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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 4-8 and 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 4/23/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-10 and species A, figs 1-5 and claims 1-3 and 9-10 in the reply filed on 4/23/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that the X references in the search report do not read on the current claims. This is not found persuasive because of the rejection shown below with the reference Asahi that teaches all of the current claim limitations in claim 1.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 and 9-10 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 "the cold air" in lines 5 and 8-9 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since cold air was not previously positively recited.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "guiding it" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since it is unclear what “it” is referring to. Is “it” referring to the heat exchanger inlet or the cold air?
Regarding claim 2, the phrase "if the closed heat exchanger is oriented such that…" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the outer surface area" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 9-10 are rejected as being dependent from claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asahi, Takao et al. JP 07336076 hereinafter “Asahi”).
With respect to claim 1, Asahi discloses a cooling device for optical and/or electronic elements of an apparatus (Fig. 3 and Abstract), comprising; at least one vortex tube for generating cold air (Fig. 3, vortex tube 9), at least one air-to-air heat exchanger comprising at least one closed heat exchanger channel (Fig. 3, air-to-air heat exchanger 12), the air-to-air heat exchanger further comprising a heat exchanger inlet for receiving the cold air and guiding it into the at least one closed heat exchanger channel (See figure below. Fig. 3, inlet from 9 into 12), and a heat exchanger outlet for exhausting air from the at least one closed heat exchanger channel (See figure below. Fig. 3, outlet at the bottom of 12 that exhausts air towards the right of the figure), wherein the heat exchanger outlet is arranged below the heat exchanger inlet such that impurities and contaminations of the cold air are forced out through the outlet due to gravity and a pressure of the cold air (See figure below. Fig. 3, outlet at the bottom of 12 is below inlet at the top of 12 and is capable of the intended use limitations).
It is noted that the phrases “such that impurities and contaminations of the cold air are forced out through the outlet due to gravity and a pressure of the cold air” are statements of intended use and the structure as disclosed by the combined teachings are capable of performing the function. Further, the teachings disclose all of the structural features of the claim.
PNG
media_image1.png
634
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Asahi discloses the cooling device according to claim 1 as discussed above. Asahi also discloses if the closed heat exchanger channel is oriented such that the heat exchanger outlet is at or below a lowest point of the closed heat exchanger channel, the heat exchanger inlet is at or above a highest point of the closed heat exchanger channel (See figure above. Inlet is above heat exchanger 12 and outlet is at a lowest point of the heat exchanger 12).
With respect to claim 9, Asahi discloses the cooling device according to claim 1 as discussed above. Asahi also discloses wherein a wall panel is provided between the at least one vortex tube and the at least one air-to-air heat exchanger (See figure below), and an inlet connection allows cold air from the at least one vortex tube to flow through the wall panel to the at least one air-to-air heat exchanger (Fig. 3, inlet connection between 9 and 12 passes through the wall panel).
PNG
media_image2.png
494
511
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 10, Asahi discloses the cooling device according to claim 9 as discussed above. Asahi also discloses wherein the wall panel comprises a recess for accommodating the at least one air-to-air heat exchanger (See figure above. Fig. 3, shows the wall panel is recessed from 1 to accommodate the heat exchanger 12).
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asahi, Takao et al. JP 07336076 hereinafter “Asahi”) in view of Ignjatovic et al. (US Publication No.: 2015/0184952 hereinafter “Ignjatovic”).
With respect to claim 3, Asahi discloses the cooling device according to claim 1 as discussed above. Asahi does not disclose wherein the at least one closed heat exchanger channel comprises a plurality of cooling ribs for increasing the outer surface area of the air-to-air heat exchanger.
Ignjatovic teaches added ribs to a heat exchanger housing that encloses a heat exchanger channel (Para 0051 and Figs. 6-8, housing 70 has ribs 74). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the heat exchanger of Asahi to have a housing with ribs as taught by Ignjatovic to aid in stiffening the housing for structural integrity (Para 0051).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE E ROJOHN III whose telephone number is (571)270-5431. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571)272-1184. 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.
/CLAIRE E ROJOHN III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights