DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the wall gap (claims 7 and 18) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Status of the Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the reply dated 7/1/2025 are as follows:
Claims 7, 11, and 18 are amended,
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanigawa (Japanese Patent Publication JP2011080704A, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Tanigawa discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-3) comprising:
a heat exchanger matrix with a plurality of flow paths (of tubes 6) in a first direction (see annotated fig 1 below) wherein the plurality of flow paths are patterned to create a plurality of inputs to the plurality of flow paths on an input surface (surface of 32);
a header comprising:
a primary distribution header (55, 51, 52) that spans across the input surface in a second direction (see annotated fig 1 below);
a plurality of distribution header channels (31) that span across the input surface in a third direction (see annotated fig 1 below) perpendicular to the second direction wherein each distribution header channel in the plurality of distribution header channels is in fluid communication with the primary distribution header (fig 1); and
a plurality of feeder tubes (6) that fluidly couple the plurality of distribution header channels with the plurality of inputs such that there is a single feeder tube for each input (fig 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
560
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Tanigawa further discloses wherein the plurality of distribution header channels (31) comprises at least two layers stacked in the first direction (see annotated fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
560
650
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Tanigawa further discloses where a first layer of distribution header channels (3) is offset in the second direction from a second layer of distribution header channels (see annotated fig 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, Tanigawa further discloses wherein a wall gap (see annotated fig 3below) spans an entire surface (see annotated fig 3 below) of the input surface and separates the input surface (surface of 32) from the header.
PNG
media_image3.png
566
460
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Tanigawa further discloses wherein each distribution header channel (31) has more than one feeder tube (6) extending to the input surface (of 32) along a single plane in the second direction (see annotated fig 1 above).
Regarding claim 10, Tanigawa further discloses wherein each distribution header channel (31) spans more than one input along the second direction (see annotated fig 1 above).
Regarding claim 11, Tanigawa further discloses wherein a cross-section of each distribution header channel is shaped like a “D” (see annotated fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
560
650
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Tanigawa further discloses wherein a tubeplate (32) separates the input surface from the header and the tubeplate forms a flat side of the “D” shaped cross-section (fig 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanigawa (Japanese Patent Publication JP2011080704A, previously cited) in view of Garimella (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2005/0006064).
Regarding claim 2, Tanigawa discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein each distribution header channel tapers from an interface with the primary distribution header towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella, however, discloses a header for a heat exchanger (fig 7) wherein each distribution header channel (18) tapers from an interface with a primary distribution header (34) towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella teaches that this provides uniform flow distribution (¶0023). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to have the channels tapered in order to provide uniform flow distribution and therefore enhance heat exchange efficiency.
Regarding claim 13, Tanigawa discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-3) comprising:
a heat exchanger matrix with a plurality of flow paths (of 6) in a first direction (see annotated fig 1 below) wherein the plurality of flow paths are patterned to create a plurality of inputs to the plurality of flow paths on an input surface (surface of 32);
a header comprising:
a primary distribution header (51, 52, 55) that spans across the input surface in a second direction (see annotated fig 1 below);
a plurality of distribution header channels (31) that span across the input surface in a third direction (see annotated fig 1 below) perpendicular to the second direction and wherein each distribution header channel in the plurality of distribution header channels is in fluid communication with the primary distribution header; and
a plurality of feeder tubes (6) that fluidly couple the plurality of distribution header channels with the plurality of inputs such that there is a single feeder tube for each input.
PNG
media_image5.png
560
650
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein each distribution header channel tapers from an interface with the primary distribution header towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella, however, discloses a header for a heat exchanger (fig 7) wherein each distribution header channel (18) tapers from an interface with a primary distribution header (34) towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella teaches that this provides uniform flow distribution (¶0023). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to have the channels tapered in order to provide uniform flow distribution and therefore enhance heat exchange efficiency.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Tanigawa and Garimella discloses all previous claim limitations. Tanigawa further discloses wherein the plurality of distribution header channels comprises at least two layers stacked in the first direction (see annotated fig 1 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
560
650
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Tanigawa and Garimella discloses all previous claim limitations. Tanigawa further discloses wherein a first layer of distribution header channels is offset in the second direction from a second layer of distribution header channels (see annotated fig 1 above).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Tanigawa and Garimella discloses all previous claim limitations. Tanigawa further discloses wherein a wall gap (see annotated fig 3 below) spans an entire surface (see annotated fig 3 below) of the input surface and separates the input surface (surface of 32) from the header.
PNG
media_image3.png
566
460
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Tanigawa discloses a heat exchanger comprising:
a heat exchanger matrix with a plurality of flow paths (of 6) in a first direction (see annotated fig 1 below) wherein the plurality of flow paths are patterned to create a plurality of inputs to the plurality of flow paths on an input surface (surface of 3);
a header comprising:
a primary distribution header (51, 52, 55) that spans across the input surface in a second direction (see annotated fig 2 below);
a plurality of distribution header channels (31) that span across the input surface in a third direction (see annotated fig1 below) perpendicular to the second direction and wherein each distribution header channel in the plurality of distribution header channels is in fluid communication with the primary distribution header and wherein the plurality of distribution header channels comprises at least two layers (see annotated fig 1 below) stacked in the first direction and wherein a first layer of distribution header channels is offset in the second direction from a second layer of distribution header channels (fig 1); and
a plurality of feeder tubes (6) that fluidly couple the plurality of distribution header channels with the plurality of inputs such that there is a single feeder tube for each input (fig 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
560
650
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein each distribution header channel tapers from an interface with the primary distribution header towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella, however, discloses a header for a heat exchanger (fig 7) wherein each distribution header channel (18) tapers from an interface with a primary distribution header (34) towards a distal end of the distribution header channel. Garimella teaches that this provides uniform flow distribution (¶0023). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to have the channels tapered in order to provide uniform flow distribution and therefore enhance heat exchange efficiency.
Claim(s) 3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanigawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Varvill et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/081562, “Varvill”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 3, Tanigawa discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein the cross section of each distribution header channel is shaped in a teardrop. Varvill, however, discloses a header for a heat exchanger (figs 15 and 16) wherein the cross section of each distribution header channel (319) is shaped in a teardrop (fig 16). Varvill teaches that this reduces pressure loss of the surrounding fluid (¶0130). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa, as modified, to provide the tear drop shape of Varvill in order to reduce the pressure drop of the surrounding fluid (8), thereby increasing the efficiency of the device.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Tanigawa, Garimella, and Varvill discloses all previous claim limitations. Tanigawa, as modified, further discloses wherein a point of the teardrop (see annotated fig 16 below of Varvill) are all orientated in the second direction (see annotated fig 1 of Tanigawa above).
PNG
media_image6.png
288
408
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanigawa as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Anderson (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0291998, previously cited).
Regarding claim 6, Tanigawa discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein a plurality of fins run in the second direction and a fin mechanically couples each feeder tube to a distribution header channel. Anderson, however, discloses a heat exchanger wherein a plurality of fins (55) run in the second direction (see annotated fig 3 below) and a fin mechanically couples each feeder tube (45) to a distribution header channel (35). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to provide the fins of Anderson in order to enhance heat exchange efficiency of the device.
PNG
media_image7.png
560
700
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 14 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanigawa and Garimella as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Varvill et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/081562, “Varvill”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Tanigawa and Garimella discloses all previous claim limitations. However, they not explicitly disclose wherein the cross section of each distribution header channel is shaped in a teardrop. Varvill, however, discloses a header for a heat exchanger (figs 15 and 16) wherein the cross section of each distribution header channel (319) is shaped in a teardrop (fig 16). Varvill teaches that this reduces pressure loss of the surrounding fluid (¶0130). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to provide the tear drop shape of Varvill in order to reduce the pressure drop of the surrounding fluid (8), thereby increasing the efficiency of the device.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Tanigawa, Garimella, and Varvill discloses all previous claim limitations. Tanigawa, as modified, further discloses wherein a point of the teardrop (see annotated fig 16 below of Varvill) are all orientated in the second direction (see annotated fig 1 of Tanigawa above).
PNG
media_image6.png
288
408
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanigawa and Garimella as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Anderson (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0291998, previously cited).
Regarding claim 17, Tanigawa discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Tanigawa does not explicitly disclose wherein a plurality of fins run in the second direction and a fin mechanically couples each feeder tube to a distribution header channel. Anderson, however, discloses a heat exchanger wherein a plurality of fins (55) run in the second direction (see annotated fig 3 below) and a fin mechanically couples each feeder tube (45) to a distribution header channel (35). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Tanigawa to provide the fins of Anderson in order to enhance heat exchange efficiency of the device.
PNG
media_image7.png
560
700
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/1/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (page 6) that since the wall in the instance application is labeled as 23 and discussed in the paragraph [0039], the wall gap should not be objected to as not being shown. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; the wall gap is not the same element as the wall. If the wall gap is supported in the drawings, the drawings and specifications should be amended to provide a reference numeral.
Applicant argues (page 7) that the office action has the “plurality of flow paths” and “plurality of feeder tubes” as the same element 6 of Tanigawa. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; in the rejection the “plurality of flow paths” are the paths formed by tubes 6 and the “plurality of feeder tubes” are the tubes themselves.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRY E ARANT whose telephone number is (571)272-1105. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at (571)270-7740. 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.
/HARRY E ARANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763