DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment received on 06/05/2026. Amended claims 1, 3, 5, 9-10, 12-14 and 16-20 are acknowledged. Claims 1- and 3-20 are pending. Claim 2 is cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102:
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.
Claims 1, 6-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liang (CN 115540331A, machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Liang discloses:
a heat exchanger assembly (figs. 2-7 and 9) comprising:
a structural support (2) with a plurality of first mating interfaces (3) cantilevered from the structural support (2) (fig. 3, as it applies to figs. 2 and 9) [par. 0062-0063 and 0069-0070];
wherein the plurality of first mating interfaces (3) has a plurality of input ports (corresponding to the water collecting chamber 24 of 2) and a plurality of output ports (corresponding to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) (figs. 2 and 9) [par. 0080]; and
an heat exchanger core (1), wherein the heat exchanger core (1) comprises:
one or more second mating interfaces (4) (fig. 3, as it applies to figs. 2 and 9) [par. 0062-0063 and 0069-0070];
at least one core input port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) and at least one core output port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water collecting chamber 24 of 2) (fig. 3, as it applies to figs. 2 and 9) [par. 0062-0063 and 0069-0070];
wherein the heat exchanger core (1) is rigidly affixed in a removable configuration to the structural support (2) by coupling with a face seal (5) [par. 0062-0063] the one or more second mating interfaces (4) with one or more first mating interfaces (3) from the plurality of first mating interfaces (3) such that the at least one core input port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) fluidly couples to a first output port (corresponding to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) in the plurality of output ports (corresponding to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) and the at least one core output port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) fluidly couples to a first input port (corresponding to the water collecting chamber 24 of 2) in the plurality of input ports (corresponding to the water collecting chamber 24 of 2) (fig. 2 and 9) [par. 0062-0063 and 0069-0070].
MPEP 2114 II clearly states “Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does" and “A claim containing a ‘recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.” Because Claim 1 fails to further limit the apparatus in terms of structure, but rather only recite further functional limitations, regarding the “in a removable configuration” limitation, the heat exchanger core as taught by Liang can be removed from the structural support if required.
Liang does not disclose an array of heat exchanger cores (1). However, the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04, section VI, part B. In this case, duplicating one or more of the heat exchanger core (1) will further increase thermal transfer according to the design application or the user’s needs.
Regarding claim 6, Liang discloses:
each heat exchanger core (1) in the plurality of heat exchanger cores (upon modification, as it applies to claim 1) having two second mating interfaces (4) (fig. 3, as it applies to figs. 2 and 9) [par. 0062-0063 and 0069-0070];
Regarding claim 7, Liang discloses:
each of the two second mating interfaces (4) having a core input port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water distributing chamber 23 of 2) and a core output port (corresponding to interfaces 3 connected to the water collecting chamber 24 of 2) (figs. 2 and 9).
Regarding claim 8, Liang discloses:
a header (2) being integrated into the structural support (2) (figs. 1-2) [par. 0061].
The recitation "is created as single piece" is considered to be a product by process limitation (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the header/support structure taught by Liang is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim. Further, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in various pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164, 65 O.G. 1765, 1893 C.D. 659.
Regarding claim 9, the recitation "each heat exchanger core in the plurality of heat exchanger cores is a single piece construction" is considered to be a product by process limitation (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the header/support structure taught by Liang is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim. Further, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in various pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164, 65 O.G. 1765, 1893 C.D. 659.
Regarding claim 11, Liang discloses:
each heat exchanger core (1) in the array of heat exchanger cores being identical in construction (as it applies to claim 1, above, the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04, section VI, part B. In this case, duplicating one or more identical heat exchanger cores (1) will further increase thermal transfer according to the design application or the user’s needs, and would be an obvious matter of design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-20 are allowed.
Claims 3-5 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the drawings, the specification, and the claims, and the rejection of claims 12-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as set forth in the OA of 08/14/2025, are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1have been fully considered but they do not apply to the new grounds of 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 GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6018. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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.
/GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights