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 the Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the reply dated 1/29/2026 are as follows:
Claims 1 and 20 are amended,
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 20 recite “an extension direction” in lines 19-20, which is unclear as an extension direction has already been established in these claims. For examining purposes the limitations will be interpreted as --the extension direction--.
Claims 2-19 are rejected as they depend on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 11, 15, 17, and 20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noren (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0160642, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Noren discloses a heat exchanger (fig 6b embodiment), in particular for the refrigerant circuit of a motor vehicle, the heat exchanger, comprising
a plurality of plates (8) which are connected to one another,
wherein the plurality of plates comprises two identical plates (see fig 6b below),
wherein curvilinear channels (see annotated fig 6b below), extending in a direction (see annotated fig 3 below) parallel to an extension direction, are formed between the plates, first and second heat exchanging media flow alternately through the channels via at least one inflow opening (24) and at least one outflow opening (26),
wherein the plurality of plates have profiles (fig 3), such that contact points are formed between the plurality of plates creating a wave profile (see fig 6b below), at which contact points the plates are connected to one another, such that flow paths (V1, V2) of the first and second media are formed from the respective inflow opening (24, 32) to the respective outflow opening (26, 30),
wherein the flow has a main flow direction (see annotated fig 3 below),
wherein the main flow direction is transverse to the wave profile (see annotated fig 6b below),
wherein a plane is formed between the profiles of the plates and their contact points,
wherein the plane formed allows flow in a first dimension and a second dimension (see annotated fig 3 below), and
wherein such that the main flow direction of the first and second heat exchanging media is restricted in third dimension relative to the plane (see annotated fig 6b below), wherein a first channel for the first media has the same size and the same cross-section as a second channel for the second media throughout the entire channel extending in a direction parallel to the extension direction (see annotated figs and 3 and 6b below).
PNG
media_image1.png
576
1007
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
808
851
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Noren further discloses wherein the plurality of plates (8) alternately and respectively have a profile (fig 3) differing from the adjacent plates (fig 8), wherein the profiles run in a curved manner, and have waves along an extension direction (see fig 6b).
Regarding claim 3, Noren further discloses wherein the profile (formed by 6, 6’) of the plurality of plates (4, 4’) between straight sections (see annotated fig 2 below) has a tip angle (α)(see annotated fig 2 below) that reoccurs at a predetermined division (see annotated fig 2 below) such that the profile is described by the division, an amplitude (see annotated fig 4 below), a wavelength (see annotated fig 4 below), the tip angle (α), wherein the profile has a radius (see annotated fig 2 below) at the tip.
PNG
media_image3.png
798
556
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
364
789
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Noren further discloses wherein, the profile (fig 3) of the plurality of plates (8) has at least one division (see annotated fig 3 above). The limitation of “wherein the number of divisions depends on the length of the respective plate, such that the longer the plate, the smaller the number of divisions” is considered a product-by-process limitation. In product-by-process claims, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference.” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 is proper because the “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 5, Noren further discloses wherein, the profile (fig 3) forms a first plate (8), and the profile is respectively arranged symmetrically with respect to the transverse axis and longitudinal axis of the first plate (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
798
818
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Noren further discloses wherein, the profile (8) forms a second plate (4’), the second plate is shifted in the direction of the transverse axis by at most half the wavelength (see annotated fig 6b below) compared to the first plate (6).
PNG
media_image6.png
364
789
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Noren further discloses wherein the profile (fig 3) forms a third plate (8), the third plate is rotated by 180° about the vertical axis (see fig 8) of the plate compared to the first plate (8), wherein the profile is shifted in the direction of the transverse axis (see annotated fig 6b below).
PNG
media_image7.png
364
789
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Noren further discloses wherein, the heat exchanger is formed of the plurality of plates (8) that are stacked together, wherein the plates having differing profile are arranged always alternately one above another (fig 6b).
Regarding claim 11, Noren further discloses wherein, the tip angle (α)(see annotated fig 3 below) between the straight sections of the profile is 90° (fig 8).
PNG
media_image8.png
798
556
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Noren further discloses wherein, the plurality of plates are connected at the contact points by material bonding (¶0085).
Regarding claim 17, Noren further discloses wherein the plates alternating and respectively have a profile different from the adjacent plates, wherein a first type of plate of the adjacent plates is always arranged alternately with an other type of plate of the adjacent plates (see annotated fig 6b below, as they are different in that they are upside down).
PNG
media_image9.png
293
752
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Noren discloses a heat exchanger (fig 6b embodiment) comprising:
a plurality of plates (8) which are connected to one another,
wherein the plurality of plates comprise tow identical plates (see fig 6b),
wherein curvilinear channels, extending in a direction (see annotated fig 3 below) parallel to an extension direction, are formed between the plurality of plates (see annotated fig 6b below),
wherein the plurality of plate have profiles, such that contact points are formed between the plurality of plates creating a wave profile, at which contact points of the plurality of plates are connected to one another, such that flow paths (V1, V2) of the first and second media are formed from the respective inflow opening (24, 32) to the respective outflow opening (26, 30),
wherein the flow has main flow direction (see annotated fig 6b below),
wherein the main flow direction is transverse to the wave profile (see annotated fig 6b below),
wherein the plurality of plates comprise a gasket material between each of the plurality of plates (¶0055),
wherein the plurality of plates are removably coupled together (as evident in fig 2), and
wherein the main flow direction of the first and second heat exchanging media is restricted in a third dimension relative to the plane (see annotated fig 3 below), wherein a first channel for the first media has the same size and the same cross-section as a second channel for the second media (fig 6b), throughout the entire channel extending in a direction parallel to the extension direction (see annotated figs and 3 and 6b below).
PNG
media_image10.png
326
764
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
808
851
media_image11.png
Greyscale
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) 9, 10, 14, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noren alone.
Regarding claim 9, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose wherein an amplitude of the profile of each of the plurality of plates is between 1.0 to 3.5 mm. However, since Noren teaches providing an amplitude (see rejection of claim 3) the exact range of the amplitude is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case the recognized result is that the amplitude will affect the heat transfer efficiency and pressure drop of the heat exchanger. It would not have been inventive to a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine via routine experimentation the optimal amplitude and thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to have the amplitude be between 1.0 to 3.5 mm.
Regarding claim 10, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose wherein, a wavelength of the profile of the plurality of plates is between 2.0 and 9.0 mm. However, since Noren teaches providing an wavelength (see rejection of claim 3) the exact range of the amplitude is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case the recognized result is that the wavelength will affect the heat transfer efficiency and pressure drop of the heat exchanger. It would not have been inventive to a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine via routine experimentation the optimal wavelength and thus it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to have the wavelength be between 2.0 and 9.0 mm.
Regarding claim 14, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose wherein, the plurality of plates are made of a metallic material. However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that the use of aluminum is old and well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to provide aluminum plates in order to provide efficient heat exchange.
Regarding claim 16, Noren further discloses a method for producing a heat exchanger, in particular according claim 7, the method comprises, stacking the plates one on top of the other, and joining the plates to one another with a material bond, in particular brazing (¶0005). Noren does not explicitly disclose embossing the plurality of plates. However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that embossing is old and well known in the art of plate heat exchangers and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to emboss the profile onto the plates.
Regarding claim 19, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose an internal heat exchanger for a motor vehicle, wherein the heat exchanger is designed according to claim 1, and wherein the heat exchanger is an oil cooler. However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that use of plate heat exchangers as oil cooler in vehicles is old and well known in the art of plate heat exchangers and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to provide the heat exchange as an oil cooler.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noren as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sondergaard (Russian Patent Publication RU2700466C1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 12, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose wherein, the inflow opening for the inflow, and the outflow opening for the outflow of the first medium, are at least a factor of 10 larger than the inflow opening for the inflow and the outflow opening for the outflow of the second medium. Sondergaard, however, discloses a plate heat exchanger wherein an inflow opening (3) for the inflow, and an outflow opening (4) for the outflow of a first medium, are at least a factor of 10 larger than an inflow opening (5) for the inflow and an outflow opening (6) for the outflow of a second medium (¶0031). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to have the opening of the first medium 10 times larger than the openings of the second medium such as taught by Noren in order to optimize the flow rates through the heat exchanger.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noren as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ito et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0012291, “Ito”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 13, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose wherein, the plurality of plates between the inflow openings and outflow openings, respectively further have a straight profile, resulting in additional contact points between the plates at which the plates are connected. Ito, however, discloses a plate heat exchanger wherein, a plurality of plates between the inflow openings and outflow openings, respectively, have an a straight profile, resulting in additional contact points between the plates at which the plates are connected (see annotated fig 6 below). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to provide the additional profile of Ito in order to ensure no leakage around the perimeter of plates.
PNG
media_image12.png
548
694
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noren as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Memory et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0102113, “Memory”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 18, Noren discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Noren does not explicitly disclose a refrigerant circuit, preferably for a motor vehicle, having a condenser, an evaporator, an expansion mechanism, at least one heat exchanger, the connecting pipes, wherein the heat exchanger is designed according to claim 1. Memory, however, discloses a refrigerant circuit, preferably for a motor vehicle, having a condenser (10), an evaporator (17), an expansion mechanism (16), at least one heat exchanger (19), and connecting pipes. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Noren to provide the heat exchanger in the circuit of Memory in order to provide efficient heat exchange.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (page 7) that Noren does not teach first and second channels having the same size and same cross-section throughout the entire channel extending in a direction parallel to an extension direction. Rather Noren teaches multiple channel in various directions and shapes. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; as can be seen below in annotated fig 6b below; the channels for the media V1 and V2 have the same cross section which extend in an extension direction.
PNG
media_image13.png
576
1007
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues (pages 7-8) that the channels of Noren are not curvilinear. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; as can be seen above in annotated fig 6b, the channels for the media V1 and V2 are curvilinear.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HARRY E ARANT whose telephone number is (571)272-1105. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 ET.
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.
/HARRY E ARANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights