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 invention I claims 1-10 and 19 in the reply filed on 7/30/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1, 2, 4-10, and 19 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 2, and 4-10 of copending Application No. 18/480111 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because The corresponding claims of the copending application recite each limitation with the only difference being the use of the term "heat pipe" instead of "conduction line" however a heat pipe conducts heat and therefore is being interpreted as reading upon the present claims which recite "conduction line".
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Reference Application
Instant Application
1. (Currently Amended)
A water heater appliance comprising:
a housing;
a tank attached to the housing, the tank defining an interior volume;
a refrigeration system comprising a sealed refrigerant loop in thermal communication with the tank to heat the interior volume;
an electronics board attached to the housing apart from the tank;
a conductive interface proximal to the electronics board and spaced apart from the sealed refrigerant loop, the conductive interface comprising a plurality of fins;
and
PNG
media_image1.png
119
7
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a conduction line extending between the conductive interface and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loopy wherein the conductive interface defines an internal channel encapsulating the conduction line,
and wherein an outer surface of the conduction line is in conductive thermal contact with an inner surface of the internal channel of the conductive interface
1. (Original)
A water heater appliance comprising:
a housing;
a tank attached to the housing,
the tank defining an interior volume;
a refrigeration system comprising a sealed refrigerant loop in thermal communication with the tank to heat the interior volume;
an electronics board attached to the housing apart from the tank;
a conductive interface connected to the electronics board and spaced apart from the refrigerant loop;
and a heat pipe extending between the conductive interface and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loop.
4. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the conduction line is clipped to the sealed refrigerant loop.
4. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the heat pipe is clipped to the sealed refrigerant loop.
5. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the conduction line extends from a first end proximal to the conductive interface to a second end proximal to the sealed refrigerant loop and above the first end.
5. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the heat pipe extends from a first end proximal to the conductive interface to a second end proximal to the sealed refrigerant loop and above the first end.
6. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 5,
wherein the sealed refrigerant loop comprises an evaporator,
and wherein the second end of the conduction line is proximal to the evaporator in conductive thermal communication therewith.
6. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 5,
wherein the sealed refrigerant loop comprises an evaporator, and wherein the second end of the heat pipe is proximal to the evaporator in conductive thermal communication therewith.
7. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 6,
further comprising a plurality of conductor wings extending horizontally between the conduction line and the evaporator.
7. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 6,
further comprising a plurality of conductor wings extending horizontally between the heat pipe and the evaporator.
8. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 7,
wherein the first end is horizontally offset from the second end.
8. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 7,
wherein the first end is horizontally offset from the second end.
9. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 7,
wherein the plurality of conductor wings horizontally bound a portion of the evaporator and restrain relative movement between the conduction line and the evaporator.
9. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 7,
wherein the plurality of conductor wings horizontally bound a portion of the evaporator and restrain relative movement between the heat pipe and the evaporator.
10. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the electronics board and the conduction line are disposed directly above the tank.
10. (Original)
The water heater appliance of claim 1,
wherein the electronics board and the heat pipe are disposed directly above the tank.
1. (Currently Amended)
A water heater appliance comprising:
a housing;
a tank attached to the housing, the tank defining an interior volume;
a refrigeration system comprising a sealed refrigerant loop in thermal communication with the tank to heat the interior volume;
an electronics board attached to the housing apart from the tank;
a conductive interface proximal to the electronics board and spaced apart from the sealed refrigerant loop, the conductive interface comprising a plurality of fins;
and
PNG
media_image1.png
119
7
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a conduction line extending between the conductive interface and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loopy wherein the conductive interface defines an internal channel encapsulating the conduction line,
and wherein an outer surface of the conduction line is in conductive thermal contact with an inner surface of the internal channel of the conductive interface
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, and 7-9 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Current prior art of record teaches the conductive interface and conduction line are integral together and therefore it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to separate the two as recited in claim 2. Further while Weyant (US 9,952,000 B1) teaches a heat pipe comprising conductor wings it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Teraki’s conduction line structure which is in direct contact with the refrigerant loop to be directly attached to the evaporator .
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bailey (US 2018/0017286 A1) in view of Teraki (JP 2016-205682 A).
Regarding claim 1,
Bailey teaches, except where struck through,
A water heater appliance (water heater appliance 100) comprising:
a housing (shroud 159 and casing 102);
a tank (tank 112) attached to the housing (fig. 2),
the tank defining an interior volume (interior volume 114);
a refrigeration system (system 120) comprising a sealed refrigerant loop in thermal communication with the tank to heat the interior volume (par. 23);
an electronics board (controller 150) attached to the housing apart from the tank (fig. 1 par. 23);
.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Bailey does not teach:
a conductive interface connected to the electronics board and spaced apart from the refrigerant loop;
and a heat pipe extending between the conductive interface and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loop.
Teraki teaches an electrical component cooling system 70 with a conductive interface (page 5 par. 3 teaches an area for fixing the electrical component and heat pipe 90 where the area is an interface) connected to the electronics board (printed circuit board 61) and spaced apart from the refrigerant loop (cooling pipe 15 is part of refrigerant circuit 60 figs. 2 and 3);
and a heat pipe extending between the conductive interface and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loop (page 3 par. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the electrical component cooling system 70 of Teraki with the water heater appliance 100 of Bailey for the purpose of cooling controller board 150 of Bailey in the instance where high power/high current discrete electrical components are used and required to be cooled (page 3 par. 4) .
Regarding claim 4,
Bailey as modified teaches, The water heater appliance of claim 1 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Bailey does not teach:
wherein the heat pipe is clipped to the sealed refrigerant loop.
Teraki teaches wherein the heat pipe is clipped to the sealed refrigerant loop (fig. 2 15, 80, and 90 are connected or clipped together).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the connection structure of Teraki with the water heater appliance 100 of Bailey for the purpose of cooling controller board 150 of Bailey in the instance where high power/high current discrete electrical components are used and required to be cooled (page 3 par. 4)
Regarding claim 5,
Bailey as modified teaches, The water heater appliance of claim 1 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Bailey does not teach: wherein the heat pipe extends from a first end proximal to the conductive interface to a second end proximal to the sealed refrigerant loop and above the first end.
Teraki teaches wherein the heat pipe extends from a first end proximal to the conductive interface (fig. 2) to a second end proximal to the sealed refrigerant loop and above the first end (fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route and connect the piping structure of Teraki with the water heater appliance 100 of Bailey for the purpose of cooling controller board 150 of Bailey in the instance where high power/high current discrete electrical components are used and required to be cooled (page 3 par. 4).
Regarding claim 6,
Bailey as modified teaches, The water heater appliance of claim 5 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Bailey does not teach:
wherein the sealed refrigerant loop comprises an evaporator,
and wherein the second end of the heat pipe is proximal to the evaporator in conductive thermal communication therewith.
Teraki teaches
wherein the sealed refrigerant loop comprises an evaporator (outdoor heat exchanger 31),
and wherein the second end of the heat pipe is proximal to the evaporator (fig. 1) in conductive thermal communication therewith (page 4 par. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route and connect the piping structure and evaporator of Teraki with the water heater appliance 100 of Bailey for the purpose of cooling controller board 150 of Bailey in the instance where high power/high current discrete electrical components are used and required to be cooled (page 3 par. 4).
Regarding claim 10,
Bailey as modified teaches, The water heater appliance of claim 1 (as discussed above).
Bailey further teaches
wherein the electronics board and the heat pipe are disposed directly above the tank (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19,
Bailey teaches, except where struck through,
A water heater appliance (water heater appliance 100) comprising:
a housing (shroud 159 and casing 102);
a tank (tank 112) attached to the housing (fig. 2),
the tank defining an interior volume (interior volume 114);
a refrigeration system (system 120) comprising a sealed refrigerant loop in thermal communication with the tank to heat the interior volume (par. 23);
an electronics board (controller 150) attached to the housing apart from the tank (fig. 1 par. 23);
.
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Bailey does not teach:
and a heat pipe extending between the electronics board and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loop.
Teraki teaches an electrical component cooling system 70 with and a heat pipe extending between the electronics board and the sealed refrigerant loop to convey waste heat from the electronics board to the sealed refrigerant loop (page 3 par. 4 and the bottom right corner of fig 1 shows power converter 60 and its interface to cooling system 70).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the electrical component cooling system 70 of Teraki with the water heater appliance 100 of Bailey for the purpose of cooling controller board 150 of Bailey in the instance where high power/high current discrete electrical components are used and required to be cooled (page 3 par. 4) .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM M ECKARDT whose telephone number is (313)446-6609. The examiner can normally be reached 6 a.m to 2:00 p.m EST Monday to Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
ADAM MICHAEL. ECKARDT
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 3761
/ADAM M ECKARDT/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights