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 § 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.
Claims 1-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by FOR1 (JP2012229897A – provided by Applicant in the IDS).
Regarding claim 1, FOR1 teaches a heat exchanger (25, Fig. 1, see Description) comprising:
a heat transfer tube allowing a refrigerant to flow (31, Fig. 4, see Description); and
a fin having through holes that are aligned in columns in a second direction crossing a first direction in which air flows (38, Fig. 5, see Description),
the through holes including: first through holes each penetrated by the heat transfer tube in a thickness direction of the fin; and second through holes not penetrated by the heat transfer tube (see 38a, 38b, Fig. 5, see Description, “The plurality of heat transfer tubes (31) are disposed so as to penetrate through the plurality of holes (38a) formed in each heat transfer fin (38). The suppression area | region (37) is comprised by the part (38c) in which the hole (38b) through which the said heat exchanger tube (31) is not penetrated was formed among the heat transfer fins (38)”),
wherein the fin comprises:
a first region having the first through holes (see Annotated Fig. A below); and
a second region having the second through holes (see Annotated Fig. A below);
PNG
media_image1.png
646
269
media_image1.png
Greyscale
one or both ends of everyone one of the second region in the first direction are adjacent to the first region, and both ends of the second region in the second direction are adjacent to the first region (see Annotated Fig. A above, the Examiner notes that the first region and the second regions can be arbitrarily defined as the fin can feature a number of regions, and the only distinction in the first region and second region relate to the through-holes).
Regarding claim 2, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 1, wherein the first through holes include an outlet through hole through which the heat transfer tube penetrates and at which a refrigerant evaporated in the heat exchanger exits, and the outlet through hole is adjacent to the first region in the first direction (see Fig. 6, see Description, “The inflowing refrigerant flows while meandering along the refrigerant flow path formed in the third heat transfer tube group (35) and above the heat transfer tube row (35a). The refrigerant flowing into the uppermost heat transfer tube (31) of the heat transfer tube array (35a) flows from the outlet end of the uppermost heat transfer tube (31) toward the liquid side header (36). The refrigerant that has flowed into the liquid side header (36) is divided into eight refrigerant flow paths. The divided refrigerant flows toward the first heat transfer tube group (33) and the second heat transfer tube group (34)”).
Regarding claim 3, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 2, wherein the outlet through hole is adjacent to a windward side of the first region (see Description, “According to a third invention, in the first or second invention, the refrigerant path (30) is configured by disposing the supercooling path (35) on the windward side of the air”).
Regarding claim 4, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 1, wherein the through holes in a column on a windward side of the heat exchanger are staggered with respect to the through holes in a column on a leeward side of the heat exchanger (see Fig. 6 which shows the through-holes staggered, see Description which notes the leeward side is considered the left side in Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10, FOR1 teaches an air conditioner (see Title) comprising: a refrigerant circuit (10, Fig. 1) comprising a compressor (21, Fig. 1, see Description), a heat source heat exchanger (23, Fig. 1, see Description), an expansion valve (24, Fig. 1, see Description), and a utilization heat exchanger (25, Fig. 1, see Description) connected in a mentioned order, wherein the utilization heat exchanger comprises the heat exchanger according to claim 1.
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.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FOR1 in view of FOR2 (JP2015137806A – provided by Applicant in the IDS).
Regarding claim 5, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 1, but does not teach that the fin comprises a narrow portion having a smaller width than an average width of the fin in the first direction, and the first through holes include a narrow portion through hole closest to the narrow portion.
FOR2 teaches an air conditioner indoor unit (FOR2, Title) which features a heat exchanger (FOR2, 13, Fig. 4, see Description) that comprises a fin (FOR2, 20, Fig. 3, see Description) which comprises a narrow portion having a smaller width than an average width of the fin in the first direction (see the edge of the fin located at, at least, the area of 21j in Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide FOR1 with the fin having a narrow portion having a smaller width than an average width of the fin in the first direction, as taught by FOR2, in order to increase the turbulence in air flow by varying the width thereby increasing the rate of heat transfer in the heat exchanger.
FOR1 as modified teaches the first through holes include a narrow portion through hole closest to the narrow portion, as FOR2 teaches the narrow limitation and FOR1 teaches the first through-holes.
Regarding claim 6, FOR1 as modified teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 5, wherein the fin is bent in the first direction at the narrow portion (see FOR2, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 5, wherein the first through holes include an inlet through hole through which the heat transfer tube penetrates and at which a refrigerant evaporated in the heat exchanger enters, and the narrow portion through hole is the inlet through hole (met through the combination as Fig. 5 of FOR1 teaches the inlet as required, and through the combination with FOR2 which teaches the narrow portion, the resultant structure reads on the claim).
Regarding claim 8, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 7, wherein the narrow portion through hole is adjacent in the first direction to one of the second region (met through the combination with FOR2 which teaches the narrow portion, the resultant structure reads on the claim).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FOR1, alone.
Regarding claim 9, FOR1 teaches the heat exchanger according to claim 1, wherein the first through holes include an inlet through hole through which the heat transfer tube penetrates and at which a refrigerant evaporated in the heat exchanger enters (see Fig. 6 which shows the arrow indicating the inlet), and in a column on a leeward side of the heat exchanger (see Fig. 6, see Description).
FOR1 does not specifically teach the inlet through hole is disposed: in a region where air passing the heat exchanger has air flow speed higher than average air flow speed. However, the claimed position and regio of where the inlet through-hole is disposed is merely a result effective variable, the general conditions of which are recognized by the prior art. Namely, the claim requires the heat exchanger having a region where air passing has an air flow speed, which is met by FOR1. Therefore, it is not patentably distinguishable to claim an application specific area of the heat exchanger where the air flow speed is higher than average air flow speed. Thus, making it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide FOR1 with the inlet through hole is disposed: in a region where air passing the heat exchanger has air flow speed higher than average air flow speed, in order to assess how this impacts the desired optimization of the heat exchanger.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FOR1 in view of FOR3 (WO2016079834A1 – provided by Applicant in the IDS).
Regarding claim 11, FOR1 teaches the air conditioner according to claim 10, but does not teach a control unit configured to control an opening degree of the expansion valve such that a refrigerant that evaporates in the utilization heat exchanger and that flows out of the heat transfer tube serving has a dryness degree equal to or more than a predetermined value.
FOR3 teaches an air conditioner (FOR3, Title) which features a control unit configured to control an opening degree of the expansion valve (FOR3, see Description, “a controller for controlling the temperature of the refrigerant flowing into the expansion device And a control unit configured to control an opening degree of the expansion device based on detection results of the detection device and the first temperature detection device”) such that a refrigerant that evaporates in the utilization heat exchanger and that flows out of the heat transfer tube serving has a dryness degree equal to or more than a predetermined value (FOR3, see Description, “Therefore, the air conditioner 100 according to the present embodiment can independently control the degree of opening of the expansion devices 4a, 4b by supercooling degree control. In the case of controlling the degree of opening of the expansion devices 4a, 4b by supercooling degree control, if the amount of refrigerant filled in the refrigeration cycle circuit 1 is known, the control target range of the degree of supercooling (the above), It is possible to change the state of the refrigerant flowing in the vicinity of the outlet of the indoor heat exchangers 5 a, 5 b functioning as the evaporator to an arbitrary state. Therefore, in the air conditioner 100 according to the present embodiment, there is no need to change the refrigerant flowing in the vicinity of the outlets of the indoor heat exchangers 5 a, 5 b to gaseous refrigerant. In the air conditioner 100 according to the present embodiment, the refrigerant (point F in FIG. 2) flowing in the vicinity of the outlets of the indoor heat exchangers 5a, 5b is brought into a saturated vapor state, for example, or even when the liquid is backed up, the compressor 2 Liquid phase two-phase refrigerant having a degree of dryness (eg, dryness degree of 0.9 or more) that does not interfere with the gas-liquid two-phase refrigerant”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide FOR1 with a control unit which controls the expansion valve to have a dryness equal or more than a predetermined value, as taught by FOR3, in order to maintain the desired lubrication of the refrigerant in the system which thereby increases the efficiency of the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments are directed to the 35 USC 102 rejection of claim 1. Applicant argues that claim 1 as amended overcomes the rejection of rejection, and notes that Miyatani does not teach the amendment to the construction of the heat exchanger as claimed. Further, Applicant notes that some of the non through-holes 38b are not in a region of the through-holes 38a in the airflow direction in Fig. 5. See Applicant Remarks, pg. 9. The Examiner has respectfully found the argument unpersuasive. The Examiner notes that in light of the amendment, the previous interpretation of the first and second region is moot. Further, an Annotated Figure is provided above in the rejection which shows 38b in the same region of 38a and meeting the amendments to the claim. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
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 NAEL N BABAA whose telephone number is (571)270-3272. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 EST.
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.
/NAEL N BABAA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763