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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/18/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse in the reply filed on 2/19/2026 species A2, B1, and C3 with traverse is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that of species C3 and C4 illustrate the same baffle. This is found persuasive and the restriction is withdrawn.
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.
Claim 3, 7, and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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 “about” in the limitation “the bending angle is about 20 degrees to about 70 degrees” claims 3, and 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term about 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. It is unclear the amount about is referring to in the drawings or specification. For examination purpose, the limitation “the bending angle is about 20 degrees to about 70 degrees” is interpreted to mean that the bending angle is about 20+/-5 degrees to about 70 +/- 5 degrees.
The term “about” in the limitation “the plurality of baffles are positioned about 120 degrees apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the shell” claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term about 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. It is unclear the amount about is referring to in the drawings or specification. For examination purpose, the limitation “the plurality of baffles are positioned about 120 degrees apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the shell” is interpreted to mean that the plurality of baffles are positioned about 120+/-5 degrees apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the shell.
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, 2, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GUALA (US 2693942 A).
PNG
media_image1.png
879
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, GUALA teaches a heat exchanger (fig. 1), comprising:
a shell (fig. 1, shell 1) extending longitudinally;
a tube (fig. 1, tubes 5) located inside the shell and extending in a longitudinal direction; and
a baffle (fig. 1, baffle 6) located inside the shell and including a tube through hole (fig. 2, holes 8) through which the tube passes (column 2 line 35-38 states “the relative positions of tubes 5 are further maintained by baffles 6 and 7 which are formed with openings 8 positioned in alignment with the holes in the tube sheet” the tubes pass through the holes of the baffle),
wherein the baffle includes a fan-shaped plane (shown in annotated fig. 2, Fan shaped plane Fsp) and sawteeth (shown in annotated fig. 2, Sawteeth St, Sawteeth St evenly spaced on the inside edge of Fan shaped plane Fsp) disposed on at least one side of the fan-shaped plane.
Regarding claim 2, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1 GUALA further teaches wherein the sawteeth (shown in fig. 2, Sawteeth St are bent at a angle of zero) are bent at a predetermined bending angle.
Regarding claim 6, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, GUALA further teaches wherein the baffle is of a plurality of baffles (shown in fig. 2, baffle 6, 7, 14, 15, 20, and 21), and baffles adjacent to each other have different vertical directions of the fan-shaped planes (shown in annotated fig. 2, Fan shaped plane) than each other.
Regarding claim 8, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, GUALA further teaches wherein
a tube is of a plurality of tubes (fig. 1, tubes 5), and
a tube through hole is of a plurality of tube through holes (fig. 2, holes 8, column 2 line 35-38 states “the relative positions of tubes 5 are further maintained by baffles 6 and 7 which are formed with openings 8 positioned in alignment with the holes in the tube sheet” the tubes pass through the holes of the baffle).
Regarding claim 9, GUALA teaches, the heat exchanger of claim 8, further teaches the baffle includes a rod through hole (shown in fig. 2, slot 10 for rods/strips 9).
Regarding claim 11, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 8, GUALA further teaches wherein some of the sawteeth (shown in annotated fig. 2, Sawteeth St) do not include at least one tube through hole of the plurality tube
through holes (fig. 1, tubes 5).
Regarding Claim 15, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, GUALA further teaches wherein the shape of the sawteeth is trapezoid (Shown in annotated fig. 2, Sawteeth St) or triangular. Though GUALA teaches the claimed shape, examiner also would like to point out that the shapes are obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.04_IV_B: In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.).
Regarding claim 16, GUALA teaches a baffle (fig. 1, baffle 6) for a heat exchanger (fig. 1), comprising:
a fan-shaped plane (shown in annotated fig. 2, Fan shaped plane);
a tube through hole (fig. 2, holes 8) through which a tube (fig. 1, tubes 5) passes; and
sawteeth (shown in annotated fig. 2, Sawteeth St, Sawteeth St evenly spaced on the inside edge of Fan shaped plane Fsp) formed on at least one side of the fan-shaped plane.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8, 11, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CHEN (CN106979716A).
PNG
media_image2.png
337
588
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, CHEN teaches, a heat exchanger (fig. 8), comprising:
a shell (shown in fig. 8, shell 1) extending longitudinally;
a tube (Background technology para. 2 states “Shell-and-tube heat exchanger generally consists of a pipe bundle, shell body, pipe box, an outer cover main components such as tube bundle is tubular core of heat exchanger” the tube bundle is located in the core of the shell) located inside the shell and extending in a longitudinal direction; and
a baffle (shown in fig. 4, baffle plate body 3) located inside the shell and including a tube through hole (shown in fig. 4, tube hole 4, Background technology para. 2 states “the tube bundle is generally composed of heat exchange tube, traverse baffle (or called support plate) and a pipe plate” the baffle is composed of tube through holes that support the tube bundle) through which the tube passes,
wherein the baffle includes a fan-shaped plane (shown in annotated fig. 4, Fan shaped plane Fsp) and sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, toothed surface 34) disposed on at least one side of the fan-shaped plane.
Regarding claim 2, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 1, further CHEN teaches wherein
the sawteeth are bent at a predetermined bending angle (shown in fig. 2, fold 5).
Regarding claim 3, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 2, further CHEN teaches, wherein
the bending angle is about 20 degrees to about 70 degrees (shown in annotated fig. 9 bending angle ba is equal to 180 – a, para. 0032 embodiment 1 states “edge folds include angle complement of between 3 is alpha, 90 degrees less than 180 degrees, preferably, a=135 degrees” thus 180ᴼ-135ᴼ=45ᴼ is within the claimed range about 20ᴼ-70ᴼ.).
Regarding claim 4, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 2, further CHEN teaches wherein
the bending angles of all of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, toothed surface 34 each are bent to the same angle) are equal to each other.
PNG
media_image3.png
274
428
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 1, further CHEN teaches wherein
the baffle is of a plurality of baffles (shown in fig. 9, baffle plate main body 2), and
baffles adjacent to each other have different vertical directions of the fan-shaped planes (shown in annotated fig. 9, Fan shaped plane Fsp) than each other.
Regarding claim 8, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 1, further CHEN teaches wherein
a tube is of a plurality of tubes (Background technology para. 2 states “Shell-and-tube heat exchanger generally consists of a pipe bundle, shell body, pipe box, an outer cover main components such as tube bundle is tubular core of heat exchanger” the tube bundle is located in the core of the shell), and
a tube through hole (shown in fig. 4, tube hole 4, Background technology para. 2 states “the tube bundle is generally composed of heat exchange tube, traverse baffle (or called support plate) and a pipe plate” the baffle is composed of tube through holes that support the tube bundle) is of a plurality of tube through holes.
Regarding claim 11, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 8, further CHEN teaches wherein
some of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, toothed surface 34) do not include at least one tube through hole of the plurality tube through holes.
Regarding claim 15, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 1, further CHEN teaches wherein
the shape of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 5, lengthening strip 35) is trapezoid or triangular. Though Chen teaches the claimed shape, examiner also would like to point out that the shapes are obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.04_IV_B: In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.).
Regarding claim 16, CHEN teaches, a baffle (shown in fig. 4, baffle plate body 3) for a heat exchanger (fig. 8), comprising:
a fan-shaped plane (shown in annotated fig. 4, Fan shaped plane Fsp);
a tube through hole (shown in fig. 4, tube hole 4, Background technology para. 2 states “the tube bundle is generally composed of heat exchange tube, traverse baffle (or called support plate) and a pipe plate” the baffle is composed of tube through holes that support the tube bundle) through which a tube (Background technology para. 2 states “Shell-and-tube heat exchanger generally consists of a pipe bundle, shell body, pipe box, an outer cover main components such as tube bundle is tubular core of heat exchanger” the tube bundle is located in the core of the shell) passes; and
sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, toothed surface 34) formed on at least one side of the fan-shaped plane (shown in annotated fig. 4, Fan shaped plane Fsp).
Regarding claim 17, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 16, further CHEN teaches wherein
the sawteeth are bent at a predetermined bending angle (shown in fig. 2, fold 5).
Regarding claim 18, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 17, further CHEN teaches wherein
the bending angle is about 20 to about 70 degrees (shown in annotated fig. 9, bending angle ba is equal to 180 – a, para. 0032 embodiment 1 states “edge folds include angle complement of between 3 is alpha, 90 degrees less than 180 degrees, preferably, a=135 degrees” thus 180ᴼ-135ᴼ=45ᴼ is within the claimed range about 20ᴼ-70ᴼ.).
Regarding claim 19, CHEN teaches the limitations of claim 17, further CHEN teaches wherein
the bending angles of each of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 2, fold 5) are equal to each other.
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(s) 7, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUALA (US2693942A) in view of Cong (CN110530175A).
Regarding claim 7, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, but does not teach, wherein
the baffle is of a plurality of baffles and
three consecutive baffles of the plurality of baffles are positioned about 120 degrees
apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the shell.
Cong teaches, wherein
the baffle is of a plurality of baffles (shown in fig. 7, baffles 8), and
three consecutive baffles (shown in fig. 7, example 2 states “each of the spiral period baffle groups includes three described oblique flow curved baffles 8. The oblique flow curved baffle plate 8 is axially projected into a fan shape and the fan angle is 120 °” The three baffle plates are each 120 degrees apart in a fan shape) of the plurality of baffles are positioned about 120 degrees
apart from each other in a circumferential direction of the shell. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the baffle plate of GUALA, to be the fan plate taught by Cong, the motivation is to spiral the flow to reduce the dead zone area inside the flow. (Summary of the invention beneficial effect 8).
PNG
media_image4.png
773
695
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, GUALA further teaches:
a rod (shown in fig. 2, strip 9) extending through a rod through hole (shown in fig. 2, slot 10),
but does not teach explicitly wherein a radius of the rod through hole is smaller than a radius of the tube through hole.
Cong teaches a rod (shown in fig. 6, pull rod 10) extending through a rod through hole (shown in annotated fig. 7, Rod hole rh),
wherein a radius of the rod through hole is smaller than a radius of the tube through hole (shown in annotated fig. 7, Tube hole Th, the Tube hole Th is larger than Rod hole rh). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the baffle plate of GUALA, with the baffle and rod taught by Cong, the motivation to increase strength and durability of the structure (summary of the invention).
Claim(s) 12 & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUALA (US2693942A) in view of Hackbarth et al. (US20080279809A1).
Regarding claim 12&13, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, but does not teach, wherein
a coating layer is formed on the sawteeth, wherein
the coating layer includes at least one of zinc, nickel, chromium, aluminum, or silver.
However, Hackbarth teaches a heat exchanger comprising
a coating layer formed on the internal surface,
wherein the coating layer includes one of chromium or zinc or nickel (see para. 0002). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide sawteeth of GUALA, with the metallic coating as taught by Hackbarth, the motivation is to inhibit corrosion (see para. 0002).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUALA (US2693942A) in view of Singh et al. (US11512902B2).
Regarding claim 14, GUALA teaches the limitations of claim 1, does not teach wherein
the baffle comprises carbon steel.
Singh teaches wherein
the baffle (shown in fig. 29, metallic baffle 420 column 27 lines 49-52 “The baffle plate may be made of any suitable metal for the service conditions of the heat exchanger. Some non-limiting examples include carbon steel, stainless steel, Nitronic® 60, and others” The baffle plate is made of carbon steel) comprises carbon steel. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the baffle of GUALA, with the baffle material as taught by Singh, the motivation to increase strength and durability of the baffle plate (summary of the invention).
Claim 5, and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUALA (US2693942A) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US7740057B2).
Regarding claim 5, GUALA does not teach wherein some of the sawteeth have different bending angles from each other.
Wang teaches wherein some of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, inner helical baffles 5, column 9 line 46-56 states “inner helical angle of. alpha. at the inner diameter, which is given by: alpha. =arctan (P.sub.t/.pi. D), wherein: Pt is the pitch, and D is the diameter of the projected circle of inner helical curve of the outer helical baffle 6 onto the cross-section of the shell body. Under the given diameter of the shell body, the helical angle. alpha. increases with the increasing pitch” the difference of the bending angle of triangular sawteeth to each other is proportional to the pitch and angle alpha) have different bending angles form each other.
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the sawteeth of GUALA with different bending angles from each other, as taught by Wang, such modification would provide the benefit of increasing the turbulence in the flow.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUALA (US2693942A) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US7740057B2).
Regarding claim 20, GUALA does not teach wherein some of the sawteeth have different bending angles from each other.
Wang teaches wherein some of the sawteeth (shown in fig. 4, inner helical baffles 5, column 9 line 46-56 states “inner helical angle of. alpha. at the inner diameter, which is given by: alpha. =arctan (P.sub.t/.pi. D), wherein: Pt is the pitch, and D is the diameter of the projected circle of inner helical curve of the outer helical baffle 6 onto the cross-section of the shell body. Under the given diameter of the shell body, the helical angle. alpha. increases with the increasing pitch” the difference of the bending angle of triangular sawteeth to each other is proportional to the pitch and angle alpha) have different bending angles form each other.
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the sawteeth of GUALA with different bending angles from each other, as taught by Wang, such modification would provide the benefit of increasing the turbulence in the flow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY FRANCIS CANOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-5795. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/HENRY FRANCIS CANOVA/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights