Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/624,397

METHOD FOR PRODUCING A FLUID FLOW-THROUGH COMPONENT FOR A HEAT EXCHANGER

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Apr 02, 2024
Examiner
BESLER, CHRISTOPHER JAMES
Art Unit
3726
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mahle International GmbH
OA Round
6 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
587 granted / 864 resolved
-2.1% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
37.2%
-2.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 864 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 10, 12, 14, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “at least one continuous unidirectional fluid channel” in the third paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to, and further define, the “plurality of channels” previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to set forth a second set of ‘channels’ which are separate and independent from the ‘plurality of channels’ previously set forth. Claim 1 recites the limitation “at least one channel region” in the third paragraph of the body of the claim. It is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the limitation to refer to the “plurality of channel regions” previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to set forth a second set of ‘channel regions’ which are separate and independent from the ‘plurality of channel regions’ previously set forth. For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “at least one channel region in the plurality of channel regions.” Claim 1 further recites the limitation “wherein the channel plate comprises a plurality of channels ..., at least one bonding region, and a plurality of channel regions, wherein the plurality of channel regions are spaced from the flat base plate to form the plurality of channels” in the second paragraph of the body of the claim. Examiner notes that the limitation first requires that the ‘channel plate’ comprises ‘a plurality of channels,’ ‘at least one bonding region,’ and ‘a plurality of channel regions.’ The limitation then states that the “plurality of channel regions are spaced from the flat base plate to form the plurality of channels,” wherein the ‘flat base plate’ is separate and independent from the ‘channel plate.’ Because the limitation clearly stats that the ‘plurality of channels’ are part of the ‘channel plate,’ it is unclear as to how the ‘plurality of channels’ are not formed until the “plurality of channel regions are spaced from the flat base plate.” For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “wherein the channel plate comprises a plurality of channel regions and at least one bonding region.” Claim 1 further recites the limitation “... channel plate where the at least one bonding region is to be formed” in the second paragraph of the body of the claim. The limitation is indefinite for several reasons. First, it is unclear as to whether Applicant intends the “channel plate” to refer to the “channel plate” previously set forth in the claim, or whether Applicant intends to set forth a second “channel plate” which is separate and independent from the “channel plate” previously set forth. Secondly, Examiner notes that the claim previously recites “wherein the channel plate comprises ... at least one bonding region.” Therefore, because the ‘channel plate’ already comprises the ‘at least one bonding region,’ it is generally unclear as to Applicant’s intent regarding “where the at least one bonding region is to be formed.” For the purposes of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret the limitation as “... the channel plate at the at least one bonding region.” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5 – 10, 12, 14, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfeiff (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2018/0241103) in view of Schiehlen (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0055314) and Huang (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0404102). As to claim 1, Pfeiff teaches a method for producing component for a heat exchanger through which fluid can flow (figure 3, element 2 being the ‘component’; paragraphs 10, 33, and 35) comprising the following steps: providing a flat base plate and a channel plate (figure 3, element 3 being the ‘base plate’ and element 10 being the ‘channel plate; paragraph 36), wherein the channel plate comprises at least one bonding region and a plurality of channel regions (figure 3, elements 12 being the ‘bonding regions’ and elements 11 being the channel regions’; paragraph 36). However, while Pfeiff further teaches a step of bonding the base plate to the channel plate to delimit at least one continuous fluid channel in at least one channel region of the plurality of channel regions (figure 3, elements 9 being the ‘continuous fluid channels’; paragraph 36), Pfeiff does not teach how to bond. Schiehlen teaches a method for producing a component for a heat exchanger through which fluid can flow (abstract), comprising the following steps: providing a base plate and a channel plate (figure 1, element 3 being the ‘base plate’ and element 2 being the ‘channel plate’; paragraph 30), wherein the channel plate comprises at least one bonding region and a plurality of channel regions (figure 1, portions of element 2 between elements 7 being the ‘bonding region’ and elements 7 being the ‘plurality of channel regions’; paragraph 30); and bonding the base plate to the channel plate to delimit at least one continuous fluid channel in at least one channel region of the plurality of channel regions (figure 1, elements 8 being the ‘continuous fluid channels’; paragraphs 30 and 33). Schehien further teaches that the bonding comprises placing an adhesive layer of on the surface of the channel plate (figure 1, element 4 being the ‘adhesive layer’ and element 2; paragraph 33), wherein the adhesive layer is formed by coating only the channel plate at the at least one bonding region (figure 1, elements 4, 2, and 6; paragraph 33), placing the channel plate on the surface of the base plate such that the channel plate is spaced a distance apart from the base plate to delimit the at least one continuous unidirectional fluid channel in the at least one channel region of the plurality of channel regions, the distance apart is based upon a thickness of the adhesive layer therebetween upon placement of the channel plate on the surface of the base plate, and wherein the adhesive layer bears on the channel plate to obtain a material bond in the bonding region (figure 1, elements 2, 3, 8, and 4; paragraph 34), clamping the channel plate to the base plate, such that the material bond is obtained in the at least the one bonding region between the base plate and the channel plate when the adhesive layer is heated (figure 1, elements 2, 3, and 4; paragraph 34), wherein the thickness of the adhesive layer is within a range of between 5 and 500 micrometers (paragraph 33), which makes obvious a range of 80 to 120 micrometers. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to bond a base plate to a channel plate to form a component for a heat exchanger, as taught by Pfeiff, via the method of Schehien, because Schehien teaches that such a method provides the benefit of forming a very strong bond between the base plate and the channel plate (paragraphs 5 and 21), as desired by Pfeiff. However, while Pfeiff in view of Schehien teaches clamping and heating the channel plate to the base plate to form the material bond, Schehien does not expressly teach how to clamp and heat. Huang teaches a method for producing a component for a heat exchanger through which fluid can flow (abstract), comprising the following steps: providing a base plate and a channel plate (figure 7, element 2 being the ‘base plate’ and element 1 being the ‘channel plate’; paragraphs 31 and 37), wherein an adhesive layer formed by glue is placed on a surface of the channel plate (figure 7, element 3a being the ‘adhesive layer’; paragraph 31), placing the channel plate on a surface of the base plate such that the channel plate is spaced part from the base plate to delimit a fluid channel in a channel region (figure 8, element 12 being the ‘channel region’; paragraphs 38 – 42), wherein the step of placing the channel plate on the surface of the base plate comprises: clamping the channel plate to the base plate, such that a material bond is obtained in at least one bonding region between the base plate and the channel plate when the adhesive layer is heated (figure 8, elements 1, 2, and 3a; paragraphs 38 – 42). Huang further teaches that the steps of clamping and heating are performed in a hot press comprising contact layers (figures 7 – 8, elements 201 and 202 being the ‘hot press,’ see below; paragraphs 38 – 44), wherein the contact layers comprise elastic contact layers (figure 7, element 203; paragraphs 41 – 42). Examiner notes that this can be found because Huang teaches the contact layers comprising an ‘aligning module’ (figure 7, element 203), which acts to change a horizontal position of the contact layers while the contact layers are brought together during the clamping (figure 7, element 203; paragraph 41 – 42). Examiner further notes that “elastic” is commonly defined by Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “accommodating or adaptable” and “capable of ready change.” Because Huang teaches that the contact layers are ‘adaptable’ and ‘capable of ready change’ in regards to their horizontal placement, it is the position of the Examiner that the contact layers of Huang may reasonably be considered to be “elastic” contact layers. PNG media_image1.png 377 894 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to clamp and heat a channel plate to a base plate to form at least bonding region, as taught by Pfeiff in view of Schehien, wherein the clamping and heating are performed in and with the heat press of Huang, because Huang teaches that the given heat press acts to continuously press the entire surface of the base plate and channel plate, such that the adhesive layer is evenly heated and pressed (paragraph 43), which one skilled in the art would recognize provides the benefit of providing a strong and continuous material bond. Examiner notes that one skilled in the art would have known, after performing the steps of clamping and heating, as taught by Pfeiff in view of Schehien and Huang, to allow the base plate and channel plate to cool to an ambient temperature (which Examiner notes is well below 70 °C), as the base plate and channel plate are no longer being actively heated and are ready for use in a heat exchanger. As to claim 2, Examiner notes that the limitations of claim 2 further define the limitation of ‘clamping with a hot press.’ Because Pfeiff in view of Schehien and Huang teaches the alternative embodiment of ‘clamping in a hot press,’ the limitations of claim 2 are not required to show obviousness. As to claim 3, Huang teaches that the clamping the channel plate to the base plate comprises exerting pressure on the bonding regions in the channel plate via the elastic contact layers (paragraphs 38 – 44). As to claim 5, Schehien teaches that the channel plate is provided with at least two of the bonding regions and at least two of the channel regions (figure 1, elements 6 and 7). As to claim 6, Huang teaches that each of the contact layers are elastic contact layers (figure 7, see above; paragraphs 41 – 42). As to claim 7, Huang teaches the base plate and the channel plate being heated to a temperature of 120°C (paragraphs 41 - 42). As to claim 8, Schehien teaches that clamping the base plate to the channel plate comprises the base plate and the channel plate being pressed together with a pressure generated by elastic contact layer of 0.1 – 0.7 N/mm2 (paragraph 34). As to claim 9, neither Schehien or Huang teach the amount of time to place the base plate and the channel plate in the hot press. Examiner takes Official Notice that it is known in the art to place components in a hot press for a first time period of 10 seconds to 30 minutes, so as to ensure that the adhesive layer between the components fully cures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to place the base plate and the channel plate of Schehien in a hot press, as made obvious by Huang, for a first time period of 10 seconds to 30 minutes, so as to ensure that the adhesive layer between the base plate and the channel plate fully cures. As to claim 10, Huang teaches that the hot press has a receiver for the base plate and the channel plate, and a moving step at a spacing to the receiver that can be moved toward the receiver (figures 7 and 8, elements 201, 202, and 203), from which the elastic contact layer projects toward the receiver to press the channel plate against the base plate at the bonding region (figure 7, see above). As to claim 14, Schehien teaches that the glue is applied to the base plate with a roller (paragraph 33). As to claim 26, Schehien teaches the thickness of the adhesive layer is within a range of between 5 and 500 micrometers (paragraph 33), which makes obvious a thickness of 100 micrometers. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed January 28, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, on pages 5 – 7, that the prior art does not teach ‘applying an adhesive layer only to the base plate or channel plate at the bonding region.’ Examiner disagrees. Schehien teaches bonding a flat base plate to a channel plate by placing an adhesive layer of on the surface of the channel plate (figure 1, element 3 being the ‘flat base plate,’ element 2 is the ‘channel plate,’ and element 4 being the ‘adhesive layer’ and element 2; paragraph 33), wherein the adhesive layer is formed by coating only the channel plate at bonding regions of the channel plate (figure 1, elements 6 being the ‘bonding regions’; paragraph 33). Examiner notes that the given limitation allows for the adhesive layer to be applied either to the ‘bonding region of the channel plate’ or any portion or an entirety of the ‘flat base plate.’ 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 CHRISTOPHER BESLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 7:30 pm (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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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. /CHRISTOPHER J. BESLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 02, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 18, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 05, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 26, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jun 26, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 27, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 27, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 28, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595159
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR REBUILDING A SPREADER BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12570069
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR REPLACING STAGE ROLL UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569902
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING STAKING ASSEMBLY, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING HUB UNIT BEARING, STAKING DEVICE, STAKING ASSEMBLY, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569947
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SERVICING ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564887
CHANGER DEVICE FOR CLAMPING HEADS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 864 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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