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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 3-5, 11-15, 17 and 19 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/06/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-2, 6-10, 16 and 18) in the reply filed on 08/06/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that search the entire application could be made without series burden. This is not found persuasive because the search and/or examination burden for distinct inventions require a different field of search (i.e., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resource, or employing different search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-10, 16 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “each of the terminals is connected to the extending portion” at lines 1-15. However, claim 1 further recites “at least a part of each of the electrode layers has an extending portion” at lines 11-12. Then, it is unclear which extending portion the terminals is connected to. Does that mean each of the terminals is connected to only one of the extending portion. Or does that mean each of the terminals is connected to each respective of the extending portion? For examining purpose, examiner has interpreted that the above claim limitation to be “each of the terminals is connected to each respective of the extending portion”.
Claim 10 recites “the material being substantially free of lead”. However, the term "substantially perpendicular" in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially free of lead" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshimura discloses “a heater element” (fig.2), comprising:
“a honeycomb structure” (fig.2 and abstract, i.e., A ceramic heater 11 made of a honeycomb-shaped ceramic) comprising “an outer peripheral wall” (fig.1, 17 pointed at an outer peripheral wall) and “partition walls” (annotated fig.3) disposed on “an inner side of the outer peripheral wall” (annotated fig.3 shows the partition walls on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall), “the partition walls defining a plurality of cells” (annotated fig.3), “each of the cells extending from a first end face to a second end face” (refers to left face and right face of heater element in fig.1) to form a flow path, “the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls being made of a material having a PTC property” (on page 7, A heater with a PTC characteristic );
“a pair of electrode layers” (Electrodes 12) provided on “the outer peripheral wall” (17) and “the partition walls” (annotated fig.3) on “the first end face and the second end face” (refers to left face and right face of heater element in fig.1); and
“terminals” (13) capable of electrically connecting “the electrode layers” (12) to “a conducting wire” (The electrode plate 13 attached to the electrode 12 is connected to the lead wire 20),
wherein “at least a part of each of the electrode layers” (electrodes 12)
wherein “each of the terminals” (13) 13 disposed to face a side surface of the honeycomb structure. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a dried state of a rectangular parallelepiped honeycomb-shaped ceramic molded product.).
Yoshimura is silent regarding at least a part of each of the electrode layers has an extending portion extending outwardly from an outer edge of each of the first end face and the second end face; each of the terminals is connected to the extending portion.
KIDA et al. teaches “at least a part of each of the electrode layers” (31 includes 31a and 31b) has “an extending portion” (annotated fig.25) extending outwardly from “an outer edge of each of the first end face and the second end face” (annotated fig.25 shows the location of an extending portion. fig.24, shows the extending portion extends outwardly from an outer edge of each of the first end face (refers to front face) and the second end face (refers to back face)); “each of the terminals is connected to each respective of the extending portion” (Please see 35 USC 112b above for examiner’s interpretation. annotated fig.25 shows each of the terminals is connected to each respective extending portion). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with KIDA et al., by replacing Yoshimura’s terminal with KIDA et al.’s terminal with extending portion, to provide desired shape and length of terminal for electrical connection based on design specification.
PNG
media_image1.png
1626
1084
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1440
1088
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Takase et al. (US 20170260887).
Regarding claim 2, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for an insulating portion provided between a side surface of the honeycomb structure and each of the terminals.
Takase et al. teaches “an insulating portion” (fig.6, 17) provided between “a side surface of the honeycomb structure” (the honeycomb substrate 2) and “each of the terminals” (fig.6, 11. There are two terminals one on the top and another on the bottom).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Takase et al., to adding Takase et al.’s insulating portion to Yoshimura’s terminals, to protect connections from short circuits and electric shock.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Mori et al. (US 2019/0368403).
Regarding claim 6, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for each of the electrode layers has a two-layer structure.
Mori et al. teaches “each of the electrode layers has a two-layer structure” (4 includes 4a and 4b. [0041], i.e., . The first base layer 4a is a layer with a resistance value adjusted to an intermediate value so that current that has flowed through the second base layer 4b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Mori, by replacing Yoshimura’s electrode layers with Mori et al.’s electrode layers, to allow current from comb-shaped electrode to more easily flow through the second base layer and reduce energy loss as heat (para.0043) as taught by Mori et al.
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Takase (US 2019/0299200).
Regarding claim 7, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the honeycomb structure has a thickness of the partition wall of 0.125 mm or less, a cell density of 93 cells/cm2 or less, and a cell pitch of 1.0 mm or more.
Takase teaches “the honeycomb structure has a thickness of the partition wall of 0.125 mm or less, a cell density of 93 cells/cm2 or less” ([0100], i.e., Further, the thickness of the partition wall of the honeycomb structure was 90 μm, and the cell density was 90 cells/cm.sup.2.), and “a cell pitch of 1.0 mm or more” (In this case, figs.2-6 show the cell is a square cell. For a square lattice, the area of a single cell unit is simply (A = P2). In this case, a cell density (N) = 90 cells/cm². Pitch (P) =
1
/
N
. Thus, P =
1
/
90
= 0.1054 cm or 1.054 mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Takase, by modifying Yoshimura’s dimension and configuration of honeycomb structure according to Takase’s dimension and configuration of honeycomb structure, to improve isostatic strength or a fracture strength under fluid pressure (para.0100) as taught by Takase.
Regarding claim 9, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the honeycomb structure has a volume resistivity of 0.5 to 200 Ω·cm at 25°C.
Takase teaches “the honeycomb structure has a volume resistivity of 0.5 to 200 Ω·cm at 25°C” ([0101] Further, the electric resistivity of each of the electrode portions of the honeycomb structures of Comparative Examples and Examples was measured at room temperature (25° C.), and it was 1.0 Ω·cm for all of Comparative Examples and Examples. Table 1 shows end region A can be 100, central region B can be 100 which is within the range of 0.5 to 200 Ω·cm at 25°C). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Takase, by modifying Yoshimura’s honeycomb volume resistivity according to Takase’s honeycomb volume resistivity, to provide optimal trade-off between joule heating and electrode losses or a high efficiency heater.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Takase (US 2017/0260887).
Regarding claim 8, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the honeycomb structure has a thickness of the partition wall of 0.14 to 0.36 mm, a cell density of 2.54 to 46.5 cells/cm2, and an opening ratio of the cells of 80% or more.
Takase teaches “the honeycomb structure has a thickness of the partition wall of 0.14 to 0.36 mm” ([0075] In addition, the thickness of the partition wall 4 of the honeycomb substrate 2 is not particularly limited, but is preferably 0.1 to 1 mm. examiner can select the thickness of partition wall to be 0.15 mm), “a cell density of 2.54 to 46.5 cells/cm2” ([0076] The cell density of the honeycomb substrate 2 (the number of the cells per unit cross section area) is not particularly limited, but is preferably in a range of 25 to 2000 cells/square inch (4 to 320 cells/cm.sup.2). Examiner can select the cell density to be “10 cells/cm2”), and “an opening ratio of the cells of 80% or more” (Examiner noted that the thickness of the partition wall can be 0.15 mm and cell density can be 10 cells/cm2 which is 10 mm2. For a square cell, the pitch (the distance from the center of one partition wall to the next) is the square root of the total area per cell: L =
10
m
m
2
=
3.162
m
m
. Calculate the cell opening width (d). The partition wall thickness (t) is 0.2 mm. The opening width of a single cell is the pitch minus one partition wall thickness: d= L-t = 3.162 mm -0.2 mm – 2.962 mm. Calculate the opening ratio of the core matrix (known as the open frontal area percentage) is the ratio of the open area of a single cell to its total area: opening ratio = d2/L2 = (2.962 mm)2 / 10 mm2 = 0.8775. So that the opening ratio is about 87.75 %). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Takase, by modifying honeycomb structure according to Takase’s honeycomb structure, to provide sufficient mechanical strength (para.0075) as taught by Takase.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) in view of KIDA et al. (US 20130287378) as applied in claim 1 above, and further in view of Shioi et al. (US 4232214).
Regarding claim 10, modified Yoshimura discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the material having the PTC property is a material containing barium titanate as a main component, the material being substantially free of lead.
Shioi et al. teaches “the material having the PTC property is a material containing barium titanate as a main component, the material being substantially free of lead” (claim 1, i.e., A heating element comprising a semiconductor ceramic body of a honeycomb structure, the material of said semiconductor ceramic body having a positive temperature coefficient of resistance over a Curie point and composed of barium titanate). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Yoshimura with Shioi et al., by modifying Yoshimura’s PTC material property according to Shioi et la.’s PTC material property, to provide unique positive temperature coefficient of resistance effect to act as self-regulating semiconductor heating element.
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taguchi (US 20130186966) in view of Yoshimura (JP H0510596 A) and KIDA et al. (US 20130287378).
Regarding claim 16, Taguchi discloses “a heater unit comprising the two or more heater elements” (Taguchi, [0128] FIG. 9B shows a schematic view of a car-mounted heater that is configured with heater units 80 ) “according to claim 1” (as set forth in claim 1 above, the combination of Yoshimura and KIDA et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1. the combination of Yoshimura and KIDA et al. teaches the configuration of a heater unit. Taguchi teaches there can be more than one heater unit).
Regarding claim 18, Taguchi discloses “a heater system” (abstract and [0112] FIG. 6 shows a specific example of attaching the car-mounted heater described above to a vehicle, such as an automobile. The case 50 having the heater unit 20 housed therein is connected to a circulation path 6.) “for heating a vehicle interior” (intended use. [0002] In general, as a main heat source for heating inside of an automobile, a hot water heater is used that utilizes exhaust heat of engine cooling water to heat air), comprising:
“the heater element according to claim 1” (as set forth in claim 1 above, the combination of Yoshimura and KIDA et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1. Please see claim 1 rejections above) or the heater unit comprising the two or more heater elements;
“an inflow pipe for communicating an outside air introduction portion or a vehicle interior with an inflow port of the heater element or the heater unit” (fig.3B shows inflow pipe 51 with an inflow port 46a of the heater unit);
“a battery for applying a voltage to the heater element or the heater unit” ([0115] At this time, by supply of the power from the battery mounted in the vehicle to the heater unit 20); and
“an outflow pipe” (52) for communicating “an outflow port of the heater element or the heater unit” (fig.3B, 47a) with “the vehicle interior” ([0002] In general, as a main heat source for heating inside of an automobile, a hot water heater is used that utilizes exhaust heat of engine cooling water to heat air).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights