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 § 103
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.
Claims 20-22, 28-29, and 32-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (WO 2014012283 A1) in view of Fu (CN 108317775 A (translation provided by Applicant in US Application 17/558,203)).
As to claim 20, Li teaches a method of manufacturing a heat rejection apparatus (a coil evaporative heat exchanger shown in Fig 6) that includes a hybrid heat exchanger (coil heat exchanger 5), the method comprising: forming the hybrid heat exchanger, wherein forming comprises: providing a plurality of metallic tubes (heat exchanger tubes 11. On Page 3 of the translation, in the paragraph beginning with “The serpentine coil 1...” Li teaches “The heat transfer tube of the serpentine coil 1 may be a copper tube, a stainless steel tube or a galvanized steel tube, etc.” Each coil 1 is combined with fillers 2 to create a fin 5. There are a plurality of fins 5 which form the hybrid heat exchanger.) each having an interior to receive a process fluid (Li describes a “high temperature fluid” is “sucked into the serpentine coil 1” (See Page 4 Paragraph beginning with “The working principle”), the metallic tubes each having an inlet end portion and an outlet end portion (inlet 3 and outlet 4 as illustrated in Fig 1); manufacturing a plurality of bodies of a [ ] polymer (Filler 2. See Page 2 paragraph 6: “Further, the cross-sectional shape of the filler is wavy, rectangular or oblong, and the material of the filler is Rubber and plastic (PVC, PP, PE, etc.), paper or aluminum foil, copper foil and other metal materials.”), the bodies each having an outer surface with surface enhancement features to affect fluid flow at the body outer surface (“the cross-sectional shape of the filler is wavy” Id.); thermally integrating the [ ] polymer bodies and the metallic tubes (Page 2 paragraph 7: “Further, one or more of the fillers are fixed between the heat exchange tubes of the coil by welding, snapping or joining.”); connecting the inlet end portions of the metallic tubes to an inlet header (As described at the “Working Principle” paragraph: “The high temperature fluid is sucked into the serpentine coil 1 through the inlet header” This implies the inlet portions of the tubes are connected to the inlet header (unlabeled)) and connecting the outlet end portions of the metallic tubes to an outlet header (As described at the “Working Principle” paragraph: “the high-temperature fluid is cooled to a low-temperature fluid and then flows out from the outlet header.” This implies the outlet portions of the tubes are connected to the outlet header (unlabeled)) to permit a first fluid to flow from the inlet header to the outlet header via the metallic tubes (the fluid flows from the inlet to the outlet through the serpentine coils 1), the metallic tubes and bodies thermally integrated therewith (coil 1 and filler 2 combine to create a fin 5) having lateral spacings between the bodies that permit air to flow between the bodies and facilitate heat transfer between the bodies and air (The fins 5 are connected by inlet and outlet headers, and are not otherwise described or shown to touch. Thus the fins 5 would have been understood to have space between them to allow the “wind” described in Page 4 to perform evaporative cooling); and assembling the heat rejection apparatus (the coil evaporative heat exchanger shown in Fig 6) including the hybrid heat exchanger (the several fins 5), wherein assembling the heat rejection apparatus comprises: positioning the hybrid heat exchanger downstream of an air inlet of the heat rejection apparatus and upstream of an air outlet of the heat rejection apparatus (the frame 10 has an air outlet on the side of the fan 6 (right side) and an air inlet on the left side, according to the arrows indicating airflow through the device. The fins 5 are located between the air inlet and outlets), the heat rejection apparatus including a fan (fan 6, see Fig 6) configured to generate airflow from the air inlet to the air outlet and contact the hybrid heat exchanger (this is described on Page 4: “At the same time, the fan 6 introduces the wind with lower temperature and relative humidity into the space where the evaporative condenser is located”); and providing a liquid distribution system of the heat rejection apparatus (water distributor 8), the liquid distribution apparatus configured to distribute liquid into the airflow to facilitate the hybrid heat exchanger removing heat from the airflow (the water distributor 8 sprays water onto the serpentine coil which promotes evaporative cooling).
Li teaches the bodies (filler 2) are rubber or plastic, but does not explicitly teach the bodies are a thermally conductive polymer. Rather, rubber and plastic may be understood by a person having ordinary skill in the art as thermally insulating rather than thermally conducting.
However, Fu teaches a hybrid heat exchanger having a similar configuration. See Fig 1 where the heat exchanger has a pipe 1 and plate 2 and ribbed plate 4. Fu teaches the ribbed plate 4 is “heat-conducting plastic.” Fu’s heat-conducting plastic plate 4 “increases the heat exchange area and improves the evaporating temperature and reaches the goal of saving energy”. See Fu [0025]
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have replaced the plastic filler 2 of Li with the heat-conducting plastic of Fu. Such a person would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to achieve the benefits described by Fu such as increased heat transfer and energy savings.
As to claim 21, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein each of the metallic tube comprises runs, and at least one bend connecting the runs (runs and bends are illustrated in Li Fig 1 and Fu Fig 11).
As to claim 22, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein the metallic tube has an outer surface portion with a first surface area (the outer surface area of a length of metallic tube (cylindrical) is inherently 2(π)(radius)(length).); wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube comprises securing the thermally conductive polymer body and the outer surface portion of the metallic tube (the securing step is at least implied in the fact that the structure exists. Moreover, Fu teaches the plate 4 is “one time injected into a whole” [0034].); and wherein the thermally conductive polymer body includes an outer surface having a second surface area larger than the first surface area (Fu teaches the addition of the plate 4 increases heat exchange of the system (see the abstract which teaches the operation energy consumption of the refrigerator can be reduced by 6 to 15 percent.), and as heat exchange is proportional to surface area, the surface area is known to have increased.).
As to claim 28, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer body comprises positioning thermally conductive paste between the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube (Fu [0016] teaches applying thermally conductive adhesive to gaps between components).
As to claim 29, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube comprises melting a portion of the thermally conductive polymer body so that the molten portion of the thermally conductive polymer body fills openings between the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube (Fu teaches at Paragraph [0017] a method of forming by “mold production.” And [0034] discusses “one-time injection into a whole.” Injection molding is a process in which molten material is formed into shape by molds. Thus the limitations of melting and filling openings are met by the process of injection molding.).
As to claim 32, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein the metallic tubes include at least one of: a stainless steel tube; an aluminum tube; a copper tube; and a carbon steel tube (Fu [0025] describes the pipes as “copper pipes.” Li likewise teaches the coils 1 are copper).
As to claim 33, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein providing the plurality of metallic tubes comprises providing at least three metallic tubes (Li teaches “a plurality of heat exchange fins” at Page 4 lines 14-20, referring to several bodies connected by an inlet header and an outlet header. Examiner previously took Official Notice, and now treats as fact that it is reasonable for three bodies (each body having a single tube) to be considered “a plurality” in the field of heat exchangers. Accordingly, it would have been an obvious matter of ordinary engineering skill to have provided for at least three metallic tubes, each tube representing a single heat exchanging body described by Li in view of Fu.).
As to claim 34, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 further comprising providing attachment members (Li teaches rope F at Page 3 lines 41-48 and Fig 3); and wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer bodies and the metallic tubes includes securing the metallic tubes between the attachment members and the bodies (Li teaches the ropes hold the tubes against the packing 2).
As to claim 35, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 34 wherein the bodies each includes a first collar portion (Li teaches groove 21) and the attachment members each include a second collar portion (Li teaches ropes F); and wherein securing the metallic tubes between the attachment members and the bodies comprises securing the metallic tube between the first and second collar portions (as shown in Li Fig 3, the ropes F extend over the coil 1, and as shown in Li Fig 4, the groove extends over the other side of the coil 1.).
As to claim 36, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 34 wherein the metallic tubes each have a circular cross- section (both Fu and Li teach tubes/coils have a circular cross section). Fu in view of Li does not teach wherein one of the body and the attachment member extends about a majority of a circumference of a metallic tube of the metallic tubes; and wherein the other of the body and the attachment member extends about a minority of the circumference of the metallic tube.
Instead, Li teaches in Fig 4 the packing 2 having grooves 21 cover approximately ½ of a circumference of a coil 1. Applicant has not disclosed that having either an attachment member or the other of the body extending either a majority or a minority of the circumference of the tube solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose. Moreover, it appears that the packing of Li, or applicant’s invention, would perform equally well with packing and rope extending around the circumference of the coil 1 to any reasonable extent.
Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Li such that the body and attachment member extend their corresponding circumferential extents because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Fu in view of Li.
As to claim 37, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 34 but does not teach the attachment members are made of the thermally conductive polymer material.
Rather, the rope F of Li is not given a particular material. However, as the purpose of Fu and Li is to transfer heat, it appears to be a matter of ordinary engineering skill to have attempted to maximize heat transfer by providing any portion of the arrangement in touch with the coil 1 to have excellent heat transfer properties, including forming the rope F out of the same material as the packing 2.
As to claim 38, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 wherein at least one of the metallic tubes is a serpentine tube having a plurality of straight runs and return bends connecting the straight runs (as shown for example in Li Fig 3).
As to claim 39, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 38 wherein the serpentine tube has a unitary, one-piece construction (as shown for example in Li Fig 3 and described at Page 2 line 34: “the coil is a serpentine coil formed by continuous S-bending of the heat exchange tube”).
Claims 23-25, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Fu as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Vadder (US 10,780,632).
As to claim 23, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 but does not teach manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer body comprises manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer body using additive manufacturing.
Rather, Fu teaches the plate 4 is made by a “mold” process [0017]. However, in the field of hybrid heat exchangers, it was known at the time the invention was effectively filed to manufacture a hybrid heat exchanger by additive manufacturing the polymer portions of the heat exchanger. See Vadder which teaches a method of manufacturing headers for heat exchangers. Vadder teaches metal support tubes 3 are connected by additively manufactured plastic headers 4.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have swapped the injection molding process of Fu for the additive manufacturing method of Vadder. Such a person would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success. For simple geometries, injection molding and additive manufacturing are interchangeable. For complex geometries, additive manufacturing is an improvement over injection molding as injection molding is incapable of making certain complex geometries.
As to claim 24, Li in view of Fu and Vadder teaches the method of claim 23 wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube comprises additive manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer in situ with the metallic tube (Vadder teaches the header 3 is additively manufactured in situ with the tubes 3. See Col 3 line 66-Col 4 line 5).
As to claim 25, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 but does not teach manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer body comprises manufacturing portions of the thermally conductive polymer body using additive manufacturing.
Rather, Fu teaches the plate 4 is made by a “mold” process [0017]. However, in the field of hybrid heat exchangers, it was known at the time the invention was effectively filed to manufacture a hybrid heat exchanger by additive manufacturing the polymer portions of the heat exchanger. See Vadder which teaches a method of manufacturing headers for heat exchangers. Vadder teaches metal support tubes 3 are connected by additively manufactured plastic headers 4.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have swapped the injection molding process of Fu for the additive manufacturing method of Vadder. Such a person would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success. For simple geometries, injection molding and additive manufacturing are interchangeable. For complex geometries, additive manufacturing is an improvement over injection molding as injection molding is incapable of making certain complex geometries.
Fu in view of Vadder teach: and wherein thermally integrating the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube comprises assembling the portions of the thermally conductive polymer body and the metallic tube (Vadder teaches the header 3 is additively manufactured in situ with the tubes 3. See Col 3 line 66-Col 4 line 5).
As to claim 30, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 but does not teach manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer body comprises using additive manufacturing of a polymeric material infused with discontinuous conductive particles.
Rather, Fu teaches the plate 4 is made of a polymeric material infused with conductive particles (see Paragraph 0019) by a “mold” process [0017]. However, in the field of hybrid heat exchangers, it was known at the time the invention was effectively filed to manufacture a hybrid heat exchanger by additive manufacturing the polymer portions of the heat exchanger. See Vadder which teaches a method of manufacturing headers for heat exchangers. Vadder teaches metal support tubes 3 are connected by additively manufactured plastic headers 4.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have swapped the injection molding process of Fu for the additive manufacturing method of Vadder. Such a person would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success. For simple geometries, injection molding and additive manufacturing are interchangeable. For complex geometries, additive manufacturing is an improvement over injection molding as injection molding is incapable of making certain complex geometries.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Fu as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Vadder (US 10,780,632) and Aegerter et al. (“Pultrusion of hybrid bicomponent fibers for 3D printing of continuous fiber reinforced thermoplastics”)
As to claim 31, Li in view of Fu teaches the method of claim 20 but does not teach manufacturing the thermally conductive polymer body comprises using additive manufacturing.
Rather, Fu teaches the plate 4 is made of a polymeric material infused with conductive particles (see Paragraph 0019) by a “mold” process [0017]. However, in the field of hybrid heat exchangers, it was known at the time the invention was effectively filed to manufacture a hybrid heat exchanger by additive manufacturing the polymer portions of the heat exchanger. See Vadder which teaches a method of manufacturing headers for heat exchangers. Vadder teaches metal support tubes 3 are connected by additively manufactured plastic headers 4.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have swapped the injection molding process of Fu for the additive manufacturing method of Vadder. Such a person would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success. For simple geometries, injection molding and additive manufacturing are interchangeable. For complex geometries, additive manufacturing is an improvement over injection molding as injection molding is incapable of making certain complex geometries.
Li in view of Fu and Vadder does not teach additive manufacturing including forming a bead comprising a metallic strand and a polymer annulus extending around the strand.
Rather, in the field of additive manufacturing, and specifically Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), filament serves as the feedstock. The filament may have fillers to impart properties such as conductivity. Aegerter teaches one way of imparting fillers to filament is by pultrusion, thus creating a filament having a metal strand surrounded by polymer. See Abstract: “Hybrid bicomponent fibers overcome these constraints because each individual reinforcement filament is clad in a thermoplastic sheath.” The filament is known to be a metal wire, as discussed by Aegerter in section 2.3.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have performed the additive manufacturing of Vadder using the bicomponent filament of Aegerter. Such a person would have been motivated to do so with a reasonable expectation of success, since Aegerter teaches the pultruded filaments overcome constraints of other filaments, such as limits in material quality (Abstract).
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Fu as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of Li et al. (US 2017/0276437).
As to claim 40, Fu in view of Li teaches the method of claim 38 but does not teach the serpentine tube comprises a plurality of assembled straight runs and return bends.
Rather, it coils of Fu and Li are each made by bending a continuous tube, not an assembled tube.
However, Li’437 teaches at [0025]: “As shown in FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, the combined plate-and-tube heat exchange piece includes a serpentine tube 1 machined by a heat exchange tube (the machining can be a process bending a long heat exchange tube to form the serpentine tube, or the machining also can be a process welding bent heat exchange tubes and straight heat exchange tubes together to form the serpentine tube), and a heat transfer plate 2.”
Thus it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have provided for a method of forming a serpentine tube as either bent from a single tube, or as an assembled plurality of straight runs and return bends. See MPEP § 2143 B which describes the prima facie obviousness of applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. In this case, the techniques of bending or assembling are taught by Li’427 to be interchangeable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On Pages 7-8 Applicant argues, “a person having ordinary skill in the art would have no reason to modify the filler layer 2 to be made of a thermally conductive polymer in view of Fu...because the filler layer 2 is not intended to conduct heat – instead the filler 2 provides a surface for the water to travel along and be cooled by airflow.”
Examiner notes that filler 2 is taught to be formed of any one of a number of materials, including metals such as aluminum, copper, or rubber or plastics. Even if Filler 2 is never described by Li as being useful for transferring heat directly, a filler 2 made of aluminum or copper will inherently transfer heat from coil 1 into the evaporating water.
Moreover, even if Li doesn’t appreciate that filler 2 may transfer heat, this does not preclude an artisan from recognizing that heat may be advantageously transferred through the filler 2 if the filler 2 is made of a heat-conductive material. Fu teaches the benefit of a similar rib plate (4) being made of heat-conducting material is precisely to increase heat transfer and thus increase energy savings. Thus, the obviousness of the combination of Fu’s heat conducting material as the material of Li’s filler 2 is derived from Fu, not Li.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the combination of Fu in view of Li on Page 9 are moot since the rejections above rely on Li in view of Fu.
The device of Li is modified by the heat-conductive material of Fu. As both Li and Fu are analogous to the present invention, they are available for combination. See MPEP § 2141.01(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB JAMES CIGNA whose telephone number is (571)270-5262. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm Monday-Friday.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/JACOB J CIGNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 6 March 2026