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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 13-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/07/2026.
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, 2, 6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Burne et al (US 3,415,316).
As to claim 1, Burne et al. disclose an air-cooled heat exchanger comprising:
A hollow shell (figure 18)
Tube inlet (150) for receiving a medium
Tube outlet (163)
Tube arrangements (154)
Conductive air permeable material (152) in tight engagement with the tube arrangements
Air inlet (159)
Air outlet (161)
The shell is cylindrical.
As to claim 2, the permeable material is metal (col. 3, line 3).
As to claim 6, the permeable material is porous solid material (col. 7, line 5).
As to claim 9, it is inherent that a blower is at the inlet to provide air.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 3-5, 7, 8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burne et al. (US 3,415,316).
As to claims 3-5 and 7-8, Burne et al. fail to teach that the permeable material is spherical or irregular with a width or heigh to 3mm, wherein it is copper or brass. In addition, Burne et al. fail to teach the diameter of the shell is at least 150mm.
Although, Burne et al. fail to teach the specific material, Burne et al. discloses a permeable material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose a specific material through routine experimentation to discover the effectiveness range of the heat exchange between two mediums. Furthermore, the size of the shell would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art depending on the design expediency.
As to claims 10-12, Burne et al. fail to teach multiple air inlets and outlets with multiple blowers. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include multiple inlets and outlets with corresponding blowers, since it is merely a duplication of parts to accommodate the required size of the shell.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Len Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-1184. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am - 4pm.
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.
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.
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
