DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( as being anticipated by Peyton et al. (US 20210214562).
Per claim 1, Peyton teaches a heat exchanger, comprising:
a heat exchanger core (10); and
an integral slurper circuit, comprising:
multiple slurper bars (12) integrally formed with the heat exchanger core as a single, monolithic body (see figure 1), each of the multiple slurper bars comprising a hollow shell (12), the hollow shell being elongate in a longitudinal dimension thereof, which is aligned with a direction of flow of humid air exiting the heat exchanger core and which defines a longitudinal end of the hollow shell (see figure 1),
the hollow shell having an upper surface (see annotated figure below), a lower surface (see annotated figure below) and an end surface (see annotated figure below) extending between the upper surface and the lower surface at only the longitudinal end,
the upper surface (see annotated figure below) and the lower surface (see annotated figure below) and the end surface (see annotated figure below) being formed to define an interior (see annotated figure below), and
the upper surface (see annotated figure below) being formed to define plural holes (26) arranged along a length of the hollow shell (12) (see figure 2 showing the holes arranged along a length of the hollow shell), which is defined along the longitudinal dimension, by which water that is condensed out of the humid air is drawn into the interior (“The slurper bars 12 collect moisture from passing air and wick the moisture away from an air flow stream through the heat exchanger 10 to prevent condensation and formation of water droplets. The slurper bars 12 are in fluid communication with a vacuum source 18 that is connected to the heat exchanger 10 through a vacuum port 20 in a known manner…the slurper bars 12 each include openings 26 that fluidly connect a passage 28 to the passing air flow stream. The vacuum source 18 (FIG. 1) evacuates the passage 28”,para. 0027-0028).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
300
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Per claim 2, Peyton meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Petyon teaches wherein the multiple slurper bars (12) are arranged in parallel with one another (see figure 1).
Per claim 3, Peyton meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Petyon teaches wherein the multiple slurper bars (12) all have a common configuration (see figure 1).
Per claim 4, Peyton meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Petyon teaches wherein the hollow shell of each of the multiple slurper bars comprises parallel ridges extending perpendicularly with respect to the longitudinal dimension (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
451
285
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peyton et al. (US 20210214562) in view of Haydt et al. (US 20240118047).
Per claim 5, Peyton meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Petyon teaches the hollow shell of each of the multiple slurper bars (12) fails to explicitly teach wherein the slurper bars comprise offset angled ridges extending diagonally with respect to the longitudinal dimension.
However, Haydt teaches system a slurper bar (200) comprising offset angled ridges (226a) extending diagonally with respect to a longitudinal dimension (A2; see figure 3) (to clarify, the ridges are three dimensional structures and extend in all directions including diagonally with respect to the longitudinal dimension) for efficient separation of water from air (para. 0056). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a slurper bar comprising parallel ridges and channels extending perpendicularly with respect to a longitudinal dimension and ridged baffles extending in parallel with respect to the longitudinal dimension, as taught by Haydt in the invention of Peyton, in order to advantageously efficiently separate water from air (para. 0056), thereby reducing energy consumption (para. 0056).
Per claim 6, Peyton meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Petyon teaches the hollow shell of each of the multiple slurper bars (12) fails to explicitly teach wherein the slurper bars comprise parallel ridges and channels extending perpendicularly with respect to the longitudinal dimension and ridged baffles extending in parallel with respect to the longitudinal dimension.
However, Haydt teaches system a slurper bar (200) comprising parallel ridges (parallel adjacent elements of 226a shown in figure 3) and channels (space between parallel adjacent elements of 226a shown in figure 3) extending perpendicularly with respect to a longitudinal dimension and ridged baffles (228b) extending in parallel with respect to the longitudinal dimension (to clarify, the ridges, channels and baffles are three dimensional zones/structures and extend in all directions including perpendicular/parallel with respect to the longitudinal dimension) efficient separation of water from air (para. 0056). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a slurper bar comprising parallel ridges and channels extending perpendicularly with respect to a longitudinal dimension and ridged baffles extending in parallel with respect to the longitudinal dimension, as taught by Haydt in the invention of Peyton, in order to advantageously efficiently separate water from air (para. 0056), thereby reducing energy consumption (para. 0056).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of references being used in the current rejection.
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 DAVID J TEITELBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5142. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am-4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571) 272-66816681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID J TEITELBAUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
