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 with traverse of Group I, Species B (Claims 1, 3-11) in the reply filed on 07/13/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that (a) there is not a search burden; (b) Claim 12 depends from Claim 1. This is not found persuasive because:
The distinct species and inventions encompass mutually exclusive subject matter (mechanical vs chemical; apparatus vs method) and thus require separate searches including mutually exclusive keyword and classification searches.
Claim 12 is a different statutory class than Claim 1. Although Claim 12 requires all of the limitations of Claim 1 there is one-way distinctness due to the different statutory classes, and a search burden exists due to the apparatus only requiring the final end product, and not the method steps to produce said final end product. Thus the search for the apparatus requires different search queries and interpretations of the prior art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 2 and 12-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species and invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 07/13/2026.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nagata (JPS59212696A)(text citations from the provided machine translation).
Claim 1
Nagata teaches a method for protecting a tube of a heat exchanger (Figure 2), the method comprising: inserting at least one portion of a non-ferrous tube (Item 2 is a tube made from aluminum material (Line 72).) into a hole (8) of a tube sheet (6) of the heat exchanger (Figure 2); rolling the at least one portion of the non-ferrous tube to radially expand the at least one portion (Lines 61-62), wherein the at least one portion expands and forms a seal with the hole (Figure 2 shows the expanded part of the tube (2) is formed to the inner bore of the hole (8).); and affixing a sleeve (10) onto an inner surface corresponding to the at least one portion of the non-ferrous tube. (The sleeve (10) is affixed to the tube using adhesive (See Lines 134-135).)
Claim 3
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the sleeve is chemically affixed onto the inner surface of the non-ferrous tube. (Lines 134-135 teach the use of an adhesive to bond the sleeve to the tube.)
Claim 4
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein chemically affixing the sleeve comprises: applying an adhesive onto the inner surface of the non-ferrous tube (The adhesive, whether applies to the sleeve or tube surface in Nagata, will eventually be “applied” to the inner surface of the tube.); inserting the sleeve into the non-ferrous tube to coaxially align the sleeve with the inner surface of the non-ferrous tube (Figure 2); and affixing the sleeve onto the inner surface of the non-ferrous tube using the adhesive. (Lines 134-135)
Claim 5
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein affixing the sleeve on the inner surface (inner surface of 2) having a coating (4), comprises: coaxially aligning the sleeve with the coating of the non-ferrous tube (Figure 2); and affixing the sleeve onto the coating (Figure 2 / Line 67-68) or a damaged portion of the coating (This alternative is not selected for this rejection.), wherein the damaged portion is defined as a portion of the coating which is rolled to radially expand the at least one portion of the non-ferrous tube.
Claim 8
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the sleeve (10) is coaxially aligned with a joint of the non-ferrous tube, the joint is defined between a rolled portion of the non-ferrous tube and an unrolled portion of the non-ferrous tube. (Figure 2 shows a portion of the sleeve is located at, and coaxially aligned with the central longitudinal axis of the tube (2) at the transition point between the rolled and non-rolled portions of the tube.)
Claim 9
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the non-ferrous tube is made up of aluminum. (Line 71)
Claim 10
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the sleeve is formed of a watertight material. (Line 130-131 teach the use of a synthetic resin. This is a polymer that is watertight.)
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata as applied in Claim 4, further in view of Ammon (EP2208956A2).
Claim 6
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein the sleeve is affixed using an adhesive (Lines 135-136)
Nagata does not explicitly disclose wherein the adhesive is a pressure sensitive adhesive.
However, Ammon teaches wherein the adhesive is a pressure sensitive adhesive. (Claim 2)
One of ordinary skill would have selected pressure sensitive adhesives from the known list of adhesives provided by the references because they do not require any solvents/water/heat in order to function, thus reducing the required equipment. (General Engineering Rationale)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to substitute the known pressure sensitive adhesive of Ammon for the adhesive in Nagata because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to substitute one known element for another to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The predictable result is the sleeve in Nagata will be secured using a pressure sensitive adhesive.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata as applied in Claim 5, further in view of Schiehlen (US20180224222A1).
Claim 7
Nagata teaches the method according to claim 5.
Nagata does not disclose wherein the adhesive is activated by applying pressure on at least one portion of the sleeve with a rolling tool.
However, Schiehlen teaches the adhesive is activated by applying pressure on at least one portion of the sleeve with a rolling tool. (¶0025 teaches that a contact pressure and heat is applied to the adhesive layer between a sleeve/tube (2) and the structure to be adhered to (bore of 3) using a tool (11). The tool (11) applies pressure to a portion of the sleeve/tube (2) and thus meets the functional requirements of the claimed tool. The claim does not specify any structure/function of the tool that is different from the tool (11) in Schiehlen.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known pressure and heating tool technique of Schiehlen to the adhesive securing of the sleeve to the tube method of Nagata in order to provide a method that improves the connection between portion due to the contact pressure (¶0024) in a simple and effective process that requires reduced time. (¶0025)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known pressure and heating tool technique of Schiehlen to the adhesive securing of the sleeve to the tube method of Nagata because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is the sleeve/adhesive connection of Nagata will be improved by using a pressure mandrel to press the sleeve against the tube and heat the adhesive.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata as applied in Claim 10, further in view of Bay (US2157107A).
Claim 11
Nagata teaches the method of Claim 10.
Nagata does not disclose the watertight material is a flexible elastomer.
However, Bay teaches the watertight material is a flexible elastomer. (Figures 1-4 teach an insert (13) that is placed within a tube (10) at the header plate (11). The insert is made from rubber, which is an elastomer (Col 2, Line 15) and is secured by gluing (Col. 2, Lines 15-16).)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to substitute the known flexible elastomer of Bay for the material in Nagata in order to use a material that is chemically inert with respect to the tube and header (Bay, Col. 2, Lines 12-14); has high resistance to abrasion (Col. 2, Lines 41-42); and has high electrical insulating properties (Col. 2, Lines 45-46).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found on the PTO-892 Form.
Document
Date
Description of Relevant Subject Matter
US3317222A
1964-04-16
Figures 2-3 teach a tube (12) that is expanded at the tube plate (10) by rolling (See Col. 3, Lines 20-22 and Col. 25-30). A sleeve (insert) is placed within the inner diameter of the tube and expanded (See figures 2-3) to secure/affix it to the inside of the tube. (Claim 1) Figures 2-3 show the sleeve is located at a transition point of the tube between the expanded and non-expanded portions. (Claim 8) Col. 3, Lines 60-65 teach the tube is made from aluminum. (Claim 9) The insert/sleeve is made from aluminum as well, and the reference does not say it is porous. (Claim 10)
DE2224675A1
1972-12-14
Figure 2 teaches an insert (7) that is placed within the inner diameter of a tube (1) that is rolled to expand it (¶0006). The insert is expanded to create a connection (¶0007-0008). (Claim 1) The insert is located at the expansion portion of the pipe (Figure 2). (Claim 8) The pipe is made from aluminum (¶0008) (Claim 9) The insert is made from titanium or aluminum (¶0008) (Claim 10)
US2735698
1956-02-21
Step 6 of the process of inserting a ferrule into a pipe is to roll the ferrule to obtain a deformation and secure the ferrule to the tube end. Col. 4, Lines 5-12 teach this technique allows the deformation of the ferrule to be uniform.
US20180224222A1
2016-08-04
Figure 2 teaches a tube (2) that is secured using an adhesive (6, 7, 8). The adhesive connection and deformation of the end of the tube is done using pressure and heat (¶0025)
US20150159956A1
Figure 7 teaches a sleeve (8) inserted into the tube of a heat exchanger.
US20220074684A1
2020-09-08
[0047]
Referring now to FIG. 10, another example is shown in which a tube 12 is inserted and optionally rolled into the tube insertion aperture 34 of a tubesheet 14 prior to the damage-resistant layer 42 being applied. Once positioned in the tube insertion aperture 34 as shown in FIG. 10, an application process 60 (e.g., welding or overlay process) is utilized to apply the damage-resistant layer 42 in situ. It can be appreciated that only a portion of the layer 42 is shown in FIG. 10 to illustrate the application process 60 in progress.
JPS59212696A
1984-12-01
Figure 2 teaches a heat exchanger tube (2) that is expanded by rolling (Line 61-62) to secure it to the tube plate (6). A sleeve (10) is then inserted into the interior of the tube and affixed using adhesive (Line 65). (Claims 1 and 3) The adhesive is applied either to the sleeve or to the pipe, either way the adhesive ends up being “applied” to the inner surface of the pipe. (Claim 4) Figure 2 shows a coating (4) that is formed on the interior of the tube (2) and that the sleeve (10) is placed on the coating. (Claim 5) The tube is made from aluminum material (Line 71) (Claim 9). The sleeve thickness can be 1.5mm (Line161) or 5mm (Line 185). The sleeve is made from a synthetic resin (Line 130) that is flexible (Line 131). (Claims 10-11)
US2157107A
1938-05-09
Figures 1-4 teach an insert (13) that is placed within a tube (10) at the header plate (11). The insert is made from rubber, which is an elastomer (Col 2, Line 15) and is secured by gluing (Col. 2, Lines 15-16). The rubber is used because it is chemically inert with respect to the tube and header (Col. 2, Lines 12-14); has high resistance to abrasion (Col. 2, Lines 41-42); and has high electrical insulating properties (Col. 2, Lines 45-46). (Claim 11)
US2195403A
1939-04-14
Figure 1 teaches an insert (10) that is made of rubber or rubber like material. (Col. 1, Lines 40-44)
US4706743A
1986-01-13
Figure 8 teaches a sleeve (1) placed inside of a tube (6) that can be connected to the tube using expansion and bonding. (See Col. 3 Lines 24-28)
US20080202732A1
2006-07-03
Figure 1 teaches sleeves (4) that are connected to tubes (1) using a rolling expansion (¶0030).
US4152818A
1977-07-14
Figure 8 teaches a rolling tool used to expand a ferrule (19) against an inner tube of a heat exchanger in order to secure it in place.
EP2208956A2
2010-07-21
Claim 2 teaches the use of pressure sensitive adhesives as a known alternative to other known adhesives. (Claim 6) One of ordinary skill would have selected pressure sensitive adhesives from the known list of adhesives provided by the references because they do not require any solvents/water/heat in order to function, thus reducing the required equipment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael W Hotchkiss whose telephone number is (571)272-3854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 0800-1600.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/MICHAEL W HOTCHKISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights