Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/577,584

STOREHOUSE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 08, 2024
Priority
Jul 08, 2021 — RE 10-2021-0089706 +1 more
Examiner
VAZQUEZ, ANA M
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
700 granted / 878 resolved
+9.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
903
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
71.3%
+31.3% vs TC avg
§102
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 878 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered. 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, 8-10, 12-14, 16-17 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US 8,336,330). Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a storehouse (refer to fig.2) comprising: a first space (20) configured to provide a space in which goods are stored; a second space (refer to the space where evaporator 23 is located at) configured to provide a space in which a first heat exchanger (23) is accommodated, the second space being fluidly connected to the first space (refer to the solid lined arrows communicating between spaces); a third space (11) configured to provide a space in which a second heat exchanger is accommodated (refer to col. 5, lines 4-8, wherein a condenser is provided); a first wall (compartment door 21 forming the first wall) defining at least a part of the first space (20); a second wall (back wall of the compartment as in fig.2) defining at least a part of the second space; a third wall (bottom wall of compartment 10 as can be seen from fig. 2) defining at least a part of the third space; a partition wall (refer to fig.2 below, wherein the term “partition wall” is being considered as internal wall or barrier that divides an internal cavity into separate compartment or zones) that separates the first space from the second space; and a fan assembly (including first blowing fan 26) disposed on a path through which a fluid in the second space flows out of the second space and including a fan having a blade, wherein the blade includes a part located inside the partition wall (refer to fig. 2, and col. 5, lines 49-52, wherein the first blowing fan 26 is arranged at the first blowing port 25b located in the partition wall). PNG media_image1.png 393 514 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Lee discloses wherein the second space comprises a first region (region accommodating evaporator 23) and a second region (25d) disposed relatively closer to the first space (20) than the first region. Regarding claim 3, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Lee discloses wherein the first region (region accommodating evaporator 23) and the second region (25d) are disposed such that the fluid in the second space passes through the first region (region accommodating evaporator 23) and then flows toward the second region (towards outlets 25c). Regarding claim 4, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Lee discloses wherein the second region (25d) is disposed adjacent to the first region in a horizontal direction (next to each other as in fig. 2). Regarding claim 5, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 4. Further, Lee discloses wherein a direction in which the fluid in the second space flows in the first region of the second space (upwards) is different from a direction in which the fluid flows in the second region (downwards) of the second space. Regarding claim 8, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Lee discloses wherein the second region (25d) of the second space is disposed adjacent to the first region (including evaporator 23) of the second space in a vertical direction (both regions extending vertically next to each other). Regarding claim 9, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 8. Further, Lee discloses wherein a direction in which the fluid in the second space flows in the first region (upwards) is different from a direction in which the fluid flows in the second region (downwards). Regarding claim 10, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 9. Further, Lee discloses wherein the direction in which the fluid in the second space flows in the first region (upwards) is opposite to the direction in which the fluid flows in the second region (downwards). Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses a storehouse (refer to fig.2) comprising: a first space (20) configured to provide a space in which goods are stored; a second space (including evaporator 23) configured to provide a space in which a first heat exchanger (23) is accommodated; a first wall (including door 21) defining at least a part of the first space (20); a second wall (refer to fig. 2 below) defining at least a part of the second space; a fan assembly (including blowing fan 26) disposed on a path through which a fluid flows in or out of the second space; and an air guide (refer to fig. 2 below) configured to change a flow direction of the fluid after passing through the first heat exchanger (23), at least a portion of the air guide being disposed in an inside of the second space (refer to fig. 2 below), wherein the air guide comprises a first surface and a second surface (refer to fig. 2 below), and wherein a direction in which the fluid in the second space flows along the first surface of the air guide (upwards) is opposite to a direction in which the fluid flows along the second surface (downwards) of the air guide. PNG media_image2.png 370 581 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 13, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 12. Further, Lee discloses wherein the air guide comprises a portion of a surface of the second wall (refer to annotated fig.2 above). Regarding claim 14, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 12. Further, Lee discloses wherein the air guide is provided as a separate component coupled to the inside of the second space (refer to fig. 2, wherein the air guide is a portion of the second wall which said wall is a separate component coupled to the inside of the second space). Regarding claim 16, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 12. Further, Lee discloses wherein the first surface of the air guide is disposed closer to the first heat exchanger (23) than the second surface of the air guide (refer to annotated fig. 2 above). Regarding claims 12 and 17, Lee discloses a storehouse (refer to fig.2) comprising: a first space (20) configured to provide a space in which goods are stored; a second space (including evaporator 23) configured to provide a space in which a first heat exchanger (23) is accommodated; a first wall (including door 21) defining at least a part of the first space (20); a second wall (refer to fig. 2 below) defining at least a part of the second space; a fan assembly (including blowing fan 26) disposed on a path through which a fluid flows in or out of the second space; and an air guide (refer to fig. 2 below) configured to change a flow direction of the fluid after passing through the first heat exchanger (23), at least a portion of the air guide being disposed in an inside of the second space (refer to fig. 2 below), wherein the air guide comprises a first surface and a second surface (refer to fig. 2 below), and wherein a direction in which the fluid in the second space flows along the first surface of the air guide (downwards) is opposite to a direction in which the fluid flows along the second surface (upwards) of the air guide, wherein the second surface of the air guide is disposed closer to the fan assembly than the first surface of the air guide (refer to fig. 2 below). PNG media_image3.png 370 581 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 21, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Lee discloses wherein the storehouse includes a refrigerator (refer to fig. 2). Regarding claim 22, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Lee discloses wherein first heat exchanger includes an evaporator, and the second heat exchanger includes a condenser (refer to col. 5, lines 4-8). Regarding claim 23, Lee discloses a storehouse (refer to fig. 2) comprising: a first space (20) configured to provide a space in which goods are stored; a second space (where evaporator 23 is located at) configured to provide a space in which a first heat exchanger (23) is accommodated; a third space (11) configured to provide a space in which a second heat exchanger is accommodated (refer to col. 5, lines 4-8, wherein a condenser is provided); a first wall (21) defining at least a part of the first space (20); a second wall (refer to fig. 2 below) defining at least a part of the second space; a third wall (bottom wall of the cabinet as in fig.2) defining at least a part of the third space (11); a passage (25b) formed through the second wall and a fan assembly disposed on a path through which a fluid in the second space flows out of the second space and including a fan (26), wherein the fan (26) is disposed such that an axis of the fan meets the passage (25b). PNG media_image4.png 346 578 media_image4.png Greyscale 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. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 8,336,330) in view of Ko (US 2021/0131717). Regarding claim 11, Lee meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 8. Further, Lee discloses the first region of the second space (which houses the first heat exchanger), but fails to explicitly disclose a passage provided in the first region of the second space and through which water formed on a surface of the first heat exchanger is discharged to an outside of the second space. However, Ko teaches a refrigerator (refer to fig. 19), including a passage (1170) provided in a space and through which water formed on a surface of a first heat exchanger (1200) is discharged to an outside of the space. One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize that by providing a passage provided in the first region of the second space and through which water formed on a surface of the first heat exchanger is discharged to an outside of the second space, is essential for maintaining efficiency, safety by reducing water damage risk. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lee by providing a passage provided in the first region of the second space and through which water formed on a surface of the first heat exchanger is discharged to an outside of the second space, in order to reduce water damage risk in view of the teachings by Ko along with the knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-7 and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-13, filed on 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-9, 11 and 21-24 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANA M VAZQUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4. 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. /ANA M VAZQUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 08, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Sep 16, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 23, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Dec 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12680742
AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM
1y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674614
COOLING DEVICE WITH A CONDENSER FAN AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A COOLING DEVICE WITH A CONDENSER FAN
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12663198
DEFROST FAN CONTROL
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12663208
Cooler For Holding Beverage Containers
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12644636
REFRIGERATOR
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+17.9%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 878 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month