DETAILED ACTION
Claims filed on 3/31/2026 have been entered.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/14/2019 has been entered.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-10, 13-15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sathyamurthi (US 2019/0162455 A1), in view of An (CN 112033208 A).
Claim 1: Sathyamurthi discloses a condenser tube (i.e., FIG.1) comprising:
a tube (i.e., 110) having a first end (i.e., inherent), a second end (i.e., inherent) opposite the first end, an interior surface (i.e., inherent), and an exterior surface (i.e., inherent; to clarify, the tube has interior surface which refrigerant flows and includes exterior surface and both ends);
a longitudinal bore (i.e., inherent) defined by the interior surface (i.e., inherent) and extending from the first end to the second end (i.e., inherent) and configured to transport a coolant (i.e., paragraph [23]: refrigerant used as coolant);
Sathyamurthi discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose a cylindrical tube having an exterior surface; wherein the exterior surface comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface located above a horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube; and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface located below the horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube, and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements are configured to shed a condensate due to gravity.
However, An teaches a cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe 1 is cylindrical shape having a diameter) having an exterior surface (i.e., inherent; to clarify, the tube has interior surface which refrigerant flows and includes exterior surface and both ends); the exterior surface (i.e., exterior surface of pipe 1) comprises:
a top semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., annotated FIG.4; pipe 1 is cylindrical shape having a diameter) located above a horizontal midplane (i.e., annotated FIG.4) of the cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe1); and
a bottom semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., bottom portion where fin root 41 extends) located below the horizontal midplane (i.e., annotated FIG.4) of the cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe1), and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., annotated FIG.4) is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements (i.e., fins 4 are enhancements; there are no fins on top surface), and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., bottom portion where fin root 41 extends; to clarify, outer surface of pipe has fins 4) comprises a plurality of surface self-draining enhancements (i.e., paragraph [21]: guide groove gathers condensed liquid and drain it downward ensure sharp part of fin always in thin liquid film; to clarify outer surface interpreted to have top portion and bottom portion, further inner surface of pipe has spiral inner tooth) extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end (i.e., see annotated FIG.4), wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (i.e., 4) are configured to shed a condensate due to gravity (i.e., to clarify, natural force gravity enhances the drain of condensed liquid downward from surface of fin) for the purpose of improving the heat transfer efficiency of the tubes (paragraph [5]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Sathyamurthi to include a cylindrical tube having an exterior surface; the exterior surface comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface located above a horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube; and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface located below the horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube, and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements are configured to shed a condensate due to gravitas taught by An in order to improve the heat transfer efficiency of the tubes.
PNG
media_image1.png
374
586
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (An i.e., 4) extend radially from the bottom semi-cylindrical surface (An i.e., annotated FIG.4).
Claim 3: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 2, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements comprise a plurality of fins (An i.e., 4).
Claim 4: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 2, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (An i.e., 4) each extend either horizontally (An i.e., see FIG.4) or downward from the exterior surface.
Claim 5: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 2, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (An i.e., 4) each extend downward from the exterior surface (An i.e., see figure below; to clarify, figure 4 is a cross section of pipe, pipe is circular shape therefore top and bottom are relative to the position of the pipe).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
509
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 6: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (An i.e., 4) each extend horizontally from the exterior surface (An i.e., see FIG.4).
Claim 7: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 2, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements comprise a plurality of fins (An i.e., fins 4 used as enhancements) extending from the first end to the second end (Sathyamurthi i.e., inherent).
Claim 8: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 5, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (An i.e., 4) extend in a parallel configuration (An i.e., see FIG.4) and where a first surface enhancement (An i.e., surface is inherent) is recessed relative to a second surface enhancement (An i.e., surface is inherent) that is above and adjacent to the first surface enhancement (An i.e., see FIG.4).
Claim 9: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the condenser tube is part of a condenser (i.e., 401).
Claim 10: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 9, wherein the condenser is part of a two-phase immersion cooling system (i.e., paragraph [31]: HVAC system using condenser for cooling process using refrigerant in liquid/gas phase).
Claim 13: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements comprise a plurality of pointed fins (An i.e., fins 4) that taper in a direction from a base (An i.e., inherent) to a tip (An i.e., inherent) of each fin (An i.e., see FIG.4).
Claim 14: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the interior surface is substantially smooth (i.e., based on broadest reasonable interpretation, inner surface is substantially smooth).
Claim 15: Sathyamurthi as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein each fin has a maximum fin length greater than a minimum distance between adjacent fins (An i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of An to include each fin has a maximum fin length greater than a minimum distance between adjacent fins in order to enhance the heat transfer efficiency of the pipe, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
PNG
media_image2.png
292
509
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 20: Sathyamurthi discloses a condenser for a two-phase immersion cooling system (i.e., preamble/intended use), the condenser (i.e., FIG.1) comprising:
an inlet manifold (i.e., 140) comprising an inlet (i.e., 191); an outlet manifold (i.e., 141) comprising an outlet (i.e., 192); a plurality of condenser tubes (i.e., 110) fluidly connecting the inlet manifold (i.e., 140) to the outlet manifold (i.e., 141); wherein at least one of the plurality of condenser tubes (i.e., 110) comprises: a tube having a first end (i.e., inherent), a second end (i.e., inherent) opposite the first end, an interior surface (i.e., inherent), and an exterior surface (i.e., inherent; to clarify, the tube has interior surface which refrigerant flows and includes exterior surface and both ends); a longitudinal bore (i.e., inherent) defined by the interior surface (i.e., inherent) and extending from the first end to the second end (i.e., inherent) and configured to transport a heat transfer fluid (i.e., paragraph [23]: refrigerant used as heat transfer fluid); wherein the interior surface is substantially smooth (i.e., based on broadest reasonable interpretation, inner surface is substantially smooth);
Sathyamurthi discloses the claimed limitations in claim 20, but fails to disclose a cylindrical tube having an exterior surface; wherein the exterior surface comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface located above a horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube; and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface located below the horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube, and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements are configured to shed a condensate due to gravity.
However, An teaches a cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe 1 is cylindrical shape having a diameter) having an exterior surface (i.e., inherent; to clarify, the tube has interior surface which refrigerant flows and includes exterior surface and both ends); the exterior surface (i.e., exterior surface of pipe 1) comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., annotated FIG.4; pipe 1) located above a horizontal midplane (i.e., annotated FIG.4) of the cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe1); and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., bottom portion where fin root 41 extends) located below the horizontal midplane (i.e., annotated FIG.4) of the cylindrical tube (i.e., pipe1), and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., annotated FIG.4) is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements (i.e., fins 4 are enhancements; there are no fins on top surface), and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface (i.e., bottom portion where fin root 41 extends; to clarify, outer surface of pipe has fins 4) comprises a plurality of surface self-draining enhancements (i.e., paragraph [21]: guide groove gathers condensed liquid and drain it downward ensure sharp part of fin always in thin liquid film; to clarify outer surface interpreted to have top portion and bottom portion, further inner surface of pipe has spiral inner tooth) extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end (i.e., see annotated FIG.4), wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements (i.e., 4) are configured to shed a condensate due to gravity (i.e., to clarify, natural force gravity enhances the drain of condensed liquid downward from surface of fin) for the purpose of improving the heat transfer efficiency of the tubes (paragraph [5]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Sathyamurthi to include a cylindrical tube having an exterior surface; the exterior surface comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface located above a horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube; and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface located below the horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube, and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, wherein the plurality of self-draining surface enhancements are configured to shed a condensate due to gravitas taught by An in order to improve the heat transfer efficiency of the tubes.
PNG
media_image1.png
374
586
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument: “the written disclosure of An does not support the Office Action’s interpretation of Fig. 4. Therefore, Applicant contends that the Office Action misinterprets what is shown in Fig. 4 of An, and that An fails to teach or suggest the features that Sathyamurthi lacks. Sathyamurthi and An, either alone or in combination, fail to teach a condenser tube in which the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, as recited in independent claims 1 and 20, as amended”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because figure 4 of An is only used to show cylindrical tube as pipe 1 which inherently has bottom and top surfaces, and midplane is arbitrary to show the interpretation of the examiner about where midplane is taken to be for pipe 1, therefore examiner annotated figure 4 of An to illustrate the examiner interpretation of the claimed limitations. As indicated in the office action Sathyamurthi lacks these limitations a cylindrical tube having an exterior surface; wherein the exterior surface comprises: a top semi-cylindrical surface located above a horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube; and a bottom semi-cylindrical surface located below the horizontal midplane of the cylindrical tube, and wherein the top semi-cylindrical surface is a substantially smooth region free of surface enhancements, and the bottom semi-cylindrical surface comprises a plurality of self-draining surface enhancements extending longitudinally from the first end to the second end, therefore An is used to teach these limitations that Sathyamurthi lacks. Sathyamurthi discloses condenser tube, but the surface of the tube lacks the features such as surface self-draining enhancements and at the same time having other surface without enhancements regions. So Sathyamurthi is modified to include cylindrical tube having smooth region without surface enhancements and also having surface self-draining enhancements as taught in paragraph [21] of An in order to improve the heat transfer efficiency of the tubes and enhancing draining. Every single limitation indicated in the applicant’s arguments above are addressed in this office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure which is relevant to heat exchanger tube:
Tokizaki (US 2009/0166019 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights