Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/476,285

ADAPTABLE DEFROST DAMPER FOR ADJUSTABLE PORT VENTILATOR

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
DOERRLER, WILLIAM CHARLES
Art Unit
3993
Tech Center
3900
Assignee
Carrier Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
312 granted / 398 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
422
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 398 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-3,21,22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pre-Grant Publication 2002/153133 to Haglid (hereinafter “Haglid”) in view of Korean Publication KR 20210131165A (hereinafter “KR ‘165”) and Korean Publication KR 101941537B1 (hereinafter KR ‘537”). Haglid discloses a ventilator comprising: a housing comprising a first set of ports and a second set of ports, ports comprising a first inlet (at 22), a first outlet (at 20), a second inlet (at 18) and a second outlet (at 24); and a partition wall defining a first chamber, a first inlet chamber (22), a first outlet chamber (20), a second inlet chamber (18), and a second outlet chamber (24) (see Figure 1), wherein the first inlet are in fluidic communication with the first inlet chamber and the first outlet are in fluidic communication with the first outlet chamber, the second inlet are in fluidic communication with the second inlet chamber and the second outlet are in fluidic communication with the second outlet chamber; wherein the housing defines a first flowpath (50, 52) extending from the first inlet chamber to the first outlet chamber and a second flowpath (46, 48) extending from the second inlet chamber to the second outlet chamber, each of the first flowpath and the second flowpath extends through the first chamber; and a pair of dampers (70, 72, 74, 76) configured to move between a first position and a second position. Haglid does not disclose that the second set of ports also includes further inlets and a second outlet, and regarding the dampers, wherein in the first position the dampers close the second inlet and the first outlet of the second set of ports, and in the second position the dampers close the first outlet and the second inlet of the first set of ports; wherein the two dampers are coupled to a single motor for movement between the respective first position and the second position. KR ‘165 discloses a ventilator with a recovery heat exchanger and in the seventh paragraph under the description of embodiments heading, states, “four outdoor air intakes are formed on both sides, upper and lower portions of the case 100,200 in the outdoor air inlet space 12a, and four outdoor air intakes are formed in the indoor air outlet space 14a on both sides, upper and lower portions of the case 100,200. An indoor air outlet is formed, and four outdoor air outlets are formed on both sides, upper and lower sides of the case 100 and 200 in the outdoor air inlet space 18a”. The penultimate paragraph before the reference signs list heading states, “That is, unlike the conventional air circulation device, the air circulation device of the present invention can install the duct (A) in the lateral direction and the upward direction, the lateral direction and the downward direction, and the upward and downward direction, and the duct (By installing several A), it is possible to supply outdoor air to various places in the room.” KR ‘537 teaches one motor controlling multiple dampers, “so that the ventilation efficiency in a house is remarkably improved, and the energy loss is reduced, thereby remarkably improving economic feasibility” (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the ventilator with a recovery heat exchanger of Haglid by using multiple sets of inlets and outlets as taught by KR ‘165 to enable multiple mounting options and to use a single motor to control multiple dampers to increase efficiency while lowering cost, as taught by KR ‘537. In regard to the structure added to claim 1 in the February 10, 2026 amendment and claim 21, Haglid discloses defrosting the recovery core by controlling the dampers (see paragraph 68) as well as a recirculator 70. In regard to claim 2, Haglid shows heat recovery core 16 to transfer heat between different flowpaths. In regard to claim 3, Haglid discloses a coupling of the inlet (at 18) and the outlet (at 20) via the opening opened by damper (70) so that when this is opened and the dampers (72, 74) closed, the fluid from the first flowpath is recirculated to the second flowpath (see Figure 1, description: paragraph 68) which thereby enables defrosting of the recovery core (16). In regard to claim 22 Haglid’s damper70 can be seen to be positioned in a flow channel coupling the inlet for outside air 46 to the outlet for airstream 52. This combined with the multiple air intakes and outlets taught by KR ‘165 is seen to render a flow channel between the first outlet and the second inlet obvious. In regard to claim 24, Haglid shows multiple dampers with first and second positions to control the air passing through the ventilator. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 30-33 are allowed. Claims 10,23 and 25-29 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach the claimed configuration of the recirculator of claim 10 or the dampers on a common shaft. The prior art also fails to teach the method for defrosting a recovery core even though the structure for performing the method is seen to be rendered obvious. Haglid teaches a defrosting of the recovery heat exchanger but cannot be said to teach the controlling of dampers that do not exist in Haglid. Haglid uses a motor for each damper. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed February 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states that the new claims include previously indicated allowable subject matter, but the new claims eliminate structure from base claims that was seen as required for allowablity. For example claim 21 does not claim a recovery core that was seen as required for allowability. 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 WILLIAM C DOERRLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-5. 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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at (571) 272-6928. 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. /WILLIAM C DOERRLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 10, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent RE50847
METHOD OF INSTALLING A MULTI-BOWL WELLHEAD ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590718
Air conditioning systems for rooms
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent RE50828
DRIVING-SIDE PULLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent RE50827
ONE TRIP LOCKDOWN SLEEVE AND RUNNING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571574
ICE MAKER AND REFRIGERATOR INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 398 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month