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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 7/31/2026 are entered.
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.
Claim 10 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. Specifically, claim 10 recites “the two condensed adapters”. However, only one adapter is found in the preceding claims. The Examiner searched the specification, and found no corresponding subject matter. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected as indefinite.
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) 1-5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park (KR 102136170 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches an air heating apparatus (the assembly shown in FIG. 35) comprising: a burner (FIG. 35, mix chamber 1000 includes a burner 1300) configured to cause combustion reaction; a heat exchange part (FIG. 35, the assembly of heat exchanger 2000) configured to receive heat from a combustion gas generated by the combustion reaction so as to heat water; a heating heat exchanger (FIG. 35, the heat exchanger 2000) configured to receive the water heated by the heat exchange part so as to be heat-exchanged with air to be discharged for heating (FIG. 35, during the heat exchange process, the water received by the exchanger 2000 exchanges heat with the air-containing mixture, both of which are discharged following (i.e., for) the reaction and heat exchange); a fan (FIG. 35, blower 7000) configured to blow the air to the heating heat exchanger (the blower 7000 blows an air mixture into the combustion chamber for heat exchange); a condensed water receiver (FIG. 35, condensate receiver 3000) configured to collect and discharge condensed water generated in the heat exchange part; a case (FIG. 35, the upper exterior of the assembly displayed) in which the burner, the heat exchange part, the heating heat exchanger, the fan, and the condensed water receiver are embedded; and a condensed water trap (FIG. 35, the terminus of the condensate outlet 3100) disposed outside the case and configured to receive the condensed water transferred from the condensed water receiver so as to provide a trap configured to block leakage of the combustion gas.
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches that the condensed water receiver comprises: a receiving body (FIG. 35, the body of the condensate receiver 3000) coupled to a lower side of the heat exchange part to receive the condensed water dropping from the heat exchange part; and a receiving boss (FIG. 35, the diagonal stepped section of the condensate receiver 3000) extending in an inclined direction with respect to a lower side from a lower end of the receiving body so that the condensed water is discharged from the receiving body.
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches that a bottom surface of the receiving body is inclined downward from a circumference toward the receiving boss (FIG. 35).
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches that the receiving body comprises: a receiving part (FIG. 35, the body of the condensate receiver 3000) disposed below the heat exchange part; and a discharge part (FIG. 35, the area above the condensate outlet 3100) connected to the receiving part and connected to an exhaust duct (FIG. 35, exhaust duct 4000) configured to discharge the combustion gas, wherein the receiving boss extends from the discharge part.
Regarding claim 5, Park teaches that a lower end of the receiving boss is disposed below the receiving part (FIG. 35).
Regarding claim 14, Park teaches that the inner space of the case comprises: a heat cell space (the bottom portion of the inner space of the assembly o FIG. 34) in which the burner, the heat exchange part, and the condensed water receiver are embedded; a heating space (FIG. 35, the volume above exhaust guide 3300) which is divided from the heat cell space by a vertical division plate (FIG. 35, the exhaust guide 3300) and in which the heating heat exchanger is embedded; a fan space (FIG. 34, the interior volume of blower 7000) which communicates with the case and in which the fan is embedded; and a water space (FIG. 35, the interior volume of the condensate receiver 3000) divided from the heat cell space by a horizontal division plate (FIG. 35, lower pipe 2700).
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) 6-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park as applied to claims 1-5 and 14 above, and further in view of Dempsey (US 4603680 A).
Regarding claim 6, Park fails to teach a condensed water adapter installed in the case below a lower end of the receiving boss; an internal condensed water tube configured to connect the condensed water adapter to the lower end of the receiving boss; and an external condensed water tube configured to connect the condensed water adapter to the condensed water trap.
However, Dempsey teaches a condensed water adapter (FIG. 2, the assembly of the drain tube 194 and the condensate trap assembly 110) installed in the case below a lower end of the receiving boss; an internal condensed water tube (FIG. 2, the drain tube 194) configured to connect the condensed water adapter to the lower end of the receiving boss; and an external condensed water tube (FIG. 2, the tube of the condensate water trap assembly 110) configured to connect the condensed water adapter to the condensed water trap.
At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park by connecting a flexible tube to the water reservoir, as taught by Dempsey, with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Park with these aforementioned teachings of Dempsey with the motivation of using a flexible and easily replaceable part to direct the water.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that an inner space of the case comprises a heat cell space (the bottom portion of the inner space of the assembly o FIG. 34), in which the burner, the heat exchange part, and the condensed water receiver are embedded, and a water space (FIG. 35, the interior volume of the condensate receiver 3000) divided from the heat cell space by a horizontal division plate (FIG. 35, lower pipe 2700), and the air heating apparatus further comprises a support protrusion (the outer walls of the lower pipe 2700) protruding upward from a top surface of the horizontal division plate to support the internal condensed water tube.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the support protrusion is provided in plurality (FIG. 35, the multiple sections of the perimeter wall), the plurality of support protrusions are disposed side by side at predetermined intervals, and heights of the plurality of support protrusions decrease as being closer to the condensed water adapter (FIG. 35, the lower stepped section of the wall is closer to the tubes in the above combination and is shorter).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the support protrusion is provided in plurality (FIG. 35, the multiple sections of the perimeter wall), and a height of the support protrusion, which is the closest to the receiving boss, of the plurality of support protrusions is higher than that of each of other support protrusions (FIG. 35, the lower stepped section of the wall is closer to the tubes in the above combination and is shorter).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the condensate adapter is provided as two pieces, which are disposed at opposite sides of the condensate receiver, respectively, the internal condensed tube is selectively coupled to one of the two condensed adapters (Dempsey, FIG. 2, the internal flow path of the tube assembly runs through both tube parts), and the plurality of support protrusions comprises a first support protrusion group configured to support the internal condensed water tube when the internal condensed water tube is coupled to one of the two condensed water adapters and a second support protrusion group configured to support the internal condensed water tube when the internal condensed water tube is coupled to the other of the two condensed water adapters (Park, FIG. 35, the portions of the tube 2700 support the assembly, including the tube assembly of the combination above).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the internal condensed water tube is made of a material comprising rubber (Dempsey, FIG. 2, drain tube 194 is rubber).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the condensed water trap is disposed below the condensed water adapter (Dempsey, FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Park and Dempsey teaches that the internal condensed water tube comprises: a boss connection tube part having an upper end coupled to the receiving boss (Dempsey, FIG. 2, the upper portion of drain tube 194); and an adapter connection tube part having an upper end connected to a lower end of the boss connection tube part and a lower end coupled to the condensed water adapter, wherein the boss connection tube part and the adapter connection tube part extend in different directions (Dempsey, FIG. 2, the lower portion of drain tube 194).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, on page 8 of the filed remarks, the Applicant argues that the heat exchanger 2000 of Park does not use the combustion reaction to heat air, but rather a heating medium. However, given the wording of the claim, and broadest reasonable interpretation, Park may be interpreted to read as a heat exchanger exchanging heat to air (as seen above).
Also on page 8, the Applicant argued that the blower 7000 of Park does not blow air to the heat exchanger, but rather a mixture to a combustion chamber. The Examiner notes that the blower sends a mixture including air into a combustion chamber that then pushes the air toward a heat exchanger. Using broadest reasonable interpretation, Park teaches the contents of claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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. WEINERT whose telephone number is (571)272-6988. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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 WEINERT/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/Allen R. B. Schult/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
