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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the two plates are arranged one inside the other in claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 3 recites the limitation “the two plates are arranged one inside the other” which is not described in the specification or drawings as to how two plates are arranged one inside the other. It appears the plates are stacked on top of each other as shown in the drawings rather than inside each other.
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 3, 8 and 11 are 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the plate arranged inside another plate is unclear as to how a solid plate is arranged within another solid plate as claimed.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the same" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the same face" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-7, 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Martins et al. (US Publication No.: 2006/0053833 hereinafter “Martins”).
With respect to claim 1, Martins discloses a heat exchanger for a motor vehicle (Para 0009), the heat exchanger comprising: a first circuit configured to be traversed by a heat-transfer fluid (Fig. 4, first circuit F1 and Para 0047), the first circuit comprising: a first inlet header through which the heat-transfer fluid is admitted into the first circuit (Fig. 4, 12), and a first outlet header through which the heat-transfer fluid leaves the first circuit (Fig. 4, outlet 14), a second circuit configured to be traversed by a heat-transfer fluid (Fig. 4, second circuit F2), that wherein the second circuit is fluidically separate from the first circuit (Fig. 4) and comprises: a second inlet header through which the heat-transfer fluid is admitted into the heat exchanger (Fig. 4, second inlet 20), and a second outlet header through which the heat-transfer fluid leaves the heat exchanger (Fig. 4, second outlet 24), wherein the first circuit or the second circuit comprises an additional header that extends in the same direction as the inlet headers and outlet headers of the first circuit and the second circuit, and wherein the additional header is separate from the inlet and outlet headers (Fig. 4, additional headers 56 and 62).
With respect to claim 2, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the first and second circuits comprise a plurality of chambers linked fluidically to the inlet headers and outlet headers of either the first circuit or the second circuit respectively (Figs. 4-5, chambers within plates 2 for both circuits and Para 0047-0048).
With respect to claim 3, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein each chamber is delimited by at least two plates (Para 0048, Fig. 5 shows two plates 2 on top of each other to form a chamber), wherein each plate comprises a bottom wall surrounded by a raised edge (Para 0043, Fig. 9 shows plates 2 with raised edges 3), wherein the bottom wall comprises one opening per header that at least partially delimits each inlet header or, outlet header or, and additional header (Fig. 5 shows the openings in plates 2 for fluid flow to the headers), and wherein the two plates are arranged one inside the other (Fig. 9 shows plates 2 stacked on top of each other).
With respect to claim 4, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the heat exchanger comprises a first group of chambers and a second group of chambers (Fig. 5, first group of chambers for flow path F1 and second group for F2), and wherein the first group of chambers is separated from the second group of chambers by at least one deflecting plate configured to force the fluid of at least the first circuit or the second circuit to flow in a first flow direction in the first group of chambers and to force the fluid to flow in a second flow direction in the second group of chambers (Fig. 5, plates 2a-2f deflect the fluid into separate chambers).
With respect to claim 5, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 4 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the at least one deflecting plate comprises a bottom wall with no opening in the first inlet header or the second inlet header, depending on the circuit configured to have a second flow direction of the fluid (Fig. 5, plates 2 have no openings for fluid passages to guide the fluid flow into the chambers).
With respect to claim 6, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 2 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the first circuit and the second circuit each comprise an additional header (Fig. 5, headers in 2a-2f).
With respect to claim 7, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 4 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the heat exchanger comprises two deflecting plates, and wherein the deflecting plates are configured to provide a second flow direction to be provided for the fluid of the first circuit and the second circuit (Fig. 5, plates 2a-2f deflect the fluid into separate chambers that are in a cross flow pattern).
With respect to claim 10, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the inlet headers of the first and second circuits each comprise a supply channel configured to supply heat-transfer fluid to the first circuit or the second circuit respectively (Fig. 4, supply channel in 12 and 14), and wherein the outlet headers of the first and second circuits each comprise an outlet channel configured to drain heat-transfer fluid from the first circuit or the second circuit respectively (Fig. 4, outlet channel in 20 and 24).
With respect to claim 12, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the additional header of the first circuit is arranged between the second inlet header and the second outlet header of the second circuit (Fig. 4, 56 and 62 are between the inlet and outlet of the second circuit).
With respect to claim 13, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the additional header of the second circuit is arranged between the first inlet header and the first outlet header of the first circuit (Fig. 4, 56 and 62 are between the inlet and outlet of the first circuit).
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.
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.
Claims 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martins et al. (US Publication No.: 2006/0053833 hereinafter “Martins”). In view of Flik et al. (US Publication No.: 2007/0125527 hereinafter “Flik”).
With respect to claim 8, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 4 as discussed above. Martins does not disclose wherein the first inlet header and the first outlet header of the first circuit are arranged at one and the same first longitudinal end of the heat exchanger, and wherein the second inlet header and the second outlet header of the second circuit are arranged at a second longitudinal end of the heat exchanger, opposite the first longitudinal end.
Flik teaches a stacked plate heat exchanger with two inlets on a top plate and two outlets on a bottom plate (Figs. 1-2, inlets 1 & 2 are on the top plate 5 and outlets 11 and 31 are on the bottom plate or second longitudinal end of the heat exchanger at 6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the inlets and outlets of Martins to be on the same ends as taught by Flik to have a desired fluid flow path of a series flow path (Para 0038 and 0061) and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 9, Martins and Flik teach the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 8 as discussed above. Martins also discloses wherein the additional header is positioned at a longitudinal end opposite the inlet header and the outlet header to which the additional header is fluidically linked (Fig. 4, 56 and 62 are on opposite longitudinal end of 14, 24, 14 and 20).
With respect to claim 11, Martins discloses the heat exchanger as claimed in claim 1 as discussed above. Martins does not disclose wherein the supply channels and the outlet channels are positioned on one and the same face of the heat exchanger.
Flik teaches a stacked plate heat exchanger with two inlets on a top plate and two outlets on a bottom plate or on the same face (Figs. 1-2, inlets 1 & 2 are on the top plate 5 and outlets 11 and 31 are on the bottom plate or second longitudinal end of the heat exchanger at 6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the inlets and outlets of Martins to be on the same face as taught by Flik to have a desired fluid flow path of a series flow path (Para 0038 and 0061) and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE E ROJOHN III whose telephone number is (571)270-5431. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571)272-1184. 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.
/CLAIRE E ROJOHN III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763