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 .
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, 5-13, 15-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KONDO US 20170176047 Al.
Re claim 1, KONDO teach a plate heat exchanger, comprising a plurality of heat transfer plates,
the plurality of heat transfer plates comprising:
a first heat transfer plate (2b) comprising protrusions (annotated fig) protruding upward, the protrusions having a top (annotated fig, noting top is considered the portion which is mostly symmetrical on both sides and thus having same height on both sidewalls which constitute the protrusion); and
a second heat transfer plate (2a) stacked on the first heat transfer plate and comprising recesses (annotated fig) sunken downward, the recesses having a bottom,
wherein the top of at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate has a
concave portion sunken downward (adjacent protrusions have concave portion which transitions into the adjacent protrusion),
and at least a part of the bottom of at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate is located in the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate (fig 18);
wherein the first heat transfer plate further comprises recesses (annotated fig) sunken downward, and the second heat transfer plate further comprises protrusions (annotated fig) protruding upward;
and wherein the protrusions and the recesses of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate are alternately arranged in a first direction and alternately arranged in a second direction intersecting the first direction (annotated fig, noting that some of the structure alternates along the first direction, and since the structure is off different height relative to the second direction, different combinations of portions of the “the protrusions and the recesses of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate” alternate in the first and second directions which meet the broad new limitations).
PNG
media_image1.png
1011
858
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
807
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re claim 2, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is located in the middle of the top (vertically in the middle).
Re claim 3, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is located on one side of the top, and the top of the at least one protrusion is step-shaped (fig 18).
Re claim 5, KONDO teach wherein the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate has a downward curved bottom surface or a downward flat bottom surface (fig 18).
Re claim 6, KONDO teach wherein a portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate other than the concave portion has at least one of a curved top surface portion and a flat top surface portion (fig 18).
Re claim 7, KONDO teach wherein the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate has a concave portion sunken upward (fig 18, noting without relative structure given upward can be any direction depending on reference point).
Re claim 8, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate is located in the middle of the bottom (noting bottom is already at the middle point).
Re claim 9, KONDO teach wherein a bottom portion of the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate has an upward convex portion (portion under protrusions of the first plate complementary to the concavity and makes the pointier protrusions), and at least a part of the convex portion of the bottom portion of the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is located in the concave portion at the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate (noting portions are broad terms to cover an area defining structure and both portions overlap to extend and thus a portion of the convex portion overlaps into the concave portion and is thus “in” the other portion; fig 18).
Re claim 10, KONDO teach wherein the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate has a convex portion (portions under/surrounding on other side of plate of recesses of the second plate complementary to the concavity and makes the points on the sides of the recesses) protruding downward, and at least a part of the convex portion at the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate is located in the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate (noting portions are broad terms to cover an area defining structure and both portions overlap to extend and thus a portion of the convex portion overlaps into the concave portion and is thus “in” the other portion; fig 18).
Re claim 11, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is located on one side of the top (fig 18), and the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is step-shaped (fig 18); and the convex portion at the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate is located on one side of the at least one bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate (fig 18), and the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate is step- shaped (fig 18).
Re claim 12, KONDO teach wherein the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate and the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate have complementary shapes (fig 18 noting mating plates).
Re claim 13, KONDO teach wherein the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate and the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate are located in at least a part of a heat exchange zone and/or at least a part of an opening zone of the plate heat exchanger (fig 18 ; the entire heat exchanger is considered a heat exchange zone due to conduction) .
Re claim 15, KONDO teach wherein the plurality of heat transfer plates comprise a plurality of first heat transfer plates and a plurality of second heat transfer plates, which are stacked on top of each other, the plurality of first heat transfer plates and the plurality of second heat transfer plates being alternately arranged (figs 17-18), and the bottom of at least one recess of one of every two adjacent heat transfer plates being connected to the top of at least one protrusion of the other of the two adjacent heat transfer plates, wherein the plurality of first heat transfer plates comprises the first heat transfer plate and the plurality of second heat transfer plates comprises the second heat transfer plate (noting all parts are connected to each other directly or via intermediate parts when assembled).
Re claim 16, KONDO teach wherein the top of the at least one protrusion of the second heat transfer plate has a concave portion sunken downward (area under 2a1), and at least a part of the bottom of the at least one recess of the first heat transfer plate is located in the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the second heat transfer plate (fig 18).
Re claim 17, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate and the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate are circular when viewed in the stacking direction of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate,
or
the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate
and the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate are crescent-shaped
when viewed in the stacking direction of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer
plate (fig 18).
Re claim 18, KONDO teach wherein the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate is circular when viewed in the stacking direction of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate (fig 18), and the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the second heat transfer plate is crescent-shaped when viewed in the stacking direction of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate (fig 18).
Re claim 19, KONDO teach wherein an angle of inclination of at least a part of a side wall of the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate with respect to a horizontal plane is greater than or equal to an angle of inclination of a corresponding portion of a side wall of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate with respect to the horizontal plane (fig 18 noting mating sidewalls; also noting the mating portion will have equal angles when a line tangent to the same horizontal line since the two parts are mated at the same point and thus have the same angle when the angle is measured on the same side with respect to the horizontal plane).
Re claim 20, KONDO teach wherein an angle of inclination of at least a part of a side wall of the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate with respect to a horizontal plane is greater than or equal to an angle of inclination of a corresponding portion of a side wall of the convex portion at the bottom of the at least one recess of the second heat transfer plate with respect to the horizontal plane (fig 18 noting mating sidewalls; also noting the mating portion will have equal angles when a line tangent to the same horizontal line since the two parts are mated at the same point and thus have the same angle when the angle is measured on the same side with respect to the horizontal plane).
Re claim 21, KONDO teach a plate heat exchanger, comprising a plurality of heat transfer plates, the plurality of heat transfer plates comprising: a first heat transfer plate (2b) comprising protrusions protruding upward, the protrusions having a top (see rejection of claim 1, annotated fig above); and a second heat transfer plate (2a) stacked on the first heat transfer plate and comprising
recesses (annotated fig) sunken downward, the recesses having a bottom,
wherein the top of at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate has a concave
portion sunken downward, and at least a part of the bottom of at least one recess of the second
heat transfer plate is located in the concave portion at the top of the at least one protrusion of the
first heat transfer plate (see rejection of claim 1, fig 18); and wherein a downwardly recessed connecting portion is provided between adjacent protrusions and an upwardly projecting connecting portion is provided between adjacent recesses (noting both protrusions and recesses have plate portions in between which directly connect and at least a portion of the plates are considered the connecting portions; fig 18).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KONDO in view of Air WO 2015/069178 A1 as cited on IDS filed 12/29/2025.
Re claim 4, KONDO fail to explicitly teach an upward flat bottom surface.
Air teach wherein the concave portion (3e’) at the top of the at least one protrusion of the first heat transfer plate has an upward flat bottom surface to make the valley floor flat (fig 1c).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include an upward flat bottom surface as taught by Air in the KONDO invention in order to advantageously allow for structural assembly strength after assembly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see reply, filed 3/16/2026, with respect to 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 3/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that KONDO fail to teach newly amended scope that the “and wherein the protrusions and the recesses of the first heat transfer plate and the second heat transfer plate are alternately arranged in a first direction and alternately arranged in a second direction intersecting the first direction” and supplied a figure from the instant application. The examiner respectfully disagrees. However, the scope of the independent claim has been changed in the latest reply and therefore the examiner is now relying on another embodiment of Kondo to teach to teach the newly recited scope of the intendent claims (see detailed rejection above). Therefore, the applicants’ arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the claims dependent on the independent claim(s) are allowable based upon their dependence from an independent claim. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been addressed above. Thus, the rejections are proper and remain.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-F PST.
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.
/GORDON A JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights