DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
All of the limitations of claim 20 have been incorporated into claim 16 by the most recent claim amendments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12, 14-15, and 19 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claims 1-12 and 14-15, the prior art does not appear to teach or fully suggest that both the fin and the tube alloys are comprised of only the three elements listed (Zn, Mg, Al) with the proportions used to adjust the relative corrosion potential between the fin and tube.
The prior art teaches that adjusting the relative corrosion potential is a known results effective variable, even directly teaching the recited range (e.g. US 2015/0075760; Para. [0014]). However, the located prior art consistently includes another element in either the fin (e.g. JP 04-259347) or both the fin and tube (e.g. 4,842,185; see Table 1).
Therefore, the specific requirements of the claim that the alloy include only the three elements Zn, Mg, and Al with the relative proportions of those elements creating the recited corrosion potential difference appears to be absent and not fairly suggested in the prior art.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art does not appear to specify a fin comprising only the three elements in the recited ranges for the fin. It is noted that this claim also restricts the tube to the same three elements as they are both recited as the same alloy with only differing wt% of elements.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (US 2015/0075760).
Regarding claim 16, Huang teaches forming a tube and fins from the same aluminum alloy (see abstract; further it is noted that the alloy list for the tube in Para. [0013] includes the 1000 series and for the fin in Para. [0014] includes AA8011 which have identical elemental makeup at differing wt% as claimed) at differing wt% wherein the second corrosion potential of the fins is lower than the first corrosion potential of the tubes by between 10 and 30mV (abstract) resulting in earlier corrosion of the fins than the tubes (inherent).
Regarding claims 17-18, the alloy compositions may include Zn and/or Mg (the alloy types listed in Para. [0013]-[0014] both include these elements; furthermore, the adjustment of the Zn and Mg types is the specific mechanism for adjusting the corrosion potential, see Para. [0014]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Devon Lane whose telephone number is (571)270-1858. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9-4.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571.270.5054. 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.
/DEVON LANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights