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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore, the “a distributor connected to ends of the plurality of third flat tubes and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from an inflow tube disposed at a central position of the distributor to the plurality of third flat tubes through a plurality of branches when the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator” (claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The instant drawings depict “a distributor with an inflow tube disposed at a central position of the distributor” as a single distributor with a single central inflow pipe (e.g. Figure 11) and the drawings depict “a heat exchanger comprising: a group of windward tubes…and a group of leeward tubes [including third flat tubes]” with plural distributers with plural central inflow pipes (e.g. Figure 2). However, the drawings do not appear to show the combination of subject matter as recited in claim 1. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a first connection member” (claim 5, line 2) as disclosed in paragraph 18 of the specification.
“a second connection member” (claim 6, line 2) as disclosed in paragraph 18 of the specification.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-6 and 8-11 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.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “a fourth convex portion” (line 19) renders the claim indefinite. The recitation implies the presence of first, second, and third convex portions in addition to the fourth convex portion. Therefore, it is unclear if the claims require one or more convex portions.
Regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends where the refrigerant flows in and out” (line 3) renders the claim indefinite. The recitation “the other ends” lacks antecedent basis. It is also unclear from which claim element “the refrigerant flows in and out”.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends where the refrigerant flows in and out” (lines 4-5) renders the claim indefinite. The recitation “the other ends” lacks antecedent basis. It is also unclear from which claim element “the refrigerant flows in and out”.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitations “the other ends” (lines 8 and 9) lack antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends of the plurality of first flat tubes” (lines 11-12) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitations “the ends” (lines 12, 13, 15, and 17) render the claim indefinite. It is unclear which of the previously recited ends are being referenced.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends of the plurality of third flat tubes” (line 13) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends of the plurality of second flat tubes” (line 15) lacks antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 3, the recitation “the other ends of the plurality of fourth flat tubes” (lines 16-17) lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the recitation “a first end of each flat tube in the group of windward flat tubes opposite to the other end where the refrigerant flows in and out is connected to a second end of a corresponding flat tube in the group of leeward flat tubes group opposite to the other end where the distributor is connected” (emphasis added) (lines 1-5) renders the claim indefinite.
The recitation “the other end” lacks antecedent basis. It is unclear what claim element comprises “the other end” and it is unclear if “the second end” refers to “the other end” or a separate and distinct end. It is also unclear from which claim element “the refrigerant flows in and out”.
Claims 2, 5, 6, and 8-11
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US 2019/0128574), and further in view of Higashhue et al. (US 2019/0093965).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura et al. (US 2019/0128574) discloses a heat exchanger that exchanges heat between refrigerant and air, the heat exchanger comprising:
A group of windward flat tubes (13a, 15a) including a plurality of first flat tubes (i.e. 13a) spaced apart from each other and a plurality of second flat tubes (i.e. 15a) spaced apart from each other (Figures 6-7 and Paragraph 41),
A group of leeward flat tubes (13b, 15b) including a plurality of third flat tubes (i.e. 13b) spaced apart from each other and a plurality of fourth flat tubes (i.e. 15b) spaced apart from each other (Figures 6-7 and Paragraph 41), the group of leeward flat tubes being disposed at a leeward position with respect to the group of windward flat tubes in a flow direction of air (Figures 6-7 and Paragraph 38), and
A distributor (29) connected to ends of the plurality of third flat tubes and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from an inflow tube (37) to the plurality of third flat tubes when the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator (Figure 7 and Paragraph 19),
When the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator (Figure 7 and Paragraph 19), the refrigerant flows through the plurality of second flat tubes, the plurality of fourth flat tubes, the plurality of third flat tubes, and the plurality of first flat tubes in this orde r(Figure 7 and Paragraph 19), and
When the heat exchanger acts as a condenser (Figure 6 and Paragraph 18), the refrigerant flows through the plurality of first flat tubes, the plurality of third flat tubes, the plurality of fourth flat tubes, and the plurality of second flat tubes in this order (Figure 6 and Paragraph 18).
While Nakamura et al. discloses a segmented distributor (29) connected to ends of the plurality of third flat tubes and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from inflow tubes (37) to the plurality of third flat tubes when the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator (Figure 7 and Paragraph 19), Nakamura et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the distributor is connected to ends of the plurality of third flat tubes and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from an inflow tube disposed at a central position of the distributor to the plurality of third flat tubes through a plurality of branches.
Higashhue et al. teaches a heat exchanger comprising, at least: a plurality of tubes (22) and a distributor (51_1), where the distributor is connected to ends of the plurality of flat tubes and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from an inflow tube (52) disposed at a central position of the distributor to the plurality of third flat tubes through a plurality of branches (Figures 1-2). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the distributors and the inflow tubes as disclosed by Nakamura et al. in the form of a distributor and an inflow tube as taught by Higashhue et al. to improve heat exchanger heat transfer efficiency by providing for uniform refrigerant distribution to a plurality of heat transfer tubes.
Further, while Nakamura et al. discloses a distributor connected to a plurality of third flat tubes and an inflow tube, Nakamura et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the distributor as having a fourth convex portion.
Higashhue et al. teaches a heat exchanger comprising, at least: a plurality of tubes (22) and a distributor (51_1), where the distributor has a fourth convex portion (57, 41) protruding outward from a main body of the distributor (Figures 2 and 10), and the fourth convex portion protruding outward from a main body of the distributor (Figures 2 and 10) is formed with a channel (i.e. an internal flow path of 57, 41) through which the refrigerant flowing in from the inflow tube and branched by the distributor flows (Figures 2 and 10, see also Paragraph 137). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the distributors and the inflow tubes as disclosed by Nakamura et al. in the form of a distributor and an inflow tube as taught by Higashhue et al. to improve heat exchanger heat transfer efficiency by providing a smooth transition for refrigerant from a distributor to a heat transfer tube.
Regarding claim 2, Nakamura et al. discloses a heat exchanger as discussed above, where the number of the plurality of first flat tubes (i.e. 13a) is greater than the number of the plurality of second flat tubes (i.e. 15a) (Figure 6), -in the group of windward flat tubes- the plurality of first flat tubes are disposed above the plurality of second flat tubes (i.e. dependent upon orientation) (Figure 6), the number of the plurality of third flat tubes (i.e. 13b) is greater than the number of the plurality of fourth flat tubes (i.e. 13b) (Figure 6), and -in the group of leeward flat tubes- the plurality of third flat tubes are disposed above the plurality of fourth flat tubes (i.e. dependent upon orientation) (Figure 6).
Regarding claim 4, Nakamura et al. discloses a heat exchanger as discussed above, where a first end of each flat tube in the group of windward flat tubes (Figure 6: See ends of 13a and 15a on a side adjacent 27 of the heat exchanger) opposite to another end (i.e. another end of the windward tubes opposite the first end of the windward tubes) (Figure 6) where the refrigerant flows in and out is connected to a second end of a corresponding flat tube in the group of leeward flat tubes group (Figure 6: See ends of 13b and 15b on a side adjacent 17 of the heat exchanger) opposite to the other end where the distributor is connected (Figure 6: Ends of the windward and leeward tubes are fluidically connected to each other).
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura et al. discloses a heat exchanger as discussed above. However, Nakamura et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the distributor as comprising a plurality of plates with holes.
Higashhue et al. teaches a heat exchanger comprising, at least: a plurality of tubes (22) and a distributor (51_1), where the distributor includes a plurality of plate members (Figure 2), each of which are provided with holes (Figure 2). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the distributors and the inflow tubes as disclosed by Nakamura et al. in the form of a distributor and an inflow tube as taught by Higashhue et al. to improve heat exchanger heat transfer efficiency by providing for uniform refrigerant distribution to a plurality of heat transfer tubes.
Regarding claim 10, Nakamura et al. as modified by Higashhue et al. discloses an air conditioner equipped with the heat exchanger according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US 2019/0128574) and Higashhue et al. (US 2019/0093965), and further in view of Park et al. (US 2015/0226495).
Regarding claim 9, Nakamura et al. discloses a heat exchanger as discussed above. While Nakamura et al. discloses that the first and second flat tubes and (i.e. windward side) comprise first fins (Paragraph 36) and that the third and fourth flat tubes (i.e. leeward side) comprise second fins (Paragraph 36), Nakamura et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose than an interval between the first fins is larger than an interval between the second fins.
Park et al. teaches a heat exchanger comprising, at least: a plurality of first flat tubes (i.e. windward side) (110) having first fins (210) and a plurality of second flat tubes (i.e. leeward side) (120) having second fins (220), where an interval between the plurality of first fins is larger than an interval between the plurality of second fins (Figure 4 and Paragraph 18). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the first and second fins as disclosed by Nakamura et al. with different intervals as taught by Park et al. to improve heat exchanger safety and reliability by arranging the heat exchanger with a variable amount of heat exchange surface area such that frost formation in minimized (Paragraph 68 of Park et al.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, and 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The instant claims (Figures 5 and 10) are directed to a heat exchanger that exchanges heat between refrigerant and air, the heat exchanger comprising:
A group of windward flat tubes including a plurality of first flat tubes (11) spaced apart from each other and a plurality of second flat tubes (12) spaced apart from each other (Figure 10),
A group of leeward flat tubes including a plurality of third flat tubes (13) spaced apart from each other and a plurality of fourth flat tubes (14) spaced apart from each other (Figure 10), the group of leeward flat tubes being disposed at a leeward position with respect to the group of windward flat tubes in a flow direction of air (W) (Figure 10), and
A distributor (50) connected to ends of the plurality of third flat tubes (i.e. 13) (Figure 10) and configured to distribute the refrigerant flowing in from an inflow tube (e.g. 160) disposed at a central position of the distributor (Figure 5) to the plurality of third flat tubes through a plurality of branches when the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator (Figures 5 and 10),
When the heat exchanger acts as an evaporator (e.g. Figure 10), the refrigerant flows through the plurality of second flat tubes, the plurality of fourth flat tubes, the plurality of third flat tubes, and the plurality of first flat tubes in this order (e.g. Figure 10), and
When the heat exchanger acts as a condenser (e.g. Figure 8), the refrigerant flows through the plurality of first flat tubes, the plurality of third flat tubes, the plurality of fourth flat tubes, and the plurality of second flat tubes in this order (e.g. Figure 8),
The distributor has a fourth convex portion (e.g. one of 110A-110B or one of 210A- 210F) protruding outward from a main body of the distributor (Figures 5 and 11), and the fourth convex portion protruding outward from a main body of the distributor is formed with a channel through which the refrigerant flowing in from the inflow tube and branched by the distributor flows (Figures 5 and 11).
The art of record (Nakamura et al. US 2019/0128574) discloses a heat exchanger as discussed in the 35 USC 103 rejections as discussed above. However, Nakamura et al. does not teach or disclose a heat exchanger comprising tubes with ends that are respectively fluidically connected to each other as recited in claim 3. Nor does Nakamura et al. disclose connection members with convex portions as recited in claims 5 and 6.
The art of record (Higashhue et al. US 2019/009396) similarly discloses a heat exchanger as discussed in the 35 USC 103 rejections as discussed above. However, Higashhue et al. also does not teach or disclose a heat exchanger comprising tubes with ends that are respectively fluidically connected to each other as recited in claim 3. Nor does Higashhue et al. disclose connection members with convex portions as recited in claims 5 and 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2017/0328638 discloses a heat exchanger.
US 2021/0003353 discloses a heat exchanger.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON N THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6391. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 8:30 am -5:00 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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/JASON N THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763