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 .
Status of the Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the reply dated 5/9/2026 are as follows:
Claims 1, 7, and 14 are amended,
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-9, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi et al. (Japanese Patent Publication JP2012032089A, “Ishibashi”, previously cited) in view of Sekiya et al. (Japanese Patent Publication JP2011226510A, “Sekiya”).
Regarding claim 1, Ishibashi discloses a micro-channel heat exchanger (figs 1-8), comprising
a plurality of fins (9) and a plurality of flat tubes (1a1, 1a2, 1b1, 1b2, 1c1, 1c2), wherein the plurality of fins are arranged in parallel to form a plurality of rows, each of the plurality of fins is provided with a insertion slot (fig 2), the plurality of flat tubes are arranged in parallel to form a plurality of layers (fig 2), and the plurality of flat tubes penetrate through the insertion slots (fig 2);
the micro-channel heat exchanger further comprises a distributor (8) and an adapter (7), the distributor is provided with a plurality of capillary tubes (7), an end of the adapter is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of capillary tubes (fig 3), and the other end of the adapter is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes (fig 3).
However, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose a shrinking tube and a flared tube, the flared tube is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of adapters, and the shrinking tube is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes, the shrinking tube is formed by a part of corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes shrinking, and the flared tube is formed by a part of corresponding one of plurality of adapters flaring; and,
the shrinking tube is sleeved with a welding ring, the welding ring abuts against an outer surface of the shrinking tube, the welding ring abuts against an end surface of the flared tube, and the shrinking tube penetrates into the flared tube and is connected to the flared tube via the welding ring by welding.
Sekiya, however, discloses a pipe connection (fig 3) having a shrinking tube (3a) and a flared tube (2); and,
the shrinking tube is sleeved with a welding ring (7a), the welding ring abuts against an outer surface of the shrinking tube, the welding ring abuts against an end surface of the flared tube, and the shrinking tube penetrates into the flared tube and is connected to the flared tube via the welding ring by welding (¶0031). Sekiya teaches that this configuration prevents deterioration of the connection (¶0005-0008). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi to provide the connection configuration of Sekiya in order to reduce deterioration of the connection. This would result in the flared tube is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of adapters, and the shrinking tube is connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes, the shrinking tube is formed by a part of corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes shrinking, and the flared tube is formed by a part of corresponding one of plurality of adapters flaring.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein the micro-channel heat exchanger comprises a plurality of adapters (2, fig 3), one end of one part of the plurality of adapters is connected to and in communication with the plurality of capillary tubes (7), the other end of the one part of the plurality of adapters is connected to and in communication with the plurality of flat tubes (1a1, 1a2, 1b1, 1b2, 1c1, 1c2), and both ends of another part of the plurality of adapters are connected to and in communication with the plurality of flat tubes (fig 3); the first tube orifice is configured for allowing insertion of the plurality of flat tubes (¶0011).
Wherein an disclose an inner surface of each of the plurality of adapters is provided with a limiting portion (see annotated fig 3 below of Sekiya), and the limiting portion abuts against one end of corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes and/or a sidewall of corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes and is configured for limiting corresponding one of the plurality of flat tubes.
PNG
media_image1.png
310
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi, as modified, further discloses wherein a height of the plurality of flat tubes is defined as H1, each of the plurality of adapters comprises a first inner surface and a second inner surface opposite to each other, a distance between the first inner surface and the second inner surface is defined as H2, and the distance H2 between the first inner surface and the second inner surface and the height H1 of the plurality of flat tubes satisfy the following formula: 0.02 mm ≤ (H2-H1) ≤ 0.4 mm. However, Since Ishibashi teaches a height H1 of the flat tube and distances H2 between the first inner surface and second inner surface of the flat tubes (see annotated fig 4a below), the exact range of the distance is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognizable result. In this case the recognizable result is that the height and distance of the adapter will determine the strength of the connection while increasing cost and manufacturing complexity. It would not be inventive to determine via routine optimization to determine the optimal height and distance and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi, as modified, to have the height and distance satisfy 0.02 mm ≤ (H2-H1) ≤ 0.4 mm.
PNG
media_image2.png
204
508
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses each of the plurality of adapters (2) comprises a second tube orifice (see annotated fig 4d below), the second tube orifice is located at an end of the each of the plurality of adapters away from the first tube orifice (see annotated fig 4d below), and the second tube orifice is circle-shaped.
PNG
media_image3.png
537
351
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi, as modified, further discloses wherein micro-channel heat exchanger further comprises a shrinking tube and a flared tube, the outer surface of the shrinking tube is in clearance fit with an inner surface of the flared tube and a gap is defined between the outer surface of the shrinking tube and the inner surface of the flared tube, the gap between the outer surface of the shrinking tube and the inner surface of the flared tube is defined as H, and the gap H between the outer surface of the shrinking tube and the inner surface of the flared tube satisfies the following formula: 0.1 mm ≤ H ≤ 0.35 mm (see depth described in ¶0017 of Sekiya).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Ishibashi, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the shrinking tube comprises a first section and a second section connected to each other, a length of the second section is defined as L2, and the length L2 of the second section satisfies the following formula: 3 mm ≤L2≤5 mm. However, since Shin teaches a distance L2 (see annotated fig 3 below of Shin), the exact range of the distance is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognizable result. In this case the recognizable result is that a longer length will increase the strength of the connection while increasing cost and manufacturing complexity. It would not be inventive to determine via routine optimization to determine the optimal length and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi, as modified, to have the length be 3 mm ≤L2≤5 mm.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein the micro-channel heat exchanger comprises at least two columns of flat tubes (1a1, 1a2, 1b1, 1b2, 1c1, 1c2, see annotated fig 2 below), the micro-channel heat exchanger further comprises a plurality of bending pipes (4), adjacent two of the at least two columns of flat tubes are connected to and in communication with each other via the plurality of bending pipes, and the plurality of bending pipes and the at least two columns of flat tubes are disposed separately (fig 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
540
574
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein insertion slots in the same column of the at least two columns of fins are interlaced disposed (see annotated fig 2 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
530
612
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein the micro-channel heat exchanger comprises a collecting pipe (6), the plurality of flat tubes (2) comprises at least a first column of flat tubes and a second column of flat tubes parallel to each other (see annotated fig 2 below), the first column of flat tubes are connected to and in communication with a corresponding one of the plurality of adapters (7), the second column of flat tubes are connected to and in communication with the collecting pipe (fig 3).
5. Claim(s) 10-12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi and Sekiya as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawabata et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0320977, “Kawabata”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein the plurality of flat tubes (2) are disposed at intervals (see annotated fig 2 below), each of the plurality of fins (9) is provided with a plurality of insertion slots (for tubes 2, see annotated fig 4 below), the plurality of insertion slots are disposed at intervals (with the tubes 2) along a direction each of the plurality of fins;
a shape of each of the plurality of insertion slots correspondingly matches with a shape of each of the plurality of flat tubes, allowing the plurality of fins to insert on the plurality of flat tubes via the plurality of insertion slots (as evident in fig 2); and
the micro-channel heat exchanger further comprises a bending pipe (4), the bending pipe comprises two connecting sections (see annotated fig 3 below) and a bending section (see annotated fig 3 below), the two connecting sections are disposed at both ends of the bending sections respectively, the two connecting sections and the bending section are connected to and in communication with each other to define a U-shaped tube structure, and the two connecting sections are connected to and in communication with two of the plurality of flat tubes, respectively (fig 3).
PNG
media_image6.png
530
612
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
874
600
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the connecting portion is sleeved on the flat tube. Kawabata, however discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-4) wherein a connecting portion (3) is sleeved on a flat tube (1, ¶0035-¶0042). Kawabata teaches that by connecting separate tubes the need to provide joint parts to convert cross sectional area (¶0039) thus reducing manufacturing cost. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi, as modified, to provide the sleeve connecting portions of Kawabata in order to reduce manufacturing cost. However, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose wherein a depth of the connecting section being sleeved on the flat tube is defined as P, and the depth P of the connecting section being sleeved on the flat tube satisfies the following formula: 2 mm ≤ P ≤ 20 mm. However, since Kawabata does teaches a depth P (see annotated fig 3 below), the exact range of the depth is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognizable result. In this case the recognizable result is that a longer depth will increase the strength of the connection while increasing cost and manufacturing complexity. It would not be inventive to determine via routine optimization to determine the optimal depth and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi, as modified, to have the length be 2 mm ≤ P ≤ 20 mm.
PNG
media_image8.png
344
448
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, and Kawabata discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi, as modified, further discloses wherein the inner surface of the connecting section is consisted of a top surface, a first side surface, a bottom surface and a second side surface in order (see annotated fig 4 below of Kawabata), both the top surface and the bottom surface are planes; both the first side surface and the second side surface are arc-shaped surfaces.
PNG
media_image9.png
260
577
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, and Kawabata discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein each of the two connecting sections of the bending pipe has an axisymmetric structure, symmetry centers of the two connecting sections define a connecting axis (see annotated fig 3 below), an angle between the connecting axis and a length of a orifice of the bending pipe is defined as α, and the angle α between the connecting axis and the length of the orifice of the bending pipe is 0° (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
874
600
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, and Kawabata discloses all previous claim limitations. Ishibashi further discloses wherein a minimum distance between the plurality of fins (9) and the two connecting sections (see annotated fig 3 above) is defined as C, and the minimum distance C between the plurality of fins and the two connecting sections is 0 mm.
6. Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi and Sekiya as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wei (Chinese Patent Publication CN207365784U, previously cited).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of fins are provided with a plurality of first protrusions and the plurality of first protrusions are round-shaped, crescent-shaped, triangle-shaped, square-shaped, S-shaped or corrugation-shaped. Wei, however, discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-5) wherein a plurality of fins are provided with a plurality of first protrusions (25) which are corrugation-shaped. Wei teaches that the protrusion improve heat dissipation (page 4, liens 31-37). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi to provide the protrusion of Wei in order to improve heat dissipation.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Ishibashi and Sekiya discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of fins comprises a first side and a second side, the plurality of fins are provided with a plurality of second protrusions on a side of the plurality of fins adjacent to the first side, the plurality of second protrusions are disposed in sequence along a width direction of the plurality of fins and form a corrugation-shaped structure, both ends of the corrugation structure extend along a length direction of the plurality of fins and penetrate through both ends of corresponding one of the plurality of fins.
Wei, however, discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-5) wherein the plurality of fins (2) comprises a first side (fig 2) and a second side (fig 3), the plurality of fins are provided with a plurality of second protrusions (25) on a side of the plurality of fins adjacent to the first side, the plurality of second protrusions are disposed in sequence along a width direction (see annotated fig 3 below) of the plurality of fins and form a corrugation-shaped structure, both ends of the corrugation structure extend along a length direction of the plurality of fins and penetrate through both ends of corresponding one of the plurality of fins (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image11.png
638
709
media_image11.png
Greyscale
7. Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi, Sekiya, and Kawabata as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Wei (Chinese Patent Publication CN207365784U, previously cited).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, and Kawabata discloses all previous claim limitation. However, they do not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of fins comprise a body portion and a flanging structure connected to each other, the plurality of insertion slots are disposed on the body portion, the flanging structure is disposed adjacent to the plurality of inserting slots, the flanging structure protrudes out of the body portion, and the flanging structure is configured for matching with the plurality of flat tubes.
Wei, however, discloses a heat exchanger (figs 1-5) wherein a plurality of fins comprise a body portion (see annotated fig 3 below) and a flanging structure (3, 24) connected to each other, a plurality of insertion slots (see annotated fig 3 below) are disposed on the body portion, the flanging structure is disposed adjacent to the plurality of inserting slots, the flanging structure protrudes out of the body portion, and the flanging structure is configured for matching with the plurality of flat tubes (fig 3). Wei teaches that the flanging structure provides improved support for the tubes (page 3, line 50-page 4, line 10). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Ishibashi, as modified, to provide the flanging structure of Wei in order to improve the support of the tubes.
PNG
media_image12.png
638
709
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, Kawabata, and Wei discloses all previous claim limitation. Ishibashi, as modified, further discloses wherein the flanging structure (3, 24, Wei) comprises a first flanging (31, Wie), and the first flanging is disposed along a peripheral circumference of corresponding one of the plurality of inserting slots and defines a shape matching with the plurality of flat tubes (as evident in fig 3 of Wei).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Ishibashi, Sekiya, Kawabata, and Wei discloses all previous claim limitation. Ishibashi, as modified, further discloses wherein the flanging structure (3, 24, Wei) further comprises a plurality of second flangings (32, 24), the plurality of second flangings are disposed on the first flanging at intervals along the peripheral circumference of the insertion slot (see annotated fig 3 above), and a plane defined by the plurality of second flangings coincides with a plane defined by the first flanging (see annotated fig 3 below).
PNG
media_image13.png
638
709
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 3 and 4 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that none of the cited references teach the limitations of claim 1. Specifically, the limitations the shrinking tube, flared tube and welding ring. However, newly cited Sekiya is now being relied upon to teach these limitations.
Conclusion
10. 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.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRY E ARANT whose telephone number is (571)272-1105. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 ET.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at (571)270-7740. 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.
/HARRY E ARANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights