538 to the external panel therefore disposes the heater in an area next to the branch point in Jung].
Claim 11 canceled
Regarding Claim 15, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 6 above and Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater [350] is configured to prevent dew formation at a side of the external panel [¶ 0111-0117; Fig. 8; heater 350 is part of a dewing preventative unit].
PNG
media_image1.png
424
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 15 above and Jung teaches [See zoomed Annotated Fig. 8] wherein the vacuum space of the vacuum adiabatic body includes a first straight portion [A], a second straight portion below the first straight portion [B], a third straight portion [C] between the first straight portion and the second straight portion, a first curved portion [D] between the first straight portion and the third straight portion, and a second curved portion [E] between the third straight portion and the second straight portion [See Annotated Fig. 8; apparent from inspection] [Alternatively, the terms “above” and “below” are relative limitations, therefore under broadest reasonable interpretation, the device may be rotated and labeled with different annotations than those provided while still satisfying the claim limitations], and
Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater is disposed next to the first straight portion [Jung 538 ¶ 0111-0116; the heater is provided adjacent to the supporting portion 140. Therefore, when simply combining the heaters of Jung 538 with the equivalent supporting portions [30] of Jung in Fig. 8, the heater may necessarily be disposed next to the first straight portion].
Regarding Claim 17, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 16 above and Jung 538 teaches wherein the heater is next to an edge of the first straight portion [Jung 538 ¶ 0111-0116; the heater is provided adjacent to the supporting portion 140. Therefore, when simply combining the heaters of Jung 538 with the equivalent supporting portions [30] of Jung in Fig. 8, the heater may necessarily be disposed next to an edge of the first straight portion].
Claim 18 canceled
Regarding Claim 19, Jung teaches a vacuum adiabatic body [Fig. 2] comprising:
a first plate [10];
a second plate [20] spaced apart from the first plate to form a vacuum space [50] between the first plate and the second plate [¶ 0037; Fig. 2; plates provide walls for vacuum space 50];
a side plate configured to define part of the vacuum space [¶ 0045; See Jung Fig. 2; apparent from inspection that plates 10 and 20 are joined via a side plate];
a sheet configured to reduce a heat transfer between the first plate and the second plate [Fig. 5; plurality of radiation resistance sheets 32 are disposed between member 10 and 20]; and
While Jung generally discloses the known technique of implementing a heater to attain an effective heat transfer coefficient [¶ 0063], Jung does not explicitly a heater disposed next to the side plate, wherein the heater is separated from the side plate and the heater is not in direct contact with the second plate.
However, Jung 538 teaches a refrigerator with a vacuum space [Fig. 1] comprising at least a first plate [110] and a second plate [120] with a vacuum space [130] disposed therebetween [Fig. 4; ¶ 0050-0051]. Jung further discloses a heater [350] disposed at the periphery of the second plate with the outer case [200], wherein Jung teaches the heater serves to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116]. Furthermore, Jung 538 discloses that the hot pipe [350] should be arranged adjacent to a place the supporting portion [140] is mounted to, therefore providing that the hot pipe [350] may be spaced apart from the plate [120] [¶ 0116]. Jung 538 further emphasizes, in the alternative, that the unit may be attached to the outside surface of the wall, arranged adjacent to the outside surface of the wall, or arranged adjacent to a contact point of the supporting portion to the wall [¶ 0023]. Accordingly, the term “adjacent to” in the prior art must contain some different weight than the term “contact” as they are listed as different configurations to fulfill the same function of reducing temperature drop of the outer surface [Alternatively, the limitation requiring separation of the heater from the second plate may be considered an obvious design choice regarding a rearrangement of parts [MPEP 2144.04 VI.C], as the precise position of the heater would not impact the operation of the device in a non-predictable manner (i.e. the heating of the plate is obviously proportional to the distance from the heater). A review of the instant specification provided no criticality regarding the position of the heater relative to the second plate, further implying that the precise location of the heater is not critical to the operation of the invention, leading to predictable modification. Lastly, the current interpretation of the heater (pipe 350) in Jung 538, being circular/elliptical, may make contact with the plate 120 negligible, as the plate and the heater only touch at a single tangential point, therefore prompting Jung 358 to specify that the hot pipe 350 only be adjacent to the plate]. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the heater as claimed by known methods and that in combination, the heater 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. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116].
Therefore, it is a simple mechanical expedient that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Jung to have a heater disposed at the insulated foam body, in view of the teachings of Jung 538, where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system.
Regarding Claim 21, Jung, as modified, teaches an appliance [refrigerator 1; Fig. 2], comprising a vacuum adiabatic body, the vacuum adiabatic body comprising:
a first plate [10];
a second plate [20] spaced apart from the first plate to form a vacuum space [50] between the first plate and the second plate [¶ 0037; Fig. 2; plates provide walls for vacuum space 50];
an insulated foam body [90] provided at a periphery of the first and second plates [Fig. 5; ¶ 0075-0076; mold 90 is provided at a peripheral portion of the adiabatic body and may be made of foaming urethane]; and
While Jung generally discloses the known technique of implementing a heater to attain an effective heat transfer coefficient [¶ 0063], Jung does not explicitly disclose a heater disposed at the insulated foam body, wherein the heater is separated from the second plate and the heater is not in direct contact with the second plate.
However, Jung 538 teaches a refrigerator with a vacuum space [Fig. 1] comprising at least a first plate [110] and a second plate [120] with a vacuum space [130] disposed therebetween [Fig. 4; ¶ 0050-0051]. Jung further discloses a hot pipe [350] disposed at the periphery of the second plate with the outer case [200], wherein Jung teaches the hot pipe serves to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116]. Furthermore, Jung 538 discloses that the hot pipe [350] should be arranged adjacent to a place the supporting portion [140] is mounted to, therefore providing that the hot pipe [350] may be spaced apart from the plate [120] [¶ 0116]. Jung 538 further emphasizes, in the alternative, that the unit may be attached to the outside surface of the wall, arranged adjacent to the outside surface of the wall, or arranged adjacent to a contact point of the supporting portion to the wall [¶ 0023]. Accordingly, the term “adjacent to” in the prior art must contain some different weight than the term “contact” as they are listed as different configurations to fulfill the same function of reducing temperature drop of the outer surface [Alternatively, the limitation requiring separation of the heater from the second plate may be considered an obvious design choice regarding a rearrangement of parts [MPEP 2144.04 VI.C], as the precise position of the heater would not impact the operation of the device in a non-predictable manner (i.e. the heating of the plate is obviously proportional to the distance from the heater). A review of the instant specification provided no criticality regarding the position of the heater relative to the second plate, further implying that the precise location of the heater is not critical to the operation of the invention, leading to predictable modification. Lastly, the current interpretation of the heater (pipe 350) in Jung 538, being circular/elliptical, may make contact with the plate 120 negligible, as the plate and the heater only touch at a single tangential point, therefore prompting Jung 358 to specify that the hot pipe 350 only be adjacent to the plate]. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the heater as claimed by known methods and that in combination, the heater 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. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system [¶ 0111-0116].
Therefore, it is a simple mechanical expedient that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Jung to have a heater disposed at the insulated foam body, in view of the teachings of Jung 538, where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. providing a means to generate a heat to prevent a surface temperature of the outside of the case from dropping, thereby helping prevent dew formation, thus improving the system.
Regarding Claim 22, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 1 above, and Jung 538 teaches wherein the insulated foam body is arranged between the heater [350] and the second plate [120] [Fig. 8B; Jung 538 discloses that the hot pipe 350 is disposed at a periphery of the second plate wherein a cover member 200, also disposed at the periphery, appears to surround the hot pipe member, and is thus disposed between the hot pipe and the plate 120. Accordingly, when in combination with the insulated foam body of Jung, also disposed at a periphery of the second plate, said foam body may surround the heating pipe 350, similarly to how it is surrounded by member 200 in Fig. 8B of Jung 538].
Regarding Claim 23, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 19 above and Jung teaches wherein the sheet is arranged in the vacuum space [¶ 0044; radiation resistance sheets 32 are disposed between plates 10 and 20 through the vacuum space part 50], and Jung 538 teaches wherein the side plate is arranged between the sheet and the heater [In Jung, the claimed side plate is merely regarded as the perpendicular plate member connecting the respective first and second plates making up the vacuum space. Therefore, because Jung 538 also comprises a vacuum space 130 between plate 110 and 120, the invention of Jung 538 commonsensically comprises of a side plate to contain said vacuum space. Accordingly, the sheet in Jung is disposed in the vacuum between the plates, suspended by bars 31. Therefore, under broadest reasonable interpretation, considering that the side plate must be continuous from plate to plate, in order to connect the plates and form a vacuum space, there necessarily exists some portion of the side wall (directly stemming from 120) between the sheet and the heating element in the left to right direction of the figure 8B. Accordingly, this portion of the side wall meets the claimed limitation as being disposed between the heater and the sheet].
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung and Jung 538 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Noguchi et al. (JP 2019143968 A, hereinafter “Noguchi”).
Claims 12-13 canceled
Regarding Claim 14, Jung, as modified, teaches the adiabatic body of claim 1 above but Jung does not explicitly teach comprising: a sensor configured to sense a state of outside air.
However, Noguchi teaches a refrigerator [Figs. 1-4] wherein a side wall of the refrigerator comprises a plurality of plates [31, 32], vacuum heat insulating panels [33] as well as heaters [34, 35] disposed therebetween, wherein said heaters are connected to a controller [50], wherein the controller is further connected to a plurality of indoor and outdoor temperature and humidity sensors to drive the heaters [¶ 0028-0032; Fig. 4]. Noguchi further teaches that operation of the controller allows the system to better control the heaters in response the sensed values, in order to suppress the occurrence of condensation on the surface, thereby improving the system [¶ 0036-0038]. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the sensor as claimed by known methods and that in combination, the sensor 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. operation of the controller allows the system to better control the heaters in response the sensed values, in order to suppress the occurrence of condensation on the surface, thereby improving the system [¶ 0036-0038].
Therefore, it is a simple mechanical expedient that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Jung to have a sensor configured to sense a state of outside air, in view of the teachings of Noguchi, where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective function and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. operation of the controller allows the system to better control the heaters in response the sensed values, in order to suppress the occurrence of condensation on the surface, thereby improving the system.
Response to Arguments
On pages 8-9 of the remarks, Applicant argues that paragraphs [0113]-[0114] of Jung ‘538 states that the supporting portion 140 is in contact and that dew is evaporated by such contact. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
Respectfully, the citation provided by Applicant is in relation to the embodiment of Fig 8A, wherein heater 340 is utilized. This citation does not represent the current rejection of referenced Fig. 8B, wherein a different heating element 350 is utilized to fulfill the claimed function. Furthermore, the citation in which Applicant references relies upon it for the teaching of supporting portion 140 being “in contact” with the outer case 120. Respectfully, it is unclear how the contact portion of 140 and 120 is related to the heating element 350.
On pages 9-10 of the remarks, Applicant argues that the term “adjacent” in the prior art should be more narrowly defined to a “relationship that substantially includes a contact state”. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
Respectfully, Applicant has not provided any citations to enforce a more narrow interpretation of the term in either the prior art or Applicant’s specification. The claims should be examined with their broadest reasonable interpretation. Therefore, when viewing the prior art, it is important to note that there is an explicit distinction between the terms “contact” and “adjacent to” [¶ 0113-0116] wherein heater 340 is disclosed to be “on the outside surface” of the case, whereas the hot pipe 350 is described as “adjacent to” in order to “heat a surface of the outer case”. Accordingly, prior art has indicated a difference in terms to explicitly acknowledge that pipe 350 merely heats the outside of the surface it is adjacent to, whereas the heater 340 is explicitly taught to be arranged on the outside surface of the case.
As further evidence, paragraph [0023] of Jung ‘538 further states that “The dewing preventive unit is attached to the outside surface of the wall, arranged adjacent to the outside surface of the wall, or arranged adjacent to a contact point of the supporting portion to the wall for reducing an extent of temperature drop of a surface of the outer case…”. Therefore, Jung ‘538 explicitly describes at least three known positions, listed in the alternative, for the heater to fulfill the function of “reducing temperature drop” or “enhancing a heat insulating function” [¶ 0010]. Therefore, because the prior art explicitly discloses a variety of heater locations described utilizing the concerned terms “contact” and “adjacent”, it would be improper for the Examiner to import the Applicant’s preferred interpretation to consider the term “adjacent” as also being in contact. This distinction is also considered present in the Figures 8A and 8B, wherein 8A shows heat transfer arrows of the heater 340 all flowing towards plate 120 due to the contact, whereas 8B shows the heat transfer arrows of the heater 350 tangentially extending around heater 350, not directly towards plate 120, because the heater is merely adjacent to as disclosed. Therefore, Applicant’s assertion that the prior art Jung ‘538 does not teach a configuration wherein the heater is not in contact with the plate is not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
On pages 10-12 of the remarks, Applicant argues that the technical objective of Jung ‘538 is to reduce dewing and that the examiner’s interpretation cannot be achieved or the efficiency of the system would be significantly reduced. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant references [0011] the prior art and is arguing the only purpose of the prior art is to minimize dewing. Respectfully, paragraph [0010] of the prior art also discloses that the first object of the invention is to provide a vacuum space in a refrigerator for enhancing heat insulating function, and is not only fulfilling the function of preventing dew.
Applicant further generally argues that it is self-evident that efficiency is improved through contact, and that the Examiner’s interpretation is unreasonable, further citing [0117] of the prior art. Respectfully, the Applicant appears to provide a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Specifically, [0117] of the prior art is merely discussing dew formation at a contact point between the supporting portion 140 and the outer case 120. See Fig. 8, wherein it is apparent from inspection that supporting member 140 is contact with plate 120, whereas Applicant seems to be referencing [0117] to imply that the heating device 350 is the object in said contact, when that is respectfully a false statement. Furthermore, while it is an obvious scientific principle that heat exchange is proportional to distance, Applicant’s assertion that the Examiner’s opinion is “unreasonable” because the system would be “less efficient” has not been appropriately supported, especially considering that the main purpose of the prior art is to teach a vacuum space for enhancing heat insulating function.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
On pages 11-12 of the remarks, Applicant argues against the alternative rejection of claim 1 drawn to a potential design choice. Respectfully, Applicant’s arguments are considered moot, as the citation of MPEP 2144.04 VI.C is merely listed as an alternative rejection, in good faith, in order to provide a compact prosecution for Applicant’s further amendments, should the alternative rejection be at all relevant. However, upon further review of the prior art and Applicant’s arguments, the disclosed prior art is considered to explicitly teach the configuration as claimed (i.e. adjacent to and not in contact). Applicant has not provided adequate citation to disqualify the primary rejection interpretation. Thus, Applicant’s arguments that the prior art would be unfit for combination are unpersuasive, because the prior art Jung ‘538 is considered to explicitly teach the scenario that Applicant is arguing would reduce efficiency or modify the technical purpose. Thus, the alternative rejection is not relied upon, and is merely present in the interest of prosecution as an alternative, thus the rejection is maintained.
On pages 12-13 of the remarks, Applicant argues that the remainder of the claims are allowable at least based on their dependency to allegedly allowable base claims. As the above claims have been addressed, all claims depending therefrom also remain rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH S MYERS whose telephone number is (571)272-5102. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00.
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-Daryl 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.
/KEITH STANLEY MYERS/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763