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
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-13, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Becker et al. US 2022/0260316 Al.
Re claim 1, Becker et al. teach a heat exchanger comprising: a housing;
an internal structure arranged within the housing (figs 32-33 showing cores in a housing), the internal structure defining a set of first fluid passages and a set of second fluid passages, wherein a first fluid within the set of first fluid passages is prevented from mixing with a second fluid in the set of second fluid passages (figs 4-5 show first and second passages 12, 14);
an inlet manifold (57) at an inlet end of the set of first fluid passages and defining an inlet plenum for receiving the first fluid, wherein the set of first fluid passages comprise openings to the inlet plenum to receive the first fluid therethrough, wherein the openings of the set of first fluid passages are defined in an inlet end face of the internal structure;
and a set of flow directors (annotated fig) arranged on the inlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the first fluid into the openings of the set of first fluid passages, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the second fluid passages of the set of second fluid passages;
wherein each flow director comprises two flow control surfaces (annotated fig) that extend from the inlet end face of the internal structure into the inlet manifold and join at an apex (right joint appears to be triangle tipped apex from fig 26; noting the triangular structure has an apex and two ends going towards the base portion) of the respective flow director, wherein the two flow control surfaces are arranged to direct a flow of fluid into respective first fluid passages in a smooth and non-turbulent manner.
Additionally noting that for clarity, the recitation “wherein the two flow control surfaces are arranged to direct a flow of fluid into respective first fluid passages in a smooth and non-turbulent manner” has been considered a recitation of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, the prior art meets all of the structural limitations, and is therefore capable of performing the claimed recitations set forth above. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. Finally, the intended fluid used in the apparatus to perform the intended function does not affect the patentability of the apparatus, since the apparatus is capable of using said intended fluid. See MPEP 2144.07.
PNG
media_image1.png
952
927
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, Becker et al. teach further comprising: an outlet manifold (fig 25, 56) at an outlet end of the set of first fluid passages and defining an outlet plenum for receiving the first fluid, wherein the set of first fluid passages comprise outlet openings to the outlet plenum to direct the first fluid into the outlet plenum, wherein the outlet openings of the set of first fluid passages are defined in an outlet end face of the internal structure (fig 25); and a set of outlet flow directors arranged on the outlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the first fluid into the outlet plenum, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the second fluid passages of the set of second fluid passages (annotated fig).
PNG
media_image2.png
559
552
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 3, Becker et al. teach further comprising: an inlet manifold at an inlet end of the set of second fluid passages and defining a second inlet plenum for receiving the second fluid, wherein the set of second fluid passages comprise openings to the second inlet plenum to receive the second fluid therethrough, wherein the openings of the set of second fluid passages are defined in a second inlet end face of the internal structure; and a second set of flow directors arranged on the second inlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the second fluid into the openings of the set of second fluid passages, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the first fluid passages of the set of first fluid passages (noting the area between the housing and entrance /exit to each cell as shown in fig 33 can hold air and is considered a plenum, and the first row and last row of each cell are considered first and second set of flow directors).
Re claim 7, Becker et al. teach wherein the apex is pointed and the flow control surfaces are planar surfaces that extend to the internal structure to define a substantially triangular shape of the flow director (figs and see rejection of claim 1).
Re claim 8, Becker et al. teach wherein the end face passage is similar in geometry to all other passages of the set of second fluid passages (figs).
Re claim 9, Becker et al. teach wherein the set of first fluid passages and the set of second fluid passages are defined within an interwoven structure of the internal structure within the housing (figs, noting that according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the plain meaning of ‘weave’ is 4a
: to produce by elaborately combining elements : contrive
b: to unite in a coherent whole
c: to introduce as an appropriate element : work in
—usually used with in or into
5: to direct (something, such as the body) in a winding or zigzag course especially to avoid obstacles).
Re claim 10, Becker et al. teach wherein the first fluid is bleed air from an aircraft engine and the second fluid is RAM air from a RAM air duct of an aircraft.
Additionally noting that for clarity, the recitation “the first fluid is bleed air” and “the second fluid is RAM air from a RAM air duct of an aircraft” has been considered a recitation of intended use. It has been held that the recitation with respect to the matter in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP 2114. In the instant case, the prior art meets all of the structural limitations, and is therefore capable of performing the claimed recitations set forth above. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the inclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. Finally, the intended fluid used in the apparatus to perform the intended function does not affect the patentability of the apparatus, since the apparatus is capable of using said intended fluid. See MPEP 2144.07.
Re claim 11, Becker et al. teach a method of manufacturing a heat exchanger, the method comprising: providing a housing; arranging an internal structure within the housing, the internal structure defining a set of first fluid passages and a set of second fluid passages, wherein a first fluid within the set of first fluid passages is prevented from mixing with a second fluid in the set of second fluid passages; wherein the housing defines an inlet manifold at an inlet end of the set of first fluid passages and defining an inlet plenum for receiving the first fluid, wherein the set of first fluid passages comprise openings to the inlet plenum to receive the first fluid therethrough, wherein the openings of the set of first fluid passages are defined in an inlet end face of the internal structure; and forming a set of flow directors on the inlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the first fluid into the openings of the set of first fluid passages, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the second fluid passages of the set of second fluid passages (see the rejection of claim 1, noting “providing” and “forming” and met by the presence of structure),
and wherein each flow director comprises two flow control surfaces that extend from the inlet end face of the internal structure into the inlet manifold and join at an apex of the respective flow director, wherein the two flow control surfaces are arranged to direct a flow of fluid into respective first fluid passages in a smooth and non-turbulent manner (see the rejection of claim 1).
Re claim 12, Becker et al. teach wherein an outlet manifold is defined by the housing at an outlet end of the set of first fluid passages and defining an outlet plenum for receiving the first fluid, wherein the set of first fluid passages comprise outlet openings to the outlet plenum to direct the first fluid into the outlet plenum, wherein the outlet openings of the set of first fluid passages are defined in an outlet end face of the internal structure; and forming a set of outlet flow directors on the outlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the first fluid into the outlet plenum, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the second fluid passages of the set of second fluid passages (see the rejection of claim 2, noting “providing” and “forming” and met by the presence of structure).
Re claim 13, Becker et al. teach wherein an inlet manifold is defined by the housing at an inlet end of the set of second fluid passages and defining a second inlet plenum for receiving the second fluid, wherein the set of second fluid passages comprise openings to the second inlet plenum to receive the second fluid therethrough, wherein the openings of the set of second fluid passages are defined in a second inlet end face of the internal structure; and forming a second set of flow directors on the second inlet end face and configured to direct a flow of the second fluid into the openings of the set of second fluid passages, wherein each flow director defines an end face passage that is one of the first fluid passages of the set of first fluid passages (see the rejection of claim 3, noting “providing” and “forming” and met by the presence of structure).
Re claim 17, Becker et al. teach wherein the apex is pointed and the flow control surfaces are planar surfaces that extend to the internal structure to define a substantially triangular shape of the flow director (see the rejection of claim 7).
Re claim 18, Becker et al. teach wherein the end face passage is similar in geometry to all other passages of the set of second fluid passages (see the rejection of claim 8).
Re claim 19, Becker et al. teach wherein the set of first fluid passages and the set of second fluid passages are defined within an interwoven structure of the internal structure within the housing (see the rejection of claim 9).
Re claim 20, Becker et al. teach wherein the housing and the internal structure are additively manufactured as a single structure (see the rejection of claim 10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the new claim limitations, specifically, “extend into” are not taught by Becker et al.. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Noting that according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the plain meaning of ‘into’ is
used as a function word to indicate entry, introduction, insertion, superposition, or inclusion
came into the house
enter into an alliance
2
: in the direction of
looking into the sun
3
: to a position of contact with : against
ran into a wall.
Therefore, considered that every three dimensional object extending in all directions, and the cited flow directors of the claim have a main body extending directly towards and into contact with the boundary of the manifold, one of ordinary skill in the art would see the flow directors extending into the manifold. Furthermore one of ordinary skill in the art would consider any conduit structure which is receiving the divided flow from a manifold to have to extend into the manifold (i.e. in the direction of AND to a position of contact with : against ) to receive the divided fluid flows of a manifold.
Applicant argues the claims dependent on the independent claim(s) are allowable based upon their dependence from an independent claim. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been addressed above. Thus, the rejections are proper and remain.
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 GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F PST.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/GORDON A JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763