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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to applicant’s arguments regarding the drawing objection, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Figure 6 illustrates a cross sectional view of the base body but does not have any cross hatching for the base body.
In regards to applicant’s arguments that the prior art reference Morimoto et al. does not disclose the base body having a receptacle for a component that is an integral part of the base body, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Given how broad the current set of claims are and given the claims the broadest reasonable interpretation the prior art Morimoto et al. does read on the claim language as is rejected below. Applicant’s claim language merely limits the base body to a having a single receptacle for a single component of an air conditioning device, and the prior art discloses multiple receptables for multiple components of an air conditioning device as cited below. The base body discloses multiple receptacles that receive components of the air condition device and are integrally connected to the base body, the components are received at specific locations as are disclosed in paragraphs 203-216 to connect to the specific connection ports. For example heating integrated valve 30a is clearly illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 to be structurally integrally connected to the base body 81, and as is disclosed in paragraph 53 that the base body 81 receives the inflow port 31 and refrigerant pipe from the valve, and the flat plate shape disclosed in paragraph 203. The heating expansion valve 14 is also considered a “component of the air conditioning device” and is clearly integrally connected to the base body 81 via a receptacle 84a, as disclosed in paragraph 204.
Since the following grounds of rejection are being maintained, the instant Office action has been made final.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 6 fails to adequately indicate the section portions of the drawing by using hatching/shading. MPEP 608.02 § V. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morimoto et al. (Pub. No. 2022/0194167).
Regarding claim 1, Morimoto et al. disclose a pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11) for an air-conditioning device (1), comprising a base body (81) in which several fluid channels (82, Fig. 6) and several openings (83a-k) are incorporated, wherein at least one valve (18) and several connections (paragraphs 203-215) are arranged in the openings (83a-k), wherein the base body (81) has a receptacle (plurality of receptacles connecting to 12, 14, 22, 24, 30a and 30b) for a component (plurality of components for example 12, 14, 22, 24, 30a, 30b, and etc.) of the air-conditioning device (1), and wherein the base body (81) is an integral part (Figures 1 & 2) of the component (plurality of components for example 12, 14, 22, 24, 30a, 30b, and etc.), or the base body (81) is unitarily formed (Figures 1 & 2) with the component.
Regarding claim 2, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein at least one sensor (paragraph 133) is arranged in the openings (paragraph 312).
Regarding claim 3, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the valves and connections are selectively attachable in the openings (paragraphs 203-215).
Regarding claim 4, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein at least three valves are provided (paragraphs 203-215).
Regarding claim 7, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the base body (81) forms a housing part (Figs. 1-2) of the component (12, 24, 30a, or 30b).
Regarding claim 8, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the component is formed as an accumulator (22).
Regarding claim 9, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the component is formed as a pump (paragraphs 103 or 107) or compressor (11).
Regarding claim 10, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the base body (81) is formed from metallic material (paragraph 200).
Regarding claim 11, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein at least one fluid channel (82a or 82b) is configured to function as a heat exchanger (paragraphs 226-228).
Regarding claim 12, Morimoto et al. disclose the pipe arrangement (Figs. 1-11), wherein the base body (81) is designed to be porous at least in sections (85) in order to provide the heat exchanger functionality (paragraphs 228-242).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Reinaldo Sanchez-Medina, telephone number 571-270-5168, fax number 571-270-6168. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (7:30AM-4:00PM 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached 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.
/REINALDO SANCHEZ-MEDINA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights