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 § 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 5, 13 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.
Claims 5, 13 recite “a flow of the heat exchanger fluid”. It is unclear if the bolded limitation refers to limitation “heat exchanger fluid flows” recited in claims 1, 11. The bolded phrase makes the claimed limitations indefinite, because it is unclear if a fluid flow recited in claims 5, 13 is the same fluid recited in claims 1, 11. For the purpose of examination it is interpreted as the same fluid.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boger (DE 102008007608 A1).
Claim 1: Boger discloses a heat exchanger assembly for a motor vehicle (FIGs.1-3) comprising:
an inflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger);
an outflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger); and
at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (paragraph [32]: rows of tubes 34 are twisted about their longitudinal axis form helical structures) through which a heat exchanger fluid (paragraph [9]: first medium heat exchanger medium) flows,
wherein a medium (paragraph [8]: second medium like air) flows along a throughflow direction from the inflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger) to the outflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger), wherein a helix axis (annotated FIG.5a) of a helix formed by the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) extends transversely with respect to the throughflow direction of the heat exchanger assembly (FIG.5a).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (helix axis)][AltContent: ][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
649
421
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one heat exchanger fin (39) extends transversely with respect to the helix axis (tubes are spaced in tube axis direction; see annotated FIG.6).
[AltContent: textbox (tubes axis)][AltContent: textbox (fins axis)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image2.png
369
525
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 3: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) includes at least two heat exchanger tubes (34) configured and arranged relative to one another, so as to define a common helix axis (annotated FIG.5a).
Claim 4: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) includes at least two heat exchanger tubes defining respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a), the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) extend parallel to one another and are spaced from one another such that the at least two heat exchanger tubes (34) loop around one another at uniform intervals along the helix axes (annotated FIG.5a).
Claim 5: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) includes at least two heat exchanger tubes (34) which are connected in series or in parallel with respect to a flow of the heat exchanger fluid (first medium heat exchanger medium).
Claim 6: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the helix axis (annotated FIG.5a) of the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) is at least partially curved (see FIG.5a parts of tubes are curved).
Claim 7: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) includes at least one flow-manipulating directing element (multi chamber tubes 47 include manipulating directing element inside its internal volume; see FIG.7s) arranged inside.
Claim 8: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the at least one flow-manipulating directing element (multi chamber tubes include manipulating directing element inside its internal volume; see FIG.7s) consists of a radially inwardly and rectilinearly extending rib (channel ribs 52), a radially inwardly extending pin, or a helically extending rib.
Claim 9: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) has a circular, elliptical or oval cross-sectional area (paragraph [35]: pipe cross sections for so called multi chamber pipes with circular, oval and rectangular cross sections).
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.
Claims 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boger (DE 102008007608 A1).
Claim 10: Boger discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, which is produced at least in part by additive manufacturing (paragraph [35]: tubes are manufactured by extrusion, it is also possible to manufacture other methods like brazed or welded; in product-by-process claim, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is proper because the "even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). The combination of previous references meets the structural limitations put forth in Claim 10, wherein the final product existing after fabrication is compared to prior art for the purposes of patentability. The limitations regarding “additive manufacturing” are drawn to method of production and not the structural aspects of the instant invention).
Claim 11: Boger discloses a heat exchanger assembly for a motor vehicle (FIGs.1-3) comprising:
an inflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger);
an outflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger); and
a plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (paragraph [32]: rows of tubes 34 are twisted about their longitudinal axis form helical structures) through which a heat exchanger fluid (paragraph [9]: first medium heat exchanger medium) flows, the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) positioned between the inflow side and the outflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger),
a medium (paragraph [8]: second medium like air) flows along a throughflow direction past the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) from the inflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger) to the outflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger),
wherein the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) define respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) extending transversely with respect to the throughflow direction of the heat exchanger assembly (FIG.5a),
the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) extend parallel to one another and are spaced from one another such that one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) loops around another helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) at uniform intervals along the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a), and
Boger discloses the claimed limitations in claim 11, except for wherein the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes are additively manufactured.
in product-by-process claim, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is proper because the "even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). The combination of previous references meets the structural limitations put forth in Claim 11, wherein the final product existing after fabrication is compared to prior art for the purposes of patentability. The limitations regarding “additive manufacturing” are drawn to method of production and not the structural aspects of the instant invention
Claim 12: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein at least one heat exchanger fin (39) extends transversely (to clarify, the assembly is joined tube-fin heat exchanger which is well known, corrugated fins are arranged between tubes) with respect to the helix axis (annotated FIG.6).
PNG
media_image3.png
286
528
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 13: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) are connected in series or in parallel with respect to a flow of the heat exchanger fluid (first medium heat exchanger medium).
Claim 14: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the respective helix axes of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) are at least partially curved (see FIG.5a parts of tubes are curved).
Claim 15: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein one helix axis of the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) is at least partially curved (to clarify, axes are arbitrary and can be defined and set and drawn to be curved or straight line).
PNG
media_image4.png
496
468
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 16: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 15, wherein the one helix axis includes multiple arches (to clarify, as shown in annotated FIG.5a in claim 15 the arbitrary axis has multiple arches).
Claim 17: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein each helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) includes at least one flow-manipulating directing element arranged inside (multi chamber tubes 47 include manipulating directing element inside its internal volume; see FIG.7s).
Claim 18: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 17, wherein the at least one flow-manipulating directing element (multi chamber tubes 47 include manipulating directing element inside its internal volume; see FIG.7s) consists of a radially inwardly and rectilinearly extending rib (ribs 52), a radially inwardly extending pin, or a helically extending rib.
Claim 19: Boger as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein each helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) has a circular, elliptical or oval cross-sectional area (paragraph [35]: pipe cross sections for so called multi chamber pipes with circular, oval and rectangular cross sections).
Claim 20: Boger discloses a heat exchanger assembly for a motor vehicle (FIGs.1-3) comprising:
an inflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger);
an outflow side (paragraph [8]: second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger); and
a plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes through which a heat exchanger fluid (paragraph [9]: first medium heat exchanger medium) flows,
the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (paragraph [32]: rows of tubes 34 are twisted about their longitudinal axis form helical structures) positioned between the inflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger) and the outflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger), a medium (paragraph [8]: second medium like air) flows along a throughflow direction past the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) from the inflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes from one side inflow side of the heat exchanger) to the outflow side (second medium air flows over outer surface of pipes to other side outflow side of the heat exchanger), wherein the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) define respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) extending transversely with respect to the throughflow direction of the heat exchanger assembly (FIG.5a), the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a) extend parallel to one another and are spaced from one another such that one helically extending heat exchanger tube (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) loops around two adjacent helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) of the plurality of helically extending heat exchanger tubes (34) at uniform intervals along the respective helix axes (annotated FIG.5a).
PNG
media_image4.png
496
468
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure which is relevant to heat exchanger:
Kirkham (US 2019/0217409 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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 on (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 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.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763