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 § 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.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 19: In lines 2-3, the recitation “the wall of the heat exchanger case” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 17-19 and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0226749 A1 (Lee).
With respect to claim 17: Lee discloses a storehouse comprising: a first space (cooling storage 25) configured to provide a space in which goods are stored (food @ [0016]); a second space (space accommodating evaporator 17) configured to provide a space in which a first heat exchanger (evaporator 17 and/or the heat exchanger 19 thereof) is accommodated; a first wall (rear wall of refrigerator body 11) defining at least a part of the first space (defines the rear part of storage 25); a second wall (at least the bottom wall of body 11, one or more of the plurality of walls forming evaporator box 21, and/or cover 22 – may include other walls/structures) defining at least a part of the second space, the second wall including a heat exchanger case in which the first heat exchanger is disposed (box 21 and cover 22 form “a heat exchanger case” as claimed, in which evaporator 17 and heat exchanger 19 are disposed); and a passage (Figs. 6-8: passage defined by aligned openings 30b and 24b) through which a fluid (air) received from the first space flows into the heat exchanger case (Figs. 6-8: air flows from cooling storage 25 into evaporator box 21 via aligned openings 30b and 24b), the passage including a through hole (opening 24b) formed in the heat exchanger case (in cover 22), wherein the second wall includes a partition (bottom wall of body 11 - has openings 30a, 30b therein) that separates the first space from the second space (at least Figs. 6-8), wherein the heat exchanger case includes a first surface (upper surface of cover 22) to face the partition (Figs. 6-8) and a second surface (lower surface of cover 22) to face the first heat exchanger (Figs. 6-8), and wherein the through hole includes a first end (upper end of opening 24b) formed in the first surface of the heat exchanger case (Figs. 6-8) and a second end (lower end of opening 24b) formed in the second surface of the heat exchanger case (Figs. 6-8).
With respect to claim 18: Lee discloses an additional hole (opening 30b) formed in the partition (Figs. 6-8), wherein the through hole opens to the additional hole (opening 24b opens to opening 30b).
With respect to claim 19: Lee discloses wherein the wall of the heat exchanger case (cover 22) is filled with an insulating material ([0028]: “evaporator box 21 is covered by an insulation cover 22 airtightly, and the side wall of it is also insulated”; Lee Figs. 7-8 show insulation inside cover 22), and wherein the through hole passes through the insulation material (Figs. 6-8: opening 24b passes through the insulation in cover 22).
With respect to claim 24: Lee discloses wherein the heat exchanger case includes a bottom wall (bottom wall of box 21) on which the first heat exchanger is placed (Figs. 7-8) and at least one side wall (multiple “side walls” as claimed: the left side wall of box 21, the right side wall of box 21, the front side wall of box 21, the rear side wall of box 21, and cover 22 as a top side wall of the “heat exchanger case”) connected to the bottom wall (Fig. 8), and wherein the through hole is formed in the at least one side wall (opening 24b is in cover 22).
With respect to claim 25: Lee discloses wherein the first surface include a top surface of the at least one side wall (top/upper surface of cover 22), and wherein the second surface includes an inner surface of the at least one side wall (lower/inner surface of cover 22). The lower surface of cover 22 is interpreted as “an inner surface” as claimed because said lower surface faces the inside (interior) of the “heat exchanger case”.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0226749 A1 (Lee) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of US 2,767,558 A (Wallenbrock).
With respect to claim 24: In the rejection of claim 24 under 25 U.S.C. § 102 above, Lee’s cover 22 is interpreted as comprised in “at least one side wall” as claimed. If cover 22 is held to not meet “at least one side wall” as claimed, Lee would not anticipate claim 24.
Wallenbrock shows it is known in the art to have air enter a heat exchanger case (walls forming air-cooling compartment 28) through the front thereof, through a screen 31. The front of the screen 31 is exposed to the refrigerated compartment (Wallenbrock Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee’s refrigerator to have the front of box 21 exposed to the cooling storage 25 via a screen 31, as an obvious variation of how air enters the box that holds the evaporator (to thereby cool said air with the evaporator).
Such a modification meets wherein the heat exchanger case includes a bottom wall (bottom wall of box 21) on which the first heat exchanger is placed (Figs. 7-8) and at least one side wall (multiple “side walls” as claimed: the left side wall of box 21, the right side wall of box 21, the front side wall of box 21, and the rear side wall of box 21) connected to the bottom wall (Fig. 8), and wherein the through hole is formed in the at least one side wall (the modified “through hole” is in the front wall of box 21).
With respect to claim 25: Lee, as modified, meets wherein the first surface include a top surface of the at least one side wall (top/upper surface of cover 22), and wherein the second surface includes an inner surface of the at least one side wall (lower/inner surface of cover 22). The lower surface of cover 22 is interpreted as “an inner surface” as claimed because said lower surface faces the inside (interior) of the “heat exchanger case”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-16, 23, and 26-27 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The claim objections made in the previous Office action are withdrawn, as being overcome by the latest claim amendments.
The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) made in the previous Office action are withdrawn, as being overcome by the latest claim amendments.
The rejections of claims 1, 13, and the dependents thereof under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) made in the previous Office action are withdrawn, as being overcome by the latest claim amendments. Claims 1, 13, and the dependents thereof are allowed.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s arguments against the rejections of claim 17 and the dependents thereof under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).
At page 21, the Applicant construes Lee’s openings 30a and 24a to combine as an inlet passage. However, see Lee Fig. 8. Openings 30a and 24a combine to define an outlet passage from the box 21.
At pages 21-22, the Applicant alleges that Lee does not disclose a passage through which a fluid received from the first space flows into the heat exchanger case, the passage including a through hole formed in the heat exchanger case, wherein the second wall includes a partition that separates the first space from the second space, wherein the heat exchanger case includes a first surface to face the partition and a second surface to face the first heat exchanger, and wherein the through hole includes a first end formed in the first surface of the heat exchanger case and a second end formed in the second surface of the heat exchanger case, as recited in claim 17.
However, see Lee Figs. 6-8. Openings 30b and 24b combine to define a passage through which a fluid (air) received from the first space (cooling storage 25) flows into the heat exchanger case (into box 21 and cover 22), the passage including a through hole (opening 24b) formed in the heat exchanger case (opening 24b is in cover 22), wherein the second wall includes a partition (bottom wall of body 11, has openings 30a and 30b therein) that separates the first space from the second space, wherein the heat exchanger case includes a first surface (upper surface of cover 22) to face the partition and a second surface (lower surface of cover 22) to face the first heat exchanger, and wherein the through hole includes a first end (upper end of opening 24b) formed in the first surface of the heat exchanger case and a second end (lower end of opening 24b) formed in the second surface of the heat exchanger case.
Ergo, the rejections of claims 17 and the dependents thereof under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) are maintained. The remaining claims are allowed.
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 ANDREW ROERSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-3185. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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, Daniel Troy can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/ANDREW ROERSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637