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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 9 calls for the limitation “a second storage container”; which limitation is indefinite as it is unclear as to how a second storage container is introduced in the claim when there is no prior recitation of a first storage container. It raises some confusion as to whether elements are omitted in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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) 1-5, 7, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu (CN 103206811 A).
Regarding claim 1:
Xu discloses a heat exchanger assembly (Fig. 1-2 & 4) comprising:
a first heat exchanger portion #402 and a second heat exchanger portion #401; and
a control valve #801, the control valve having an open position and a closed position ([0049]. Check valve #801 inherently has an open position and a closed position), at the open position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid communication with the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve, and at the closed position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid isolation with the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve ([0049] & [0055]).
Regarding claim 2:
Xu further discloses wherein the first heat exchanger portion and the second heat exchanger portion are respectively a first heat exchanger portion and a second heat exchanger portion of a heat exchanger (Fig. 1), the heat exchanger comprising a plurality of heat exchange tubes #4 and two header tubes (#3 and #31) connected to the two ends of each heat exchange tube and in fluid communication with each other ([0043]), wherein each of the two header tubes comprises a first header tube portion and a second header tube portion that are in fluid isolation from each other (see #6 in header #3; and at least #601 in header #31), so that the heat exchanger is separated into a first heat exchanger portion and a second heat exchanger portion that are in fluid isolation from each other, and the control valve connects the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion of one of the two header tubes to connect the first heat exchanger portion and the second heat exchanger portion in series (see at least Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3:
Xu further discloses wherein the heat exchanger further comprises a partition arranged in each of the two header tubes, the partition separating each header tube into the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion that are in fluid isolation from each other (see #6 in header #3; and at least #601 in header #31; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4:
Xu further discloses wherein the heat exchanger further comprises a partition arranged in one of the two header tubes, the partition separating the first header tube into the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion that are in fluid isolation from each other, and the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion of the other of the two header tubes are two subheader tubes that are in fluid isolation from each other (see #6 in header #3; and at least #601 in header #31; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5:
Xu further discloses wherein the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion of the header tube of the two header tubes are two subheader tubes that are in fluid isolation from each other, and the heat exchanger further comprises a partition arranged in the other of the two header tubes, the partition separating the other header tube into the first header tube portion and the second header tube portion that are in fluid isolation from each other (see #6 in header #3; and at least #601 in header #31; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7:
Xu further discloses wherein the control valve is arranged outside the header tube and connected to a first header tube portion and a second header tube portion of the header tube through a connecting tube (see at least Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11:
Xu further discloses wherein the first heat exchanger portion and the second heat exchanger portion are two heat exchangers, and the control valve is connected between the two heat exchangers to connect them in series (see at least Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhong (CN 113137673 A).
Regarding claim 25:
Zhong discloses an air conditioner system (Fig. 1; abstract) comprising:
a reheater comprising
a reheater heat exchanger #5 having an inlet and an outlet; and
a control valve #6 connected to the inlet of the heat exchanger and having an open position and a closed position, wherein, at the open position, the control valve allows a refrigerant to enter the heat exchanger by means of the control valve and the inlet of the heat exchanger, and at the closed position, the control valve closes the inlet of the heat exchanger ([0035] & [0037]);
a compressor #1;
a first heat exchanger #2 functioning as one of a condenser and an evaporator; and
a second heat exchanger #4 functioning as the other of a condenser and an evaporator;
wherein the compressor, the first heat exchanger, and the second heat exchanger are connected in sequence from the compressor through the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger (Fig. 1), and wherein the reheater is connected in parallel to the first heat exchanger (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26:
Zhong further discloses wherein in the refrigeration mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, the reheater does not operate and the control valve of the reheater is closed, so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger is diverted into the reheater and stored in the reheater ([0037]).
Regarding claim 27:
Zhong further discloses wherein in the reheating mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser, and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, the reheater operates and the control valve of the reheater opens, so that the refrigerant flows into the reheater by means of the control valve ([0035]).
Regarding claim 28:
Zhong discloses an air conditioning system (Fig. 1), comprising:
a compressor #1;
a first heat exchanger #2 functioning as one of a condenser and an evaporator;
a second heat exchanger #4 functioning as the other of a condenser and an evaporator; and
a reheater #5 connected in parallel to a first heat exchanger (Fig. 1);
wherein the compressor, the first heat exchanger, and the second heat exchanger are connected in sequence from the compressor through the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger (Fig. 1), and
in the refrigeration mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, and the reheater does not operate, so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater (see Fig. 1).
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 103206811 A) in view of Zhong (CN 113137673 A).
Regarding claim 17:
While Xu discloses wherein the heat exchanger assembly is part of an air conditioning system ([0002]), Xu does not specifically disclose wherein the heat exchanger assembly is a reheater.
Nonetheless, using a heat exchanger as a reheater is well-known in the art. See for example Zhong, reheater #5, [0035] & [0037].
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date to have provided the apparatus of Xu with the heat exchanger assembly being a reheater, in a similar manner as taught by Zhong.
One of ordinary skills would have recognized that doing so would have provided benefits such as high heat transfer efficiency, compact structure, light weight, and low refrigerant charge as suggested by Zhong ([0004]).
Regarding claims 18-20:
Zhong further discloses a compressor; a first heat exchanger functioning as one of a condenser and an evaporator; and a second heat exchanger functioning as the other of a condenser and an evaporator;
wherein the compressor, the first heat exchanger, and the second heat exchanger are connected in sequence from the compressor through the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger, and
wherein the reheater is connected in parallel to the first heat exchanger; wherein: in the refrigeration mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, the reheater does not operate and the control valve of the reheater is closed, so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the second heat exchanger portion of the reheater and is stored in the second heat exchanger portion; and wherein in the reheating mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, the reheater operates and the control valve of the reheater opens, so that the refrigerant flows into the first heat exchanger portion of the reheater and from the first heat exchanger portion to the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve (see rejection of claims 16 and 24-27 above).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date to have employed the heat exchanger of Xu with the claimed arrangement above in a similar manner as taught by Zhong.
One of ordinary skills would have recognized that doing so would have provided benefits such as high heat transfer efficiency, compact structure, light weight, and low refrigerant charge as suggested by Zhong ([0004]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/27/2026 have been fully considered.
With respect to the rejection of claim 1, applicant submitted that “a third one-way valve 8 provided on heating input pipe 10 that permits refrigerant to flow from the cooling output/heating input pipe 9 to heating input pipe 10 and into the first distributor 11, which distributes refrigerant to the right header 31 and through flat tubes 4. Thus, even when Xu' s cited first one-way valve 801 is closed, the heat exchanger portion above and below first spacer 6 may still be in fluid communication when the third way-one valve 8 is open”.
This argument is not persuasive for two reasons:
Reason 1: the argument is directed to matter not encompassed by the scope of claim 1, and to matter not relied upon by the examiner for the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 1 requires a heat exchanger assembly comprising a first heat exchanger portion and a second heat exchanger portion; and a control valve, the control valve having an open position and a closed position, at the open position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid communication with the second heat
exchanger portion by means of the control valve, and at the closed position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid isolation with the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve.
As pointed out in the rejection of claim 1 above, Xu discloses a heat exchanger assembly (shown in Fig. 1-2 & 4) comprising: a first heat exchanger portion #402 and a second heat exchanger portion #401; and a control valve #801, the control valve having an open position and a closed position ([0049]. Check valve #801 inherently has an open position and a closed position), at the open position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid communication with the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve, and at the closed position, the first heat exchanger portion being in fluid isolation with the second heat exchanger portion by means of the control valve ([0049] & [0055]).
Thus, all the required limitations of claim 1 are disclosed by Xu.
Applicant argument concerning the third one-way valve #8, the distributor #11, and the right header #31 is not persuasive as the examiner has not relied upon said structures for the thrust of the rejection. The required limitations of claim 1 are shown in bold above, and are all disclosed by Xu.
Reason 2: even if valve #8 operated with distributor #11 as argued by the applicant, refrigerant from distributor #11 would flow in one direction (right to left) in the tubes #4 in Fig. 1. Also, in Fig. 2, because baffles #6 and #604 are provided at the same height in their respective headers, refrigerant from distributor #11 flows in one direction (right to left) in the tubes #4 in Fig. 2. Note that refrigerant that arrives at distributor #11 passes through pipe #10 in fluid isolation from the first heat exchanger portion #402.
Accordingly, valve #801 would still be the only structure operable to selectively distribute refrigerant from the first heat exchanger portion (that has come from #105) to the second heat exchanger portion. At the closed position of valve #801, the first heat exchanger portion is in fluid isolation with the second heat exchanger portion ([0049] & [0055]).
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive; and the examiner position is maintained.
With respect to claim 25; the argument set forth by the applicant are not persuasive because the argument is directed to subject matter not required by claim 25. Claim 25 does not require that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater. Accordingly, the examiner maintains the position that Zhong discloses all the limitations of claim 25 as presented above.
With respect to claim 28; applicant submitted that in Zhong, when the air conditioner is in cooling state, the port connecting the solenoid valve 6 and the reheater can be controlled to be in a closed state such that refrigerant discharged from the compressor 1 only needs to pass through the condenser 2 and the expansion valve 3 to enter the evaporator 4.
This assertion is correct. However, claim 28 requires that “in the refrigeration mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, and the reheater does not operate, so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater”. This implies that the positive required limitation of the cited portion above is that “in the refrigeration mode, the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser and the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, and the reheater does not operate”. The term “so that” means that as a consequence of this claimed arrangement, a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater. Zhong clearly discloses that in the refrigerating state when valve #6 is closed. Accordingly, by virtue of the structural limitations being met by the prior art, the prior art is capable of satisfy the language “so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater”. Also, when valve #6 is closed, a portion of the refrigerant that has flowed at some point in the close circuit from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger inherently stays in at least a portion of the reheater #5.
Furthermore, the limitation “so that a portion of the refrigerant flowing from the first heat exchanger to the second heat exchanger flows into the reheater and is stored in at least a portion of the reheater” constitutes an intended use limitation that does not further limit the structure of the claimed invention. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP 2114-II - Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987)).
In view of the above, the examiner maintains the position that claim 28 is properly anticipated by Zhong.
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 LIONEL W NOUKETCHA whose telephone number is (571)272-8438. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri: 08:00 AM - 04:00 PM.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LIONEL NOUKETCHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763