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 .
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.
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 1-2, 6-11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Himmer (US 2015/0155465).
PNG
media_image1.png
566
899
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Himmer discloses a heat converter in Figures 6-8 and 10-12 comprising:
a flow path member (flow channel 40) including a flow path, and having an upper surface (left surface in Figure 11) and a lower surface (right surface in Figure 11) that are spaced apart from each other in a first direction (left to right in Figure 11) ([79] and [101]), and
a first side surface (top surface in Figures 11-12) and a second side surface (bottom surface in Figures 11-12) that are disposed between the upper surface (left surface in Figures 11-12) and the lower surface (right surface in Figures 11-12) and spaced apart from each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (vertical direction in Figures 11-12);
a first thermoelectric module (thermoelectric module 20 on top surface in Figures 11-12) disposed on the first side surface (top surface in Figures 11-12) of the flow path member (40) ([103]);
a second thermoelectric module (thermoelectric module 20 on bottom surface in Figures 11-12) disposed on the second side surface (bottom surface in Figures 11-12) of the flow path member (40) ([103]);
a first guide member (side walls 22) disposed on the upper surface of the flow path member (Figures 11-12 and [79], [81] and [85]); and
a first shield member disposed between the upper surface of the flow path member and the first guide member (22) (Annotated Figure 6 above shows shield member and guide member, shield member is between flow channel 40 and side walls 22 as shown in Figures 11-12),
wherein the first shield member includes an upper shield surface disposed on the upper surface of the flow path member (Annotated Figure 6 above and Figures 11-12),
a first side shield surface extending from a first end of the upper shield surface and disposed on the first side surface of the flow path member (Figures 6-8 and 11-12), and
a second side shield surface extending from a second end of the upper shield surface and disposed on the second side surface of the flow path member (Figures 6-8 and 11-12),
wherein the first guide member (side walls 22) includes a first inclined surface inclined with respect to the upper shield surface and a second inclined surface inclined with respect to the upper shield surface (see inclines 28a, Figures 6-8 and [79], [81] and [85]), and
wherein the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface are symmetrical to each other (See symmetrical shape of tapered surfaces in Figures 6-8).
It is noted that the term “disposed on” does not require direct contact or a particular order of the layers.
Regarding claim 2, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the first inclined surface is disposed on the first end of the upper shield surface and the second inclined surface is disposed on the second end of the upper shield surface (Figures 6 and 7, opposite ends of shield are attached to first and second inclined surfaces).
Regarding claim 6, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that a distance between the first side shield surface and the second side shield surface of the first shield member along the second direction is greater than a distance between the first side surface and the second side surface of the flow path member (first shield member is wider than the flow path member as shown in Figures 10-12, which results in a larger distance between the side surfaces as claimed).
Regarding claim 7, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the distance between the first side shield surface and the second side shield surface of the first shield member along the second direction is smaller than a maximum distance from an end of the first thermoelectric module to an end of the second thermoelectric module along the second direction (Figures 10-12, distance between outer surfaces of TE modules is greater than width of side shield member).
Regarding claim 8, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that an air gap (hollow space 26) is formed between the first shield member and the first guide member ([84] and Figure 7).
Regarding claim 9, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the first shield member and the first guide member are coupled on the upper surface of the flow path member (Figures 6 and 7).
Regarding claim 10, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that a boundary between the upper surface and the first side surface of the flow path member and a boundary between the upper surface and the second side surface of the flow path member are shielded by the first shield member (Figures 6-7 and 10-12).
Regarding claim 11, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that a length of the upper shield surface along the second direction is greater than a length of the first side shield surface along the first direction or a length of the second side shield surface along the first direction (See rectangular shape of shield, Figures 6-8).
Regarding claim 16, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses a second guide member disposed on the lower surface of the flow path member, and a second shield member disposed between the lower surface of the flow path member and the second guide member (Figures 6-8, see symmetrical sides with guide members and shield members).
Regarding claim 17, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the first guide member and the second guide member are symmetrical to each other, and the first shield member and the second shield member are symmetrical to each other (Figures 6-8, see symmetrical sides with guide members and shield members).
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Himmer (US 2015/0155465).
Regarding claim 15, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the flow path member includes a third side surface and a fourth side surface that are perpendicular to the first side surface and the second side surface and face each other (front and back surfaces shown in Figures 10-12), the heat converter further includes a first flange disposed on the third side surface and a second flange disposed on the fourth side surface (As shown in Figures 3-4, [36] and [81], the diffuser regions on the front and back have flanges). Himmer does not disclose that a size of the first flange is greater than a size of the second flange; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to change the size of the first and second flange such that a size of the first flange is greater than a size of the second flange, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Himmer (US 2015/0155465), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Brueck et al. (US 2013/0199590).
Regarding claim 12, Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer does not disclose a heat insulating layer disposed between the upper surface of the flow path member and the upper shield surface of the first shield member.
Brueck discloses a thermoelectric device (abstract and Figure 2) comprising a heat insulating layer (16) on a surface of a flow path member ([42] and [44]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to add a heat insulating layer disposed between the upper surface of the flow path member and the upper shield surface of the first shield member in the device of Himmer, as taught by Brueck, in order to improve the efficiency of the device. Such a modification would amount to nothing more than the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Regarding claim 14, modified Himmer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Himmer additionally discloses that the first thermoelectric module includes a first thermoelectric element (20) disposed on the first side surface and a first heat sink (outer wall 25 acts as a heat sink in contact with second fluid) disposed on the first thermoelectric element ([76], [100] and [103] and Figure 12), the second thermoelectric module includes a second thermoelectric element (20) disposed on the second side surface and a second heat sink (outer wall 25 acts as a heat sink in contact with second fluid) disposed on the second thermoelectric element ([76], [100], [103] and Figure 12), and a distance between the first side shield surface and the second side shield surface of the first shield member along the second direction is smaller than a distance between the first heat sink and the second heat sink along the second direction (Figure 12, the distance between outer walls 25 is wider than the width of the first shield member).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 and 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
None of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses, suggests or renders obvious the limitations “wherein a distance between the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface decreases as a distance from the upper shield surface along the first direction increases” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Claim 4 contains allowable subject matter as a result of the dependency on claim 3.
None of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses, suggests or renders obvious the limitations “wherein a distance between the first side shield surface and the second side shield surface of the first shield member along the second direction is greater than a maximum distance between the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface of the first guide member along the second direction” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Additionally, none of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses, suggests or renders obvious the limitations “wherein: the first thermoelectric module protrudes further in the second direction than the first side shield surface of the first shield member, and the second thermoelectric module protrudes further in the second direction than the second side shield surface of the first shield member” in combination with the other claim limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSEY A BUCK whose telephone number is (571)270-1234. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/LINDSEY A BUCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728