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
Applicant’s election of Species A (Figs. 1-4; claims 1-8) in the reply filed on 2/4/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/4/2026.
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 7-8 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.
The term “close” and “far” in claim 7-8is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” and “far” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 7-8 are interpreted to refer to any distance.
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) 1-3, 5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20190047373).
Regarding claim 1,
Kim teaches a manifold refrigerant module 100 comprising: a manifold plate 101 in which a plurality of refrigerant flow paths are formed; and a plurality of heat exchangers (e.g. condenser 120, evaporator 130) arranged on the manifold plate, wherein the plurality of heat exchangers are arranged in a left-right direction or a vertical direction (e.g. depending on the orientation of a reference axis).
Regarding claim 2,
Kim teaches wherein the plurality of heat exchangers include a water-cooled condenser 120 and a chiller 130 (see par. 28), and an accumulator 145 is disposed between the water-cooled condenser and the chiller (e.g. along a refrigerant path).
Regarding claim 3,
Kim teaches wherein the chiller and the accumulator are disposed at one side of a virtual reference line formed on the manifold plate (e.g. a line along pipe 165, not labeled), and the water-cooled condenser is disposed on the other side of the reference line.
Regarding claim 5,
Kim teaches wherein, when the refrigerant module is in an air conditioner mode, a high-pressure refrigerant introduced into the manifold plate from the outside circulates through and is discharged from the other side of the reference line (e.g. discharged from the condenser towards the evaporator).
Regarding claim 7,
Kim teaches wherein an inlet of the water- cooled condenser is formed at one side close to the first expansion valve, and an outlet of the water- cooled condenser is formed at the other side far from the first expansion valve.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 6, 8 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.
Regarding claim 4,
Kim teaches wherein a first expansion valve 140 configured to control whether a refrigerant introduced into the water-cooled condenser expands but does not teach a first direction changing valve and a second direction changing valve configured to control a direction of a refrigerant discharged from the water-cooled condenser are disposed on the other side of the reference line.
Regarding claims 6, 8,
Kim teaches a first expansion valve 140 configured to expand a refrigerant introduced into the water-cooled condenser but does not teach a second expansion valve configured to expand a refrigerant introduced into the chiller, wherein an inlet of the chiller is formed at one side close to the second expansion valve, and an outlet of the chiller is formed at the other side far from the second expansion valve, and provides no teaching or suggestion with respect to the position of said valves, such that the first expansion valve is positioned at an upper side of the water-cooled condenser, and the second expansion valve is positioned at an upper side of the chiller.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE S TANENBAUM whose telephone number is (313)446-6522. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 AM - 7 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 at (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 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.
/Steve S TANENBAUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763