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, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Panick US4923033.
Regarding claim 1, Panick US4923033 teaches a heating device for a vehicle (Fig. 5 and Fig.6) comprising:
a heat exchanger for heating a fluid in a flushable volume of the heating device (Fig. 5, 12a);
a burner device (burner 2a) having a burner flange (21a), wherein the burner device is arranged within the heat exchanger (Fig. 5); and
an exhaust gas outlet for discharging exhaust gases from the heating device (14a);
a catalytic converter element arranged between the burner flange and the heat exchanger (muffler material 19a, which provides catalytic treatment Col. 3 Ln. 26-31); and
a spacer which is configured to be fitted onto the burner flange and which has a height with respect to an exhaust gas flow direction in order to position the catalytic converter element in a predetermined position in the proximity of the exhaust gas outlet (holder 20a, seen in Fig. 5 and 6)
The embodiments of Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 both teach all the features of claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1,wherein characterized in that the heat exchanger has a plurality of radially projecting heat exchanger fins (fins 17a, Fig. 7), wherein the heat exchanger fins extend in a first region along a burner tube of the burner device and in a second region at least partially over the burner flange (Fig. 5 and Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger has at least one step, wherein the step is configured and/or arranged to form-fittingly fix the catalytic converter element between the step and the spacer (see annotated Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
440
604
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the height of the spacer is configured such that, in the predetermined position, the catalytic converter element at least partially covers an air supply region arranged inside the burner flange (Fig. 5, air supply 6a, Col. 9 Ln. 21-25).
Regarding claim 9, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the height of the spacer is configured such that an upper end of the catalytic converter element in the predetermined position is substantially at the same height as a lower end of the exhaust gas outlet (Fig. 6, the limitation is interpreted in light of instant specification Fig. 6 see annotated Figures below; When in the same orientation as instant Fig. 6, Panick Fig. 6 teaches the limitation).
PNG
media_image2.png
534
540
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
466
506
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 9,wherein the height of the spacer is configured such that the catalytic converter element in the predetermined position is at the greatest possible distance in the exhaust gas flow direction from a burner tube exhaust gas outlet arranged at a lower end of the burner tube (Panick, seen in fig. 5, material 19a is as far from the outlet of the burner tube as possible while still being between the heat exchanger and the flange).
Regarding claim 15, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer, on a side facing the burner flange, includes at least one contact projections configured to form a supporting surface between the spacer and the burner flange (annotated Fig. 5 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
440
604
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein that the spacer has an inner circle diameter that is smaller than a diameter of the burner flange, such that the fitted spacer provides a restoring force to fix the spacer onto the burner flange in the predetermined position (Panick, Fig. 5, holder 20a has an inner diameter smaller than 21a and is fitted in place).
Regarding claim 17, Panick further teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the catalytic converter element comprises a substantially annular form (Panick, Col. 4 Ln. 16-19)
Regarding claim 18, Panick further teaches the heating device according claim 1, wherein the heating device comprises at least one of:
formed as a water heating device for heating water in a flushable volume of the heat exchanger (Panick, Col. 3Ln. 45-46) and is formed as an air heating device for heating air in a flushable volume of the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 19, Panick US4923033 teaches a method of assembling a heating device, the method comprising the following steps:
providing a burner device (burner 2a, Fig. 5 and Fig. 6);
fitting a spacer (20a) onto a burner flange of the burner device (flange 21a);
fitting a catalytic converter element onto the burner flange (muffler material 19a, which provides catalytic treatment Col. 3 Ln. 26-31);
inserting the burner device into a heat exchanger (heat exchanger 12a), in such a way that the catalytic converter element is positioned between a step of the heat exchanger and the spacer in a predetermined position in the proximity of an exhaust gas outlet of the heating device (Fig. 5 and Fig. 6).
Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. MPEP2112.02
Regarding claim 20, Panick US4923033 teaches a method of using a heating device as at least one of: as a parking heater and/or an auxiliary heater in a vehicle (abstract), wherein the heating device comprises:
a heat exchanger for heating a fluid in a flushable volume of the heating device (Fig. 5, Fig. 6, heat exchanger 12a);
a burner device having a burner flange, wherein the burner device is arranged within the heat exchanger (burner 2a, flange 21a); and
an exhaust gas outlet for discharging exhaust gases from the heating device (exhaust 14a);
a catalytic converter element arranged between the burner flange and the heat exchanger (muffler material 19a, which provides catalytic treatment Col. 3 Ln. 26-31); and
a spacer which is configured to be fitted onto the burner flange and which has a height with respect to an exhaust gas flow direction in order to position the catalytic converter element in a predetermined position in the proximity of the exhaust gas outlet (holder 20a, seen in Fig. 5)
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panick US4923033 in view of Humburg ’66 US20120205066.
Regarding claim 2, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein positioning of the catalytic converter element comprises fixing in the predetermined position in a force-fit manner.
Humburg ’66 US20120205066 teaches a similar fuel operated vehicle heater (abstract) wherein components are assembled by press fit, among other methods, thereby achieving stable fixation of the device (¶18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device to be assembled in a force-fit manner, as taught by Humburg ’66, since doing so is a known technique for assembling similar devices with the known predictable result of providing a stable assembly
Claim(s) 5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panick US4923033 in view of Galtz US4688718.
Regarding claim 5, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer is formed as a single-piece sheet metal spring element
Galtz US4688718 teaches an auxiliary burner for a vehicle wherein parts are formed of sheet metal (Col. 3 Ln. 12-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device such that the space is made of sheet metal since doing so amounts to a simple substitution of known materials in the art with known predictable results
Regarding claim 11, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer is substantially c-shaped, such that the spacer has an opening region and the spacer is configured to be plugged onto and unplugged from the burner flange via the opening region in at least one of: the radial direction and the axial direction.
Galtz US4688718 teaches an auxiliary burner for a vehicle wherein parts are formed of sheet metal in cup shaped halves (Col. 3 Ln. 12-17). A cup shaped half would necessarily have a C-shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device such that the spacer is configured as a C-shaped half, as taught by Galtz since doing so amounts to a known technique for manufacturing similar devices in the art with the know predictable results of providing halves which can be easily assembled.
Claim(s) 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panick US4923033.
Regarding claim 6, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer has a wall thickness in a range from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm,
The difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art amounts to a mere change in relative dimension of the device. At the time of this office action there is insufficient evidence on the record to suggest criticality to the claimed dimensions. One or ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it may be desirable to alter relative dimensions of the device to accommodate installation such as in the case of a vehicle where various components of the vehicle must accommodate for limited space constraints. MPEP 2144.04 IV
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device to have dimensions within the claimed range since doing so amount to a mere change in size or dimensions of the prior art device and would provide the predictable result of accommodating a desired installation.
Regarding claim 7, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the height of the spacer is between 5 mm and 25 mm, preferably between 10 mm and 20 mm
The difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art amounts to a mere change in relative dimension of the device. At the time of this office action there is insufficient evidence on the record to suggest criticality to the claimed dimensions. One or ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it may be desirable to alter relative dimensions of the device to accommodate installation such as in the case of a vehicle where various components of the vehicle must accommodate for limited space constraints.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device to have dimensions within the claimed range since doing so amount to a mere change in size or dimensions of the prior art device and would provide the predictable result of accommodating a desired installation.
Claim(s) 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panick US4923033 in view of Tsumagari US20150211734.
Regarding claim 12, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer as a plurality of bending segments angled towards each other, such that the spacer has a polygonal cross-section.
Tsumagari US20150211734 teaches a burner and heating device for vehicles wherein the shape of the device may be tubular, elliptical, or polygonal (¶123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device to have a polygonal shape, as taught by Tsumagari, since doing amounts to a mere change in shape of the prior art device, such shapes are known in the art, and would not function differently than the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04 IV
Regarding claim 13, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the spacer comprises a plurality of bending segments angled towards each other, such that the spacer has at least one of an elliptical and elliptical-open cross-section.
Tsumagari US20150211734 teaches a burner and heating device for vehicles wherein the shape of the device may be tubular, elliptical, or polygonal (¶123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device to have an elliptical shape, as taught by Tsumagari, since doing amounts to a mere change in shape of the prior art device, such shapes are known in the art, and would not function differently than the prior art device.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Panick US4923033 in view of Tsumagari US20150211734.
Regarding claim 14, Panick does not expressly teach the heating device according to claim 12 wherein the spacer has a plurality of embossing regions each connecting two adjacent bending segments,
West US4829983 teaches bent sheet metal component for a burner (abstract, title) wherein the bent segments are provided with ribs or embossing regions connecting to adjacent segments at a bend (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, ribs 34) thereby strengthening the device (Col. 3 Ln. 17-25).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the prior art device with ribs, as taught by West, since doing so would provide the known predictable result of strengthening the device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Deepak Deean whose telephone number is (571)270-3347. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-4.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 517-272-6460. 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.
/DEEPAK A DEEAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
