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 .
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, 3, 5, 7-10, 13-16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Berg (US2729433A).
Regarding claim 1, Berg discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 1-6) for an aircraft powerplant (this is a statement of intended use), comprising: a heat exchanger including a frame (adjacent frames 15), a plurality of heat exchanger cores (cores sections 16), a first flowpath (interior of core sections) and a second flowpath (exterior of core sections); the frame extending circumferentially about an axis (see central axis thereof), and the frame comprising a plurality of receptacles (interiors of frames 15) within an interior of the frame; each of the plurality of heat exchanger cores (core sections 16) housed within a respective one of the plurality of receptacles; the first flowpath extending in a first direction across the heat exchanger and through the plurality of heat exchanger cores; and the second flowpath extending in a second direction across the heat exchanger and through the plurality of heat exchanger cores. Berg further discloses during operation a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores (16) is configured to move (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25), while housed within and retained within a first of the plurality of receptacles, at least one of axially relative to the frame; radially relative to the frame; or laterally relative to the frame.
Regarding claim 3, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores is moveably secured to the frame while housed within a first of the plurality of receptacles (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25).
Regarding claim 5, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the frame (15) forms an exoskeleton around the plurality of heat exchanger cores (16).
Regarding claim 7, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the frame (15) includes a plurality of elongated members arranged to form edges of a hexahedral unit (see hexahedral shape of Fig. 4); and a first of the plurality of receptacles is formed by and within the hexahedral unit.
Regarding claim 8, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the frame (see hoop formed by adjacent frames 15) is configured as a full-hoop body around the axis.
Regarding claim 9, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the frame is configured as an arcuate body extending partially about the axis (see arc formed by adjacent frames 15).
Regarding claim 10, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses
a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores is circumferentially next to a second of the plurality of heat exchanger cores (adjacent frames 15).
Regarding claim 13, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the plurality of heat exchanger cores comprises a first heat exchanger core; the heat exchanger further includes a first seal element (29) disposed at a first side of the first heat exchanger core; and the first seal element seals a first gap between the frame and the first heat exchanger core.
Regarding claim 14, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 13, and Berg further discloses the first seal element (29) is compressed between the frame and the first heat exchanger core.
Regarding claim 15, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 13, and Berg further discloses the heat exchanger further includes a second seal element (second one of 29) disposed at a second side of the first heat exchanger core that is opposite the first side of the first heat exchanger core; and the second seal element seals a second gap between the frame and the first heat exchanger core.
Regarding claim 16, Berg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Berg further discloses the first direction is an axial direction; and the second direction is a radial direction (see flows of core sections 16).
Regarding claim 20, Berg discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 1-6) for an aircraft propulsion system, comprising: a heat exchanger including a frame (frame 15), a first heat exchanger core (core section 16), a second heat exchanger core (second one of core section 16) a first flowpath (path interior of 16) and a second flowpath (path exterior of 16); the frame (15) extending circumferentially about an axis; the first heat exchanger core (16) housed within and movably retained within the frame; the second heat exchanger core housed within and movably retained within the frame (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25), and the second heat exchanger core next to and disengaged from the first heat exchanger core (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25); the first flowpath extending across the first heat exchanger core and the second heat exchanger core; and the second flowpath extending across the first heat exchanger core and the second heat exchanger core. Berg further discloses during operation a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores (16) is configured to move (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25), while housed within and retained within a first of the plurality of receptacles, at least one of axially relative to the frame; radially relative to the frame; or laterally relative to the frame.
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) 6 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berg (US2729433A) in view of Bond (US20150101334A1).
Regarding claim 6, Berg teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Berg does not teach frame is configured as a lattice framework.
Bond teaches the frame is configured as a lattice framework (see frame 84 with X-shaped bracing members 104; Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Berg to include the lattice framework configuration of Bond, in order to improve strength of the frame (¶[0218]).
Regarding claim 18, Berg teaches an apparatus of an aircraft powerplant (Fig. 1-6), comprising: a heat exchanger including a frame (15), a first heat exchanger core (16), a second heat exchanger core (another of 16), a first flowpath and a second flowpath (flowpaths through 16); the frame (15) including a plurality members arranged to form a first hexahedral unit and a second hexahedral unit the first hexahedral unit next to the second hexahedral unit (see shapes thereof), the first heat exchanger core arranged within the first hexahedral unit; the second heat exchanger core arranged within the second hexahedral unit; the first flowpath extending across the first heat exchanger core and the second heat exchanger core; and the second flowpath extending across the first heat exchanger core and the second heat exchanger core. Berg further teaches during operation a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores (16) is configured to move (each core section being removably secured – Col. 4, lines 15-25), while housed within and retained within a first of the plurality of receptacles, at least one of axially relative to the frame; radially relative to the frame; or laterally relative to the frame.
Berg does not teach the frame including a plurality of lattice members arranged to form a first hexahedral unit and a second hexahedral unit, and the first hexahedral unit sharing one or more of the plurality of lattice members with the second hexahedral unit.
Bond teaches a plurality of lattice members arranged to form a first hexahedral unit and a second hexahedral unit, and the first hexahedral unit sharing one or more of the plurality of lattice members with the second hexahedral unit (see frame 84 with X-shaped bracing members 104; Fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Berg to include the lattice framework configuration of Bond, in order to improve strength of the frame (¶[0218]).
Regarding claim 19, Berg as modified teaches the limitations of claim 18, and Berg as modified further teaches the plurality of lattice members are arranged to further form a third hexahedral unit; the first hexahedral unit is between the second hexahedral unit and the third hexahedral unit, and the first hexahedral unit shares one or more of the plurality of lattice members with the third hexahedral unit (as modified above); the heat exchanger (see additional ones of 16) further includes a third heat exchanger core arranged within the third hexahedral unit; the first flowpath further extends across the third heat exchanger core; and the second flowpath further extends across the third heat exchanger core.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berg (US2729433A) in view of Nicita (US3831374A).
Regarding claim 17, Berg teaches the limitations of claim 1, and does not teach an engine comprising an engine flowpath; and the first flowpath fluidly coupled with or configured as part of the engine flowpath.
Nicita teaches engine comprising an engine flowpath; and the first flowpath fluidly coupled with or configured as part of the engine flowpath (intake air/exhaust gas flow paths through heat exchanger 16; Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Berg to include wherein the first flowpath is fluidly coupled with an engine, in order to improve the efficiency thereof (Col. 2, lines 45-50).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Berg does not teach wherein, during operation of the heat exchanger, a first of the plurality of heat exchanger cores is configured to move, while housed within and retained by a first of the plurality of receptacles, at least one of: axially relative to the frame; radially relative to the frame; or laterally relative to the frame. Specifically, while Applicant argues the cited Col. 4, lines 15-25 suggests the cores appear to float due to thermal expansion of the frame.
Examiner respectfully traverses this argument. Specifically, Examiner notes the cited section states “The inner or rear end of each core section 16 is not attached to any member but merely rest on the frame 15 and is free to float with the expansion and contraction of the core section during operation of the heat exchanger” (bolded for emphasis). It is clear that the core moves, during operation, due to thermal expansion and contraction of the core, relative to the frame.
For at least the reasons stated above, Applicant’s arguments are found unpersuasive and the rejection is maintained.
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 ERIC S RUPPERT whose telephone number is (571)272-9911. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/ERIC S RUPPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights