DETAILED ACTION
Applicant Submission
This Office action is responsive to the amendment filed on April 30, 2025, which has been entered with the exception of the proposed replacement drawing sheets (see explanation below).
Claims Subject to Examination
Amended patent claim 1 is subject to examination. Patent claims 2-16 have been canceled. Reissue claims 17-27 are withdrawn from consideration by the examiner because applicant’s remarks filed on April 30, 2025 state that applicant does not intend to pursue these claims in this reissue application.
Objections to Amendments – Formalities
The claim amendments filed on April 30, 2025 are objected to because reissue claims 17-27 are improperly identified as “(Not entered).” Reissue claims 17-27 were added by the preliminary amendment filed on June 7, 2023 and examined via the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024. Since applicant does not intend to pursue reissue claim 17-27, such claims need to be canceled.
The amendments to the specification filed on April 30, 2025 are objected to for failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)(1), (d) and (g). The entire text of any amended paragraph must be submitted, showing all changes made relative to the original patent specification which was in effect as of the filing date of the reissue application. Matter to be omitted must be enclosed in single brackets, and matter to be added must be underlined. The precise point in the specification where each amended paragraph is located must be identified.
The amendments to the specification are improper because:
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 1, ll. 23-50 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The 1st, 6th and 10th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 1, ll. 23-50 fail to properly reflect the patent specification because “1.sup.st” should read “1st”.
The 3rd line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 1, ll. 23-50 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because “2.sup.nd” should read “2nd”.
The 4th and 13th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 1, ll. 23-50 fail to properly reflect the patent specification because “1st” should read “1st”.
The 11th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 1, ll. 23-50 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because “2nd” should read “2nd”.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 3, ll. 12-15 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The rewritten paragraph located at col. 6, ll. 14-17 is inaccurately identified as being “In column 6, beginning at line 15”.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 6, ll. 14-17 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The rewritten paragraphs located respectively at col. 7, ll. 49-50, col. 7, ll. 51-52, col. 7, ll. 53-54, col. 7, ll. 55-57, and col. 7, l. 58 are improperly combined into a single paragraph. These are separate paragraphs in the patent specification.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, ll. 49-50 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, ll. 51-52 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, ll. 53-54 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The paragraph located at col. 7, ll. 55-57 is improperly presented because it fails to show any changes relative to the patent specification. Unamended paragraphs should not be submitted.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 58 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 27-28 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 37-38 is inaccurately identified as being “In column 9, beginning at line 38”.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 37-38 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 39-40 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The 11th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because “inlet/ condensate” should read “inlet/condensate”.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, l. 49 to col. 12, l. 10 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The entire text of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, l. 49 to col. 12, l. 10 has not been presented. The portion of the paragraph located at col. 12, ll. 1-10 is improperly omitted.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 12, l. 51 to col. 13, l. 5 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The entire text of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 12, l. 51 to col. 13, l. 5 has not been presented. The portion of the paragraph located at col. 13, ll. 1-5 is improperly omitted.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 13, ll. 6-29 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 13, ll. 6-29 fails to properly show the changes made relative to the patent specification because “an” is improperly underlined (since it appears in the patent specification). It would appear that “an” should read “[an]”.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 13, ll. 34-50 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 13, l. 51 to col. 14, l. 2 fails to properly reflect the patent specification because it is not indented.
The entire text of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 13, l. 51 to col. 14, l. 2 has not been presented. The portion of the paragraph located at col. 14, ll. 1-2 is improperly omitted.
Applicant is required to place the amendments into compliance with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g) in response to this Office action.
The claim amendments filed on April 30, 2025 are also objected to because: in claim 1, at l. 4, “having single fan” should read “having a single fan”.
The amendments to the specification filed on April 30, 2025 are also objected to because:
In the rewritten paragraph located at col. 7, l. 58, “a Section view” should read “a [Section] section view”.
In the first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 27-28, “FIG. 33 shows examples of [the type of fans] one type of fan” is not correct grammatically because one type of fan does not constitute plural examples.
In the first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 9, ll. 27-28, “FIG. 33 shows examples of [the type of fans] one type of fan” is not an accurate brief description of Fig. 33 since the figure shows what appears to be four fans mounted in close proximity to one another.
In the first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65, “Referring FIGS.” should read “Referring to FIGS.”
In the first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65, “Referring FIGS. 3-9[8], the heat exchanger panels 2 according to a first embodiment” is inaccurate and contradicts the original patent specification, which describes Figs. 3-8 as showing a first embodiment, and Figs. 9, 10A and 11 as showing a second embodiment. Note that col. 7, ll. 55-57 describes Fig. 9 as showing an alternate embodiment, i.e., a different embodiment than the one shown in Figs. 3-8.
In the 2nd line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65, [includes] include” should read “[includes] each include” for accuracy.
In the 13th to 16th lines of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65, the description that the bottom bonnet 16 is fitted with a single steam inlet/condensate outlet 18 is not an accurate description of Figs. 3-8 (see “Referring FIGS. 3-8” at col. 10, l. 19 of the original patent specification) since the inlet/outlet is shown in Figs. 3-8. Rather, the inlet/outlet 18 is shown in the preferred embodiment of Figs. 9-12 (see “According to a preferred embodiment and referring to FIGS. 9-12” at col. 10, ll. 49-50 of the original patent specification).
In the 6th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41, “the cell/module 27” should read “the respective cell/module 27” for accuracy.
In the 7th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41, “manifold 28 is connected” should read “manifold 28 for each cell 27 is connected” for accuracy.
In the 8th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41, “single riser 30 for each cell 27, which” should read “single respective riser 30, which” for accuracy.
In the 10th line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 11, ll. 23-41, “panel 2, the” should read “panel 2 in each cell 27, the” for accuracy.
Proposed Replacement Drawing Sheets
The proposed replacement drawing sheets filed on April 30, 2025 have been disapproved by the examiner and will not be entered because they do not comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)(3). In reissue applications, applicant is not permitted to modify the patent drawings. Rather, replacement sheets of drawings are required. Therefore, the patent heading “U.S. Patent…” should not appear on the replacement drawing sheets.
Further, the proposed replacement drawing sheets filed on April 30, 2025 have been disapproved by the examiner and will not be entered because:
In Fig. 3, the broken lines labeled A-A and B-B are improper because these lines are not mentioned in the patent specification. Reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5).
In Fig. 3, the broken lines labeled A-A and B-B are improper because the ends of such lines should be designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view. See 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3).
Restriction in Earlier-Concluded Examination
During the earlier-concluded examination of grandparent Application No. 16/562,778 (now Patent No. 10,907,900 B2), the previous examiner initially set forth a restriction requirement that required election of:
One of the inventions of (i) claims 1-11, (ii) claim 12, (iii) claims 13-22, and (iv) claim 24.
One of the species of (a) Figs. 3-8, (b) Figs. 9-12, (c) Figs. 13A-15, (d) Fig. 16, (e) Figs. 17-19B, and (f) Figs. 20A-24.
In the election and amendment filed on May 26, 2020, applicant (i) elected the invention of claims 13-22 and the species of Figs. 17-19B, (ii) amended claims 13 and 23, and (iii) asserted that claims 13, 16 and 17 read on the elected invention and the elected species.
In the Office action mailed on June 10, 2020, the previous examiner rejected claim 13 as being unpatentable over the prior art, and indicated that claims 16 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form.
In the response filed on September 10, 2020, applicant canceled claims 1-12, made minor changes to claims 16 and 17 (but did not rewrite them in independent form), and argued that the prior art rejection of claim 13 was improper. This led the previous examiner to withdraw the prior art rejection of claim 13 and issue the Notice of Allowability on September 28, 2020.
Since generic claim 13 was allowed, the Notice of Allowability explained that the restriction requirement was withdrawn, and claims 14, 15 and 18-23 were rejoined. Thus, all pending withdrawn claims were rejoined, and all pending claims (i.e., claims 13-23) were allowed. The previous examiner did not address rejoinder of claims to the non-elected inventions of claims 1-11 and claim 12 because all such claims had already been canceled by applicant.
Since the earlier-concluded examination of grandparent Application No. 16/562,778 (now Patent No. 10,907,900 B2) resulted in the withdrawal of the restriction requirement as to all pending claims and the allowance of a generic claim, the claims of the instant application for reissue of Patent No. 11,512,900 B2 (which is a continuation of Patent No. 10,982,904 B2, which is a continuation-in-part of Patent No. 10,907,900 B2) may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of Patent No. 10,907,900 B2, applications and patents that claim priority to Patent No. 10,907,900 B2, and other applications and patents that are related to Patent No. 10,907,900 B2,.
Claim Construction
US Patent No. 11,512,900 B2 (for which reissue is sought) discloses numerous embodiments, which are disclosed as being useable together when compatible. See col. 14, ll. 15-31 of the patent specification. While other more minor variations are disclosed, the embodiments include the following major groupings:
I.
Two stage heat exchanger panels
Figs. 3-12
Single stage heat exchanger panels
Fig. 34
II.
Single fan per cell
Figs. 13A-29 and 35-37
Plural fans per cell
Figs. 30-33
III.
Upper and lower manifolds
Figs. 13A-24
Elevated manifold and elevated turbine duct
Figs. 25-29
Elevated manifold and ground level turbine duct
Figs. 35-37
IV.
V-frame type pairs of adjacent panels
Figs. 13A-27 and 31
Vertical panels
Figs. 28 and 32
One set of panels inclined one direction and another set inclined opposite direction
Fig. 29
With respect to major grouping “I” above, independent claim 1 of the instant application for reissue of Patent No. 11,512,900 B2 is considered to be directed specifically and only to the single stage embodiment of Fig. 34 because claim 1 recites “a bottom bonnet connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end of each said plurality of condenser tubes” (ll. 10-11). As stated at col. 11, ll. 6-10 of the patent specification, Fig. 34 shows an alternate embodiment in which there is no secondary section or secondary bottom bonnet, and the bottom bonnet is in direct fluid communication with all of the tubes in the heat exchange panel. No other embodiment is disclosed as having a bottom bonnet connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end of each of the condenser tubes.
With respect to major groupings “II”, “III” and “IV” above, independent claim 1 of the instant application is considered to be generic to each of these major groupings (while not being generic to major grouping “I”).
Original Disclosure – Definition
The instant application seeks reissue of US Patent No. 11,512,900 B2, which issued from US Application No. 17/222,246, which was a continuation of US Application No. 16/815,862 (now US Patent No. 10,982,904 B2), which was a continuation-in-part of US Application No. 16/562,778 (now Patent No. 10,907,900 B2). US Application No. 16/815,862 claimed priority to US Provisional Application Nos. 62/900,195, 62/902,521, 62/928,116 and 62/946,039. US Application No. 16/562,778 claimed priority to US Provisional Application Nos. 62/728,269 and 62/730,764.
The “original disclosure” is the disclosure of parent Application No. 16/815,862 as filed on March 11, 2020 since Application No. 16/815,862 was a CIP of (and, thus, added disclosure to) grandparent Application No. 16/562,778.
Prohibition of New Matter
35 USC 132(a) prohibits any amendment that introduces new matter into the disclosure of the invention.
35 USC 251(a) prohibits the introduction of new matter into the application for reissue.
Objection to Amendment – New Matter
The amendment filed on April 30, 2025 is objected to under 35 USC 132(a) and 35 USC 251(a) because it improperly introduces new matter for the reasons given below.
In the first line of the rewritten paragraph located at col. 10, ll. 19-65, “Referring FIGS. 3-9[8], the heat exchanger panels 2 according to a first embodiment” constitutes new matter because the original disclosure does not provide support for Figs. 3-9 showing a singular first embodiment. According to the original patent specification, Figs. 3-8 show a first embodiment, and Figs. 9, 10A and 11 show a second embodiment. Note that col. 7, ll. 55-57 describes Fig. 9 as showing an alternate embodiment, i.e., a different embodiment than the embodiment shown in Figs. 3-8.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in response to this Office action.
Establishing Assignee’s Ownership Interest
The corrected Statement under 37 CFR 3.73(c), i.e., Form PTO/AIA /96, filed on April 30, 2025 is acceptable. Accordingly, the prior objection to this application for failure to properly establish the assignee’s ownership interest is withdrawn.
Application Data Sheet
The corrected Application Data Sheet (ADS) filed on April 30, 2025 is defective for the reasons given on pp. 2-4 of the Decision on Petition mailed on May 29, 2025 (dismissing applicant’s petition under 37 CFR 1.78(c) and (e) to accept unintentionally delayed benefit claims under 35 USC 119(e) and 120).
As explained in the Decision on Petition, applicant:
Needs to file a corrected ADS that:
Shows changes to the benefit claims relative to the domestic priority data on the most recent filing receipt.
Identifies Application No. 16/815,862 as a continuation-in-part (CIP) of Application No. 16/562,778 (rather than identifying Application No. 16/562,778 as a CIP of itself).
Can utilize the instant reissue application to correct applicant’s failure in Application No. 17/222,246 to claim priority under 35 USC 120 to Application No. 15/629,205, i.e., applicant’s failure in Application No. 17/222,246 to designate that application as a CIP of Application No. 15/629,205.
Must file a renewed petition, including all of the necessary items, in order to have the unintentionally delayed benefit claims accepted.
The examiner further notes that the corrected Application Data Sheet (ADS) filed on April 30, 2025 is also defective because:
Customer number 25223 is improperly listed under the heading “Application Information”. The ADS lacks a section with the heading “Correspondence Information”, with such section identifying the correspondence address or a customer number. See 37 CFR 1.76(b)(2).
The first entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information identifies the instant application as “Continuity of Reissue”. This designation is not conventional and is confusing. It appears that the intent was to identify the continuity type as a reissue of a prior application/patent. The data should be clarified for accuracy.
The 4th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/730,764 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”. Provisional applications do not have an issue date.
The 5th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/728,269 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The 6th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/900,195 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The 7th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/902,521 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The 8th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/928,116 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The 9th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/946,039 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The 10th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Application No. 15/629,205 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”. Note that the 10th entry properly identifies Application No. 15/629,205 as “Abandoned”.
The 11th entry of the corrected Domestic Benefit Information inaccurately identifies Provisional Application No. 62/353,030 as having “Issue date 02/02/2021”.
The original ADS filed on June 7, 2023 is defective for the reasons given in items 31-36 (pp. 10-14) of the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024.
Correction of the ADS is required in response to this Office action.
Correction of Domestic Benefit Claim
The Filing Receipt issued on October 4, 2023 lists Domestic Priority Data that partially reflects the inaccurate and improper Domestic Benefit Information contained in the ADS filed on June 7, 2023. Specifically, the Filing Receipt:
Inaccurately identifies the instant application (i.e., reissue Application No. 18/331,152) as claiming the benefit of prior Provisional Application No. 62/728,269. It should identify prior Application No. 16/562,778 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/728,269.
Inaccurately identifies the instant application (i.e., reissue Application No. 18/331,152) as a CIP of prior Application No. 15/629,205. If applicant intends to correct the failure in Application No. 17/222,246 to claim priority under 35 USC 120 to Application No. 15/629,205 (and files the required petition), then the Filing Receipt should identify Application No. 17/222,246 as a CIP of Application No. 15/629,205.
Inaccurately identifies the instant application (i.e., reissue Application No. 18/331,152) as claiming the benefit of prior Provisional Application No. 62/430,345. It should identify prior Application No. 15/629,205 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/430,345.
Inaccurately identifies prior Application No. 17/222,246 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/350,030. It should identify prior Application No. 15/629,205 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/353,030.
Inaccurately identifies prior Application No. 17/222,246 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/430,345. It should identify prior Application No. 15/629,205 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/430,345.
Inaccurately identifies prior Application No. 16/815,862 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/430,345. It should identify prior Application No. 15/629,205 as claiming the benefit of Provisional Application No. 62/430,345.
As noted above, applicant’s petition under 37 CFR 1.78(c) and (e) to accept unintentionally delayed benefit claims under 35 USC 119(e) and 120 was dismissed by the Decision on Petition mailed on May 29, 2025. Therefore, a corrected filing receipt has not been issued in response to applicant’s request for a corrected filing receipt filed on April 30, 2025.
A renewed petition and a renewed request for a corrected filing receipt are required for the reasons summarized above.
Effective Filing Date
For the reasons explained above, the instant application is not currently entitled to priority to any of:
Prior Application Nos. 15/629,205, 16/562,778 and 16/815,862.
Prior Provisional Application Nos. 62/353,030, 62/430,345, 62/728,269, 62/730,764, 62/900,195, 62/902,521, 62/928,116 and 62/946,039.
Until such time as the domestic benefit claim is properly corrected, the effective filing date of claim 1 of the instant application is April 5, 2021, i.e., the filing date of US Patent No. 11,512,900 B2 for which reissue is sought.
Assuming that the domestic benefit claim will be corrected, the examiner has reviewed the disclosures of the applications to which priority is claimed in order to determine whether such applications provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for the subject matter claimed in the instant application. The examiner finds as follows:
Application No. 16/815,862 provides support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/946,039 provides support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Application No. 15/629,205 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application at least because it fails to provide support for the multiple fans recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Application No. 16/562,778 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application at least because it fails to provide support for the multiple fans recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/353,030 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/430,345 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/728,269 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/730,764 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/900,195 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application at least because it fails to provide support for the multiple fans recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/902,521 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application at least because it fails to provide support for the multiple fans recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Provisional Application No. 62/928,116 fails to provide support in the manner required by 35 USC 112(a) for claim 1 of the instant application at least because it fails to provide support for the multiple fans recited in claim 1 of the instant application.
Accordingly, if the domestic benefit claim is properly corrected, the effective filing date of claim 1 will be December 10, 2019, i.e., the filing date of Provisional Application No. 62/946,039.
Reissue Oath/Declaration
The corrected reissue declaration filed on April 30, 2025 is defective because it fails to contain an accurate version of the statement(s) required under 37 CFR 1.175 as to applicant’s belief that the original patent is wholly or partly inoperative or invalid. On the April 30, 2025 declaration, the box is checked indicating that the original patent is believed to be wholly or partly inoperative or invalid “by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had the right to claim in the patent.” This statement is inaccurate because:
The current version of amended claim 1 merely corrects an informality in the claim’s preamble and does not modify the scope of patent claim 1. Thus, the current version of amended claim 1 does not address/correct patentee’s failure to claim more or less than he had the right to claim in the patent.
The error statement contained in the corrected reissue declaration does not cite any error in the patent claims resulting in patentee claiming more or less than he had the right to claim. Rather, the error statement states that the reissue application is being utilized to correct priority claims under 35 USC 119(e) and 120.
Since the errors being corrected by reissue are errors in the priority claims, the box should be checked indicating that the original patent is believed to be wholly or partly inoperative or invalid “by reason of other errors.” The box stating “by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had the right to claim in the patent” should not be checked.
The corrected reissue declaration filed on April 30, 2025 is also objected to because the residence information provided for Inventor #3 differs from the residence information provided for that inventor in the ADS.
The original reissue declaration filed on June 7, 2023 is defective for the reasons given in items 46-50 (pp. 19-20) of the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024.
Listing of Prior Art
The following is a listing of the prior art cited in this Office action together with the shorthand reference used for each document (listed alphabetically):
“Amir”
US Patent No. 4,815,296
“Badin et al.”
US Publication No. 2019/0242660 A1
“Bensing et al.”
US Patent No. 6,474,272 B2
“Borre et al.”
US Publication No. 2012/0103570 A1
“Bugler et al. ‘078”
US Publication No. 2020/0333078 A1
“Bugler et al. ‘357”
US Publication No. 2017/0363357 A1
“Bugler et al. ‘358”
US Publication No. 2017/0363358 A1
“Bugler et al. ‘542”
US Patent No. 11,933,542 B2
“Bugler et al. ‘782”
US Patent No. 11,499,782 B2
“Bugler et al. ‘785”
US Publication No. 2020/0080785 A1
“Bugler et al. ‘792”
US Patent No. 11,788,792 B2
“Bugler et al. ‘891”
US Patent No. 12,018,891 B2
“Bugler et al. ‘900”
US Patent No. 10,907,900 B2
“Bugler et al. ‘904”
US Patent No. 10,982,904 B2
“Bultot et al.”
US Publication No. 2019/0128614 A1
“Dohnt”
US Patent No. 3,612,172
“Harris et al. ‘068”
US Patent No. 3,519,068
“Harris et al. ‘177”
US Patent No. 3,814,177
“Heller”
US Patent No. 2,891,773
“Kehne”
DE Publication No. 34 14 589 A1 (with translation)
“Kuhn”
US Patent No. 3,204,693
“Modine et al.”
US Patent No. 3,707,185
“Murray et al.”
GB Publication No. 789,011 A
“Quickelberghe et al.”
US Publication No. 2015/0345166 A1
“Schulenberg”
GB Publication No. 700,872 A
“Singh”
US Publication No. 2019/0093953 A1
“Singh et al.”
US Publication No. 2017/0051981 A1
“Vouche et al. ‘430”
US Publication No. 2006/0243430 A1
“Vouche et al. ‘932”
US Publication No. 2013/0312932 A1
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 251
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 251:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever any patent is, through error, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(b) MULTIPLE REISSUED PATENTS.—The Director may issue several reissued patents for distinct and separate parts of the thing patented, upon demand of the applicant, and upon payment of the required fee for a reissue for each of such reissued patents.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(c) APPLICABILITY OF THIS TITLE.—The provisions of this title relating to applications for patent shall be applicable to applications for reissue of a patent, except that application for reissue may be made and sworn to by the assignee of the entire interest if the application does not seek to enlarge the scope of the claims of the original patent or the application for the original patent was filed by the assignee of the entire interest.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(d) REISSUE PATENT ENLARGING SCOPE OF CLAIMS. No reissued patent shall be granted enlarging the scope of the claims of the original patent unless applied for within two years from the grant of the original patent.
GROUND 1: Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon a defective reissue oath/declaration. See 37 CFR 1.175. The nature of the defect(s) in the reissue oath/declaration is explained above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
GROUND 2: Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a single or plurality of condenser streets, each condenser street comprising…” (l. 3) and further recites “each said condenser street having…” (l. 12). This subject matter is indefinite because it first states that the claim requires either a single condenser street or a plurality of condenser streets, but the phrases “each condenser street comprising” and “each said condenser street having” refer to plural condenser streets that each comprise the subject matter that follows. Thus, it is unclear whether the claim encompasses only a single condenser street, or whether plural condenser streets are required. Further, it is unclear whether the claim encompasses only a single row of condenser modules (see ll. 3-4) and only a single steam distribution manifold (see l. 12) in a single condenser street since “each condenser street comprising” (and the subject matter that follows at lines 3-7) and “each said condenser street having” (and the subject matter that follows at lines 12-15) appear to apply to only embodiments having a plurality of condenser streets.
Claim 1 recites “each heat exchanger panel having a longitudinal axis and a transverse axis perpendicular to its longitudinal axis” (ll. 6-7). This subject matter is also recited in the patent specification (see col. 4, ll. 47-49). However, neither the specification nor the drawings provide a definition of the recited longitudinal axis and transverse axis. The longitudinal axis is presumed to be in the direction of the arrows 4, 6 shown in Figs. 3 and 9. Even if this is taken as fact, it is unclear what constitutes the claimed transverse axis perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. Does the transverse axis extend from top to bottom in Figs. 3 and 6-9? Or does it extend from top to bottom in Figs. 4, 5, 10A and 10B? Or does it extend in some other fashion? Since the definition of the claimed axes cannot be ascertained with any certainty based upon the incomplete disclosure, the scope of the claim is indefinite.
Claim 1 recites “each said condenser street having a single steam distribution manifold suspended from a bottom side of said heat exchanger section” (ll. 12-13). This subject matter is indefinite because it appears to contradict the previous recitation of “each condenser street comprising a row of condenser modules, each condenser module comprising a plenum section having single fan or multiple fans drawing air through a plurality of heat exchanger panels supported in a heat exchange section” (ll. 3-6). That is, lines 3-6 appear to recite “a heat exchange section” as a singular element of each condenser module of each condenser street (i.e., each street comprises plural modules and each module has a heat exchange section so each street has plural heat exchange sections) whereas lines 12-13 refers to “said heat exchanger section” as a singular element that is part of “each said condenser street” (i.e., each street comprises a single heat exchanger section).
In claim 1, the term “said heat exchanger section” (l. 13) lacks proper antecedent basis. The claim previously recites “a heat exchange section” (ll. 5-6), not a heat exchanger section.
Claim 1 recites “each said condenser street having a single steam distribution manifold suspended from a bottom side of said heat exchanger section arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of said heat exchanger panels at a midpoint of said heat exchanger panels and extending a length of said condenser street” (ll. 12-15). This subject matter is indefinite because of the run-on nature of the claim language, which creates confusion as to which of the elements each of the phrases refers to. Specifically, it is unclear whether the phrase “arranged along an axis…” refers to the single steam distribution manifold or to the heat exchanger section. Further, it is unclear whether the phrase “and extending a length” refers to the single steam distribution manifold or to the heat exchanger section.
Claim 1 recites “a longitudinal axis of said heat exchanger panels” (ll. 13-14). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear whether or not the longitudinal axis introduced at lines 13-14 is the same as the longitudinal axis introduced at line 6. Further, the re-introduction of this term at lines 13-14 inaccurately suggests that the heat exchanger panels have plural longitudinal axes.
Claim 1 recites “each said condenser street having a single steam distribution manifold suspended from a bottom side of said heat exchanger section arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of said heat exchanger panels at a midpoint of said heat exchanger panels and extending a length of said condenser street” (ll. 12-15). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear whether the term “said heat exchanger panels” refers to all of the heat exchanger panels of all of the condenser streets (see ll. 3-6), or whether it refers to only the respective heat exchanger panels of a corresponding one of the streets. That is, it is unclear whether the claim requires the single steam distribution manifold to be arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of all of the heat exchanger panels of all of the streets, or whether it only requires the single steam distribution manifold to be arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the respective heat exchanger panels of a corresponding one of the streets.
In claim 1, the term “said condenser street” (l. 15) is indefinite because this singular term is inconsistent with the previous phrase “each said condenser street having…” (l. 12), which refers to plural condenser streets. Thus, it is unclear whether the associated limitation applies to only one condenser street, or each of the claimed streets.
In claim 1, the term “said steam distribution manifold” (l. 15) is indefinite because this singular term is inconsistent with the previous phrase “each said condenser street having a single steam distribution manifold” (l. 12), which requires plural steam distribution manifolds (i.e., respective single manifolds for each of plural condenser streets). Thus, it is unclear whether the limitation at lines 15-16 applies to only one manifold, or each of the claimed manifolds.
In claim 1, the term “its top surface” (ll. 15-16) lacks proper antecedent basis. The manifold is not previously defined as having a top, or a top surface.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
GROUND 3: Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 (Bugler et al. ‘904) in view of Bugler et al. ‘358, Sing et al., Modine et al., Vouche et al. ‘932 and/or Harris et al. ‘068.
Claim 1 of the instant application recites essentially the same large scale field erected air cooled industrial steam condenser as claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2. While some claim limitations are arranged differently in claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2, modifications involving mere rearrangement of claim limitations is considered to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Further, while claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 recite some limitations that are not found in claim 1 of the instant application, modifications involving the mere elimination of claimed features is also within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 1 of the instant application differs from claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 because claim 1 of the instant application recites a single or plurality of condenser streets whereas claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 recite a condenser street. Bugler et al. ‘358 teaches a condenser having a plurality of streets. See Figs. 8-10; ¶¶ 0037-0039, 0059. Sing et al. also teaches a condenser having a plurality of streets (i.e., rows in an array). See Figs. 11-14; ¶¶ 0035-0038, 0051, 0063-0064. Modine et al. teaches a similar array-like arrangement having condenser modules arranged in series to form plural streets, which permits assembling a condenser from preassembled units to provide the required amount of condensing capacity. See Figs. 3-4; col. 2, ll. 39-59
From the teachings of Bugler et al. ‘358, Sing et al. and/or Modine et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 to include plural condenser streets to permit assembling the condenser from preassembled units to provide the required amount of condensing capacity.
Claim 1 of the instant application also differs from claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 because claim 1 of the instant application defines the steam distribution manifold as having steam outlets whereas claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 define the steam distribution manifold as having connections adapted to connect to the bottom bonnet inlet.
As shown in Figs. 2-4A and 8-9, the steam distribution manifold 10 of Bugler et al. ‘358 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to a header/manifold 6 via risers 12. As shown in Fig. 3, the steam distribution manifold 22 of Vouche et al. ‘932 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to a header/manifold 24. As shown in Fig. 5, the steam distribution manifold 62A of Harris et al. ‘068 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to headers 50A via pipes 64A. Thus, modifying claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 to define the steam distribution manifold as having steam outlets (defining the claimed connections adapted to connect to the bottom bonnet inlet) does not amount to a patentable distinction.
GROUND 4: Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536 in view of Bugler et al. ‘358, Vouche et al. ‘932 and/or Harris et al. ‘068. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 1 of the instant application recites essentially the same large scale field erected air cooled industrial steam condenser as claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536. While some claim limitations are arranged differently in claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536, modifications involving mere rearrangement of claim limitations is considered to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Further, while claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536 recite some limitations that are not found in claim 1 of the instant application, modifications involving the mere elimination of claimed features is also within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 1 of the instant application differs from claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536 because claim 1 of the instant application defines the steam distribution manifold as having steam outlets whereas claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536 define the steam distribution manifold as having connections adapted to connect to the bottom bonnet inlet.
As shown in Figs. 2-4A and 8-9, the steam distribution manifold 10 of Bugler et al. ‘358 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to a header/manifold 6 via risers 12. As shown in Fig. 3, the steam distribution manifold 22 of Vouche et al. ‘932 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to a header/manifold 24. As shown in Fig. 5, the steam distribution manifold 62A of Harris et al. ‘068 has steam outlets defining connections adapted to connect to headers 50A via pipes 64A. Thus, modifying claims 1, 2 and 23 of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536 to define the steam distribution manifold as having steam outlets (defining the claimed connections adapted to connect to the bottom bonnet inlet) does not amount to a patentable distinction.
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on April 30, 2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration dates of US Patent Nos. 10,907,900 B2, 11,499,782 B2, 11,788,792 B2, 11,933,542 B2 and 12,018,891 B2 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102 and 103
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
GROUND 5: Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bugler et al. ‘785. Bugler et al. ‘785 has essentially the same disclosure as the instant application for the subject matter illustrated in Figs. 1-24 of the instant application. Further, Bugler et al. ‘785 discloses that the heat exchanger panels may be constructed as single stage condenser heat exchange panels, in which all the tubes of the heat exchanger panels receive steam from and deliver condensate to the bottom bonnet (i.e., the bottom bonnet is in fluid communication with a bottom end of each of the condenser tubes). See ¶ 0008; claim 2. Since claim 1 recites a single fan or multiple fans in the alternative, the teaching of a single fan per module by Bugler et al. ‘785 meets the requirement of the claim. Thus, Bugler et al. ‘785 anticipates claim 1 of the instant application. As explained above, the effective filing date of claim 1 of the instant application is April 5, 2021 until such time as the domestic benefit claim is properly corrected.
GROUND 6: Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Bugler et al. ‘078. Bugler et al. ‘078 has essentially the same disclosure as the instant application and, thus, clearly anticipates claim 1 of the instant application. As explained above, the effective filing date of claim 1 of the instant application is April 5, 2021 until such time as the domestic benefit claim is properly corrected.
GROUND 7: Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bugler et al. ‘358.
Bugler et al. ‘358 discloses an air cooled condenser comprising a plurality of heat exchanger panels (each including a series of finned tube bundles 4) supported in a heat exchange section, and each heat exchanger panel comprising (i) a longitudinal axis (labeled in Figs. 2-3), (ii) a transverse axis (labeled in Figs. 2-3) perpendicular to its longitudinal axis, (iii) a plurality of condenser tubes 2 in each tube bundle 4, (iv) a top bonnet/header 8 connected to and in fluid communication with a top end of each of the tubes 2, and (v) a bottom bonnet/header 6 connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end of each of the tubes 2. See Figs. 3, 4B and 6-10; ¶¶ 0042-0046, 0059. Each of the panels comprises only a single stage in which all condenser tubes have their bottom ends in fluid communication with the bottom bonnet 6.
Each bottom header 6 includes a single inlet in communication with a steam distribution manifold 10 via a respective riser 12. See Figs. 3 and 8-10; ¶¶ 0043-0044, 0046, 0059. As shown in Figs. 3 and 8, the steam distribution manifold 10 is mounted/extends beneath the panels, is arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panels, and has steam outlets on its top surface in communication with the risers 12.
The condenser has a plurality of streets, with each street comprising a row/series of condenser modules. See Figs. 8-10; ¶¶ 0037-0039, 0059. Fig. 10 shows that plural steam distribution manifolds 10 extend perpendicular from a main steam duct, with each steam distribution manifold 10 extending beneath a row/series of condenser modules at a midpoint of the respective heat exchanger panels. Figs. 8-10 also show that each condenser module includes a fan. See ¶¶ 0002, 0004, 0017, 0026, 0049, 0058. Since claim 1 recites a single fan or multiple fans in the alternative, the teaching of a single fan per module by Bugler et al. ‘358 meets the requirement of the claim.
Specification
The specification is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) for failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See MPEP 608.01(o). The specification fails to provide proper antecedent basis for “a plurality of steam outlets” (claim 1, l. 16) on the top surface of the steam distribution manifold. Correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) for failing to show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. These features must be shown or canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered. The drawings fail to show: a longitudinal axis of each heat exchanger panel and a transverse axis perpendicular to its longitudinal axis (claim 1, ll. 6-7).
The drawings are also objected to because:
Fig. 3 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3) and (p)(5). The plane upon which a sectional view is taken should be indicated on the view from which the section is cut by a broken line. The ends of the broken line should be designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view, and should have arrows to indicate the direction of sight. Reference characters not mentioned in the description shall not appear in the drawings.
In Fig. 3, the broken lines labeled A-A and B-B are improper because these lines are not mentioned in the patent specification.
In Fig. 3, the broken lines labeled A-A, B-B, C-C, D-D and E-E are improper because they are not designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view.
In Fig. 6, the lead line for reference number 10 is misdirected, i.e., it is not directed to the top tube sheet. See Figs. 7-8.
In Fig. 6, the lead line for reference number 14 is misdirected, i.e., it is not directed to the bottom tube sheet. See Figs. 7-8.
Fig. 9 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3). The broken line labeled A-A is improper because it is not designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view.
In Fig. 15, the left occurrence of reference number 37 should be changed to 36.
Figs. 18A-19B do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(i) and (u)(1). One view must not be placed upon another or within the outline of another. The different views must be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals. Each of Figs. 18A-19B contains two views which are not numbered consecutively/separately. Further, the two views are within the outline of one another.
In Fig. 31, both occurrences of reference number 8 should be changed to 2.
In Fig. 32, both occurrences of reference number 8 should be changed to 2.
In Fig. 34, does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3) and (p)(5).
In Fig. 34, the broken line labeled A-A is improper because this line is not mentioned in the patent specification.
In Fig. 34, the broken line labeled A-A is improper because it is not designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view.
Fig. 34 appears to be inconsistent with the patent specification. The specification states that the embodiment of Fig. 34 does not include a secondary bottom bonnet (see col. 11, ll. 6-10). However, a comparison of Figs. 9 and 34 reveals that Fig. 34 illustrates the secondary bottom bonnet 24 shown in Fig. 9.
Fig. 35 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3). The broken lines labeled A-A and B-B are improper because they are not designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view.
In Fig. 36, the text “ELEVATION VIEW A-A” is improper for the reason given with respect to Fig. 35.
In Fig. 37, the text “ELEVATION VIEW B-B” is improper for the reason given with respect to Fig. 35.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Amir teaches an air cooled condenser including panels 20A, 20B, etc. in a single module oriented in the same direction and at the same angle relative to vertical. See Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 38-41. Amir explains that such a configuration facilitates separation and venting of non-condensable gases. See col. 4, ll. 36-45.
Bensing et al. teaches an air cooled condenser having panels supported by flexible supports.
Borre et al. teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 40.
Bugler et al. ‘357 teaches an air cooled condenser with a V-shaped configuration.
Dohnt discloses an air cooled condenser comprising a plurality of heat exchanger panels (each including a series of finned tube bundles 1) supported in a heat exchange section, and each heat exchanger panel comprising (i) a longitudinal axis (parallel to section arrows II in Fig. 1), (ii) a transverse axis perpendicular to its longitudinal axis, (iii) a plurality of condenser tubes (shown with upper and lower sections 12a, 12b in Fig. 3) in each tube bundle 1, (iv) a top bonnet/header 4 connected to and in fluid communication with a top end (i.e., the upper section 12a) of each of the tubes, and (v) a bottom bonnet/header 5 connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end (i.e., the lower section 12b) of each of the tubes. See Figs. 1-3; col. 5, ll. 33-44 and 54-67; col. 6, ll. 1-22. Dohnt’s heat exchanger panels comprise only a single stage in which all condenser tubes receive steam from a bottom end thereof.
Dohnt’s bottom headers 5 receive steam from a steam distribution manifold. See annotated Fig. 1 below; col. 5, ll. 39-41; col. 6, l. 5. As shown in Fig. 1, each of the bottom headers 5 includes a single inlet in communication with the steam distribution manifold. As also shown in Fig. 1, the steam distribution manifold is mounted/extends beneath the panels, and is arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panels.
PNG
media_image2.png
444
488
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Harris et al. ‘068 teaches an air cooled condenser comprising steam distribution manifolds 62A-62D each having outlets on its top surface that are in communication with respective headers 50A-50D via pipes 64A-64D. See Figs. 4-5 and 7; col. 7, ll. 52-64. As shown in Figs. 4-5, the steam distribution manifolds 62A-62D are mounted/extends beneath (portions of) respective heat exchanger panel A-frames 48A-48D, and are arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panel A-frames 48A-48D.
Harris et al. ‘177 teaches an air cooled condenser including a steam distribution manifold 23 mounted beneath a steam inlet header 16 and extending perpendicular to the header 16.
Heller teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 2.
Kehne teaches an air cooled condenser having panels supported by flexible supports.
Kuhn teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 8.
Modine et al. discloses an air cooled condenser comprising a plurality of heat exchanger panels 39 (each including a series of finned tube bundles 17) supported in a heat exchange section, and each heat exchanger panel comprising (i) a longitudinal axis (extending parallel to its bottom manifold 14), (ii) a transverse axis perpendicular to its longitudinal axis, (iii) a plurality of condenser tubes 47 in each tube bundle 17, (iv) a top bonnet/header 21 connected to and in fluid communication with a top end of each of the tubes 47, and (v) a bottom bonnet/header 14 connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end of each of the tubes 47. See Figs. 1-3 and 5-6; col. 1, l. 33 to col. 2, l. 7; col. 2, ll. 39-52; col. 3, ll. 12-30. Each of the panels 39 comprises only a single stage in which all condenser tubes receive steam from a bottom end thereof.
The bottom headers 14 of Modine et al. are coupled to (or part of) a common bottom header/manifold 10 that receives steam from a steam distribution manifold 40. See Figs. 1-3 and 5-6; col. 1, ll. 33-50; col. 2, ll. 41-45. As shown in Figs. 5-6, each bottom header 14 includes a single inlet in communication with the common bottom header/manifold 10. As shown in Fig. 3, the common bottom header/manifold 10 includes a single inlet in communication with the steam distribution manifold 40. As also shown in Fig. 3, the steam distribution manifold 40 is arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panels 39. The steam distribution manifold 40 is mounted to the side of the panels 39 and has outlets on its side surface. See Fig. 3.
Murray et al. teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 1.
Quickelberghe et al. teaches a support structure for an air cooled condenser having the same construction as that of Vouche et al. ‘932.
Singh teaches panels 43 suspended from a module frame 59 by flexible supports that include T-shaped plates 102 received between guide plates 120 to allow for thermal expansion and contraction. See Figs. 2, 10 and 13-21; ¶¶ 0046, 0049-0050, 0073-0080.
Singh et al. discloses an air cooled condenser 110 comprising a plurality of heat exchanger panels (each including a series of finned tube bundles 49) supported in a heat exchange section, and each heat exchanger panel comprising (i) a longitudinal axis (parallel to axis LA in Fig. 2), (ii) a transverse axis perpendicular to its longitudinal axis, (iii) a plurality of condenser tubes 57 in each tube bundle 49, (iv) a top bonnet/header 47 connected to and in fluid communication with a top end of each of the tubes 57, and (v) a bottom bonnet/header 48 connected to and in fluid communication with a bottom end of each of the tubes 57. For the overall condenser 110, see Fig. 18; ¶¶ 0072-0073, 0076-0080, 0083-0086. For the construction of each panel 49, see Figs. 2-10; ¶¶ 0055, 0059, 0066. Each heat exchanger panel comprises only a single stage in which all condenser tubes 57 receive steam from a bottom end thereof (when the steam inlet manifold is at the bottom).
As shown in Fig. 18 of Sing et al., the top headers 47 receive steam from a top inlet manifold 145, and the bottom headers 48 deliver condensate to a bottom outlet manifold 146. See ¶¶ 0083, 0086. However, in the alternative embodiment shown in Fig. 1, an air blast chiller 40 includes bottom headers 48 that receive hot water from a bottom inlet manifold 46, and top headers 47 that deliver cold water to a top outlet manifold 45. See ¶¶ 0052-0055. As shown in Fig. 2, each of the bottom headers 48 includes a single inlet in communication with the bottom inlet manifold 46. As shown in Figs. 2 and 11, the bottom inlet manifold 46 is mounted/extends beneath (portions of) the heat exchanger panels, is arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panels, and has outlets on its top surface that are in communication with the bottom headers 48.
Schulenberg teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 1.
Vouche et al. ‘430 teaches an air cooled condenser having vertical panels 6.
Vouche et al. ‘932 teaches an air cooled condenser comprising a steam distribution manifold 22 that has outlets on its top surface that are in communication with headers 24 via risers 20. See Figs. 1-4; ¶ 0024. As shown in Figs. 1-3, the steam distribution manifold 22 is mounted/extends beneath (portions of) heat exchanger panel A-frames 18, and is arranged along an axis that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the panel A-frames 18.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on April 30, 2025 have been considered. Some of the issues addressed in applicant’s arguments have already been addressed above. Many of applicant’s arguments are not germane to the rejections and objections set forth in this Office action.
With respect to GROUND 1 above, applicant argues that at corrected reissue declaration has been submitted. However, the corrected declaration is defective for the reasons explained above.
With respect to GROUND 2 above, applicant argues that the locations of the longitudinal and transverse axes would be readily perceived and understood by the person of ordinary skill in the art. The examiner disagrees for the reasons given in GROUND 2.
With respect to GROUND 3 above, applicant argues that a terminal disclaimer has been filed. This argument fails because the terminal disclaimer filed on April 30, 2025 does not disclaim the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 10,982,904 B2 (Bugler et al. ‘904).
With respect to GROUND 4 above, applicant argues that the claims of this application have not yet been patented. Such an argument does not overcome the provisional double patenting rejection based upon the claims of U.S. Application No. 18/753,536.
Applicant traverses the provisional double patenting rejection based upon the claims of U.S. Application No. 17/887,711 (now U.S. Patent No. 12,241,686 B2), which was set forth in the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024. The examiner agrees that claim 1, as currently amended, is patentably distinct from the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,241,686 B2. Thus, the rejection is withdrawn.
With respect to GROUNDS 5-7 above, applicant argues that the rejections have been overcome by correcting applicant’s domestic benefit claims. This argument is not persuasive because the domestic benefit claims have not been corrected for the reasons explained above (as well as for the reasons given in the Decision on Petition mailed on May 29, 2025).
Applicant traverses the rejection of claim 1 as anticipated by or obvious over Singh et al., which was set forth in the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024. The examiner agrees that claim 1, as currently amended, appears to be patentably distinct from Singh et al. Thus, the rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant traverses the rejection of claim 1 as obvious over Dohnt in view of Singh et al., Vouche et al. ‘932 and Harris et al. ‘068, which was set forth in the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024. The examiner agrees that claim 1, as currently amended, appears to be patentably distinct from Dohnt in view of Singh et al., Vouche et al. ‘932 and Harris et al. ‘068. Thus, the rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant traverses the rejection of claim 1 as obvious over Modine et al. in view of Singh et al., Vouche et al. ‘932 and Harris et al. ‘068, which was set forth in the prior Office action mailed on October 30, 2024. The examiner agrees that claim 1, as currently amended, appears to be patentably distinct from Modine et al. in view of Singh et al., Vouche et al. ‘932 and Harris et al. ‘068. Thus, the rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the specification has been amended to overcome the objections thereto. However, the specification amendments are objected to for the reasons given above. Further, they fail to address the objection under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).
Applicant argues that the drawings have been amended to overcome the objections thereto. However, the proposed replacement drawing sheets have not been entered for the reasons given above. Further, the drawing amendments fail to address all of the objections.
Final Action
Applicant’s amendment/response necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP 706.07(a).
Response Period
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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.
Amendments in Reissue Applications
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification, claims or drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g).
Failure to fully comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g) will generally result in a notification to applicant that an amendment before final rejection is not completely responsive. Such an amendment after final rejection will not be entered.
Disclosure Obligations
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which the patent for which reissue is sought is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation. Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation. These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Filing and Contact Information
All correspondence relating to this reissue application should be directed:
By Patent Center1: Registered users may submit via the Patent Center at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/
By Mail2 to: Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-8300
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Building
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter English whose telephone number is (571)272-6671. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00 am - 6:00 pm EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eileen Lillis, can be reached at 571-272-6928.
/PETER C ENGLISH/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
Conferees:
/WILLIAM E DONDERO/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
/EILEEN D LILLIS/SPRS, Art Unit 3993
1 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).
2 Mail Stop REISSUE should only be used for the initial filing of reissue applications, and should not be used for any subsequently filed correspondence in reissue applications. See MPEP 1410.
Prosecution Insights