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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species 1 (Figs. 1-2 and 7) which is drawn to claims 1-7 and 19-20 is acknowledged. Claims 8-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected groups and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/14/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/03/2025, 08/02/2023, and 07/10/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 an 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.
Regarding claim 1, one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: plate-shaped external connecting member.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In this case, the limitation “plate-shaped external connecting member” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0110 “The heater element 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention has an external connecting member 30 having a plate shape, which is arranged on an end portion side of each electrode layer 20 so as to be in plane contact with each electrode layer 20”.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-7 and 19-20 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 term “long” and “short” in lines 8-9, and line 9 each is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long” and “short” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 4, the term “long” in line 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 5, the term “long” and “short” in line 2 each is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long” and “short” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 6, the term “long” in line 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 19, the term “long” and “short” in lines 11-12, and line 15 each is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long” and “short” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A and see the PDF attached).
Regarding independent claim 1, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, a heater element (see ceramic heater 11 in Figs. 1 and 4 and see Figs. 2-3) for heating a vehicle cabin, comprising:
a honeycomb structure (see honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product 17 in Fig. 2, Fig. 3 and disclosed in the specification “FIG. 3 is a view of the honeycomb structure of the same honeycomb molded product. It is composed of a cell 16 in which a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 having a thickness of 0.5 mm are combined, and the cell size is 1”) comprising: an outer peripheral wall (see annotated in Fig. 2); and partition walls (see a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 in Fig. 3) disposed on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall (see Fig. 3), the partition walls defining a plurality of cells (see cells 16 in Fig. 3), each forming a flow path from a first end face to a second end face (see Fig. 2 and 3), the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprising a material having a PTC property (disclosed in the specification “A heater with a PTC characteristic is stable and safe”); and
a pair of electrode layers (see electrodes 12 in Fig. 2) provided on a surface of the outer peripheral wall (see Fig. 2),
wherein the honeycomb structure (17) has a shape having a long axis (see 140 mm in Fig. Fig. 2) and a short axis (see 40 mm in Fig. 2) in a cross section orthogonal to a central axis (see annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the pair of electrode layers (12) are formed in a band shape (see Fig. 2) extending parallel to the central axis (see annotated Fig. 2), and are arranged on the surface of the outer peripheral wall (see annotated Fig. 2) so as to face each other across the long axis (140mm) passing through a center of gravity of the honeycomb structure (17) in the cross section orthogonal to the central axis (see Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “Electrodes 12 and electrode plates 13 are attached above and below the honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product 17”), and
wherein the heater element (11) further comprises a plate-shaped external connecting member (see electrode plate 13 in Fig. 2) disposed on an end portion side of each of the electrode layers (see Fig. 2), the plate-shaped external connecting member (13) being in plane contact with each of the electrode layers (see Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “The electrode plate 13 attached to the electrode 12 is connected to the lead wire 20 through a hole (not shown) of the insulating insulator 19”).
PNG
media_image1.png
305
552
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 1, and embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein each of the external connecting members (13) is arranged on one end portion side of the electrode layer (12) parallel to the central axis (see annotated Fig. 2), and extends outwardly from the end portion side in the same direction (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 1, and embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein the honeycomb structure (17) has a rectangular cross section orthogonal to the central axis (see Fig. 2), and the pair of electrode layers (12) are disposed on both sides of the outer peripheral wall including long sides of the rectangular cross section (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 4, and embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein the rectangular cross section has a ratio of a short side length (40 mm in Fig. 2) to a long side length (140mm) of 1:2 to 1:15 (see Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “The outer dimensions are 140 mm x 40 mm and depth 15 mm”, wherein the ratio of 40/140 is about 1:3.5).
Regarding claim 6, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 1, and embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein the honeycomb structure (17) does not have partition walls (see annotated Fig. 2) parallel to the long axis in the cross section orthogonal to the central axis (see Fig. 2).
Regarding independent claim 19, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, a heater element (see ceramic heater 11 in Figs. 1 and 4 and see Figs. 2-3) for purifying a vehicle cabin, comprising:
a honeycomb structure (see honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product 17 in Fig. 2, Fig. 3 and disclosed in the specification “FIG. 3 is a view of the honeycomb structure of the same honeycomb molded product. It is composed of a cell 16 in which a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 having a thickness of 0.5 mm are combined, and the cell size is 1”) comprising:
an outer peripheral wall (see a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 in Fig. 3); and partition walls (see a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 in Fig. 3) disposed on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall (see Fig. 3), the partition walls (see a vertical rib 14 and a horizontal rib 15 in Fig. 3) defining a plurality of cells (see cells 16 in Fig. 3) each forming a flow path from a first end face to a second end face (see Fig. 2 and 3), the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprising a material having a PTC property (disclosed in the specification “A heater with a PTC characteristic is stable and safe”);
a pair of electrode layers (see electrodes 12 in Fig. 2) provided on a surface of the outer peripheral wall (see Fig. 2);
and a functional material-containing layer provided on surfaces of the partition walls (disclosed in the specification “since the conductive honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product is fired to be porous and the platinum-based particles are carried as the noble metal-based particles, the catalyst is activated by the heat generation of the ceramic heater 11. When the air flowing in through the suction port 5 passes through the ceramic heater 11, it comes into contact with the heated platinum-based particles, and the odor is directly oxidized and deodorized”),
wherein the honeycomb structure (17) has a shape having a long axis (see 140 mm in Fig. Fig. 2) and a short axis (see 40 mm in Fig. 2) in a cross section orthogonal to a central axis (see annotated Fig. 2),
wherein the pair of electrode layers (12) are formed in a band shape (see Fig. 2) extending parallel to the central axis (see annotated Fig. 2), and are arranged on the surface of the outer peripheral wall (see annotated Fig. 2) so as to face each other across the long axis (140mm) passing through a center of gravity of the honeycomb structure (17) in the cross section orthogonal to the central axis (see Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “Electrodes 12 and electrode plates 13 are attached above and below the honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product 17”), and
wherein the heater element (11) further comprises a plate-shaped external connecting member (see electrode plate 13 in Fig. 2) disposed on an end portion side of each of the electrode layers (see Fig. 2), the plate-shaped external connecting member (13) being in plane contact with each of the electrode layers (see Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “The electrode plate 13 attached to the electrode 12 is connected to the lead wire 20 through a hole (not shown) of the insulating insulator 19”).
Regarding claim 20, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 19, and embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein the functional material-containing layer comprises a functional material having a function of adsorbing one or more selected from water vapor, carbon dioxide and odor components (disclosed in the specification “since the conductive honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product is fired to be porous and the platinum-based particles are carried as the noble metal-based particles, the catalyst is activated by the heat generation of the ceramic heater 11. When the air flowing in through the suction port 5 passes through the ceramic heater 11, it comes into contact with the heated platinum-based particles, and the odor is directly oxidized and deodorized”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura in view of embodiment of Fig. 9 of Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A and see the PDF attached).
Regarding claim 2, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 1.
However, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura does not explicitly disclose wherein the external connecting member has substantially the same width as that of an end portion of the electrode layer on which the external connecting member is arranged.
Nonetheless, embodiment of Fig. 9 of Yoshimura teaches, wherein the external connecting member (see lead terminal 31 in Fig. 9) has substantially the same width as that of an end portion of the electrode layer (see electrode 30) on which the external connecting member is arranged (see Fig. 1).
Hence, at the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious mater of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the width of the external connecting member of embodiment of Figs. 1-4 so as the external connecting member has substantially the same width as that of an end portion of the electrode layer on which the external connecting member is arranged as taught/suggested by embodiment of Fig. 9 because applicant has not disclosed that the limitation “the external connecting member has substantially the same width as that of an end portion of the electrode layer on which the external connecting member is arranged” provides an advantage is used for particular purpose or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the Applicant' s invention to perform equally well with “the external connecting member has substantially the same width as that of an end portion of the electrode layer on which the external connecting member is arranged” or “the external connecting member has substantially a smaller width than that of an end portion of the electrode layer on which the external connecting member is arranged”, because both widths would perform the function of connections equally well (MPEP 2144.04 IV B).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura in view of Kasai (US 20140010720 A1).
Regarding claim 7, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura discloses, the heater element according to claim 1, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura further discloses wherein the honeycomb structure (17) has an angle of each of the partition walls relative to the long axis of 90° in the cross section orthogonal to the center axis (see Fig. 3).
However, embodiment of Figs. 1-4 of Yoshimura does not explicitly disclose wherein the honeycomb structure has an angle of each of the partition walls relative to the long axis of 30 to 60° in the cross section orthogonal to the center axis.
Nonetheless, Kasai teaches, wherein the honeycomb structure has an angle of each of the partition walls relative to the long axis of 30 to 60° in the cross section orthogonal to the center axis (see Fig. 5 and disclosed in para 0038 “the angle .theta. of 0.5 times the center angle .alpha. is further […] preferably from 30 to 55.degree”).
Hence, at the time the invention was made, it would have been obvious mater of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the honeycomb structure of Yoshimura wherein the honeycomb structure has an angle of each of the partition walls relative to the long axis of 30 to 60° in the cross section orthogonal to the center axis as suggested/taught by Kasai in order effectively suppress the deviation of the current flowing through the honeycomb structure (see para 0038 and 0039 by Kasai).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 9:00 am-5:00 pm ET.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on (571) 270-5569. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights