Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/614,476

Pipeline Device and Refrigeration System Having Same

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Priority
Jun 24, 2022 — CN 202221615067.2 +1 more
Examiner
LEARY, JOSHUA DENNIS
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Midea Group Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allowance Rate
3 granted / 3 resolved
+40.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
14
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
85.3%
+45.3% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 3 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 were received on 22 March 2024. These drawings are acceptable. 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. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. (JP H11759). Regarding claim 1: A pipeline device, comprising: a first cover body comprising a first fitting plate, the first fitting plate having a first recess hollowed in a first direction (First cover body and first fitting plate 10 with a first recess 10a hollowed in a first direction [Fig. 1D]); a second cover body comprising a second fitting plate, the second fitting plate having a second recess hollowed in a direction opposite to the first direction (Second cover body and second fitting plate 20 with a second recess 20a hollowed in an opposite direction [Fig. 1D]), wherein the second recess have a one-to-one correspondence to the first recess, wherein each of the second recess and the corresponding first recess fit with each other to form a complete cavity (First recess 10a and second recess 20a form a complete cavity [Figs. 1B-1D]), wherein an isolation portion is provided on the first fitting plate and the second fitting plate between two adjacent cavities, and wherein a length of the isolation portion is not shorter than a length of any one of the two adjacent cavities (Isolation portion 20d and 10d are same length of two adjacent cavities [Fig. 1A]); and a solder layer provided between the first fitting plate and second fitting plate and used for soldering the first fitting plate and the second fitting plate, wherein the solder layer avoids the cavity (Surface of fitting plate clad with brazing material to be brazed and escape the slit portions [Para. 8, lines 9-13 of translated document]). For the purpose of compact prosecution, if it is seen that there are is not a plurality of recess on the first and second fitting plate, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a plurality of recesses in the fitting plates for multiple refrigerant paths, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding claim 2: The pipeline device according to claim 1, wherein the isolation portions between the two adjacent cavities comprise a first isolation portion provided on the first fitting plate (First isolation portion 10d between cavities 10a [Fig. 1D]) and a second isolation portion provided on the second fitting plate (Second isolation portion 20d on second fitting plate 20 [Fig. 1D]), the first isolation portion and the second isolation portion having a same arrangement path (Same path for the isolation portion at elements 10d and 20d [Fig. 1A and 1D]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-20 allowed. Claims 3-7 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. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance and indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not disclose or reasonably suggest refrigeration pipeline device having the combination of features set forth in claims 3, 8 and 16. JP H11759 to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. may be seen as close prior art in certain aspects but fails to teach the alternating first and second slits along an arrangement path wherein the plurality of first slits face towards the plurality of second spacing portions and the plurality of second slits face towards the plurality of first spacing portions. 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.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gellert (US 4648546) teaches: two plates comprising cavities are brazed together to form a manifold (Abstract). Morrissey (US 20120000566) teaches: two plates comprising opposing recesses to form cavities creating a manifold system that are bonded in a liquid tight fashion via weld (Abstract, Para. 19 and Fig. 8). Hidaka (US 20020108740) teaches: a manifold formed by two piping plates which are welded (Figs. 40-42) or joined by nuts and bolts (Fig. 1 and Para. 298). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA DENNIS LEARY whose telephone number is (571)272-1685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm. 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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. If Craig Schneider cannot be reached, please contact Kenneth Rinehart at 571-272-4881. 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. /JOSHUA D LEARY/Examiner, Art Unit 3753 /CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
2y 9m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 3 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