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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/11/2026 has been entered.
Applicant’s amendment filed 6/11/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-7 are pending. Claims 3-4 and 6 remain withdrawn from further consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 5 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Kaymiya et al. (US 5,307,870A) in view of GB 1184125A (hereinafter, GB’125).
Kaymiya discloses (figures 9-10 and figure B shown below) a heat exchanger comprising an inner fin (46) having heat transference and disposed in a flat passage (22), wherein the inner fin (46) is formed by a plurality of fin portions having a convex shape formed by a top surface portion and a side surface portion and having a hollow inside the convex shape (see figure A); when a direction in which the plurality of fin portions are formed and lined to be continuous via a coupling portion is defined as a first direction and a direction in which slits are formed between the plurality of fins portions and lined is defined as a second direction, the plurality of fin portions are arranged at a predetermined interval in the second direction (theta shown in figure 10); a predetermined fin interval is provided between the fin portions and the slit is formed in an end portion of the predetermined fin interval (see figure B); and the inner fin is arranged such that the first direction and the second direction respectively forms an acute angle (theta or 90-theta, see figures 9,10, column 6, lines 65-68 and column 7, lines 2-10) with respect to a flow of a refrigerant flowing in the flat passage. Regarding claim 1, Kaymiya does not disclose that the slit is formed in a portion of the predetermined fin interval such that the fin portions are fully separated. GB’s 125 discloses (figures 1-3) a heat exchanger that has an inner fin (5-1) formed form of a plurality of fins portions lined to be continuous in one direction and fully separated by slits (6-1) in a second direction for a purpose of dividing up the channels into a large number of channels of reduced length, which facilitates flow of the channels and creating turbulence in the flow of liquid . (column 2, lines 4-15). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use GB’s 125 teaching in Kaymiya’s device for a purpose of dividing up the channels into a large number of channels of reduced length, which facilitates flow of the channels and creating turbulence in the flow of liquid.
Regarding claim 2, Kaymiya further discloses (figure 10 or figure A) that in the plurality of fin portion, when a diameter of a largest circle entering the hollow is defined as a first diameter, and a diameter of a largest circle entering a coupling portion connecting the respective side surface portions of the adjacent fin portion is defined as a second diameter, the second diameter has a size greater than or equal to the first diameter. (see figure 10, width of the coupling portion and hollow are the same, basing on the geometrical relationship).
Regarding claim 7, Kaymiya further discloses (figure 10) that the first direction and the second direction form a right angle. (a rectangular shape shown in figure 10).
++
PNG
media_image1.png
736
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: the modified figure corresponds to figure 10 with limitation shown.
PNG
media_image2.png
608
626
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure B: the modified figure corresponds to figure 9 with limitations shown.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaymiya and GB’s 125 and further in view of Mizuno et al. (US 9,818,673B2). Kaymiya and GB’s 125 substantially discloses all of applicant’s claimed invention as discussed above except for the limitation of a power conversion device comprises the heat exchanger. Mizuno discloses (figures 3 and 6) a heat exchanger that has inner fins (29) provided within a passage (24) that is used in a power conversion device for a purpose cooling a semiconductor module (5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Mizuno’s teaching in the combination device of Kaymiya and GB’s 125 for a purpose of cooling a semiconductor module.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THO V DUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-4793. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 10-6PM.
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, Atkisson Jianying can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/THO V DUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights