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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 05/09/2026. The drawing objection and 35 U.S.C. 112b rejection is withdrawn. Claims 4-6, 8, 11, 19-20 and 25 are cancelled. Claims 26-27 are new. Claims 1-3, 7, 9-10, 12-18, 21-24 and 26-27 remain pending for consideration on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9-10, 12-15, 18, 23 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae et al (US 20180347886 A1, hereinafter Chae) in view of Zhu et al (CN 214039113 U, hereinafter Zhu) and Kawamoto et al (JP 2020118386 A, hereinafter Kawamoto).
Regarding claim 1, Chae teaches an air duct (cooling air duct 60) for a refrigerator (refrigerator 1) having an enclosure (cabinet 11) and a refrigeration system (as shown on figure 2) with a fan (fan 26) for generating a cooling airflow (paragraph 0032), the air duct (cooling air duct 60) comprising: an air inlet (cooling air inlet 610) fluidly couplable to and arranged for receiving the cooling airflow from the refrigeration system (paragraph 0054); an air outlet (air outlet 613) downstream of the air inlet (paragraph 0060), arranged to direct the cooling airflow from the refrigeration system into the enclosure in a first direction (outwards towards duct 90, paragraph 0070 and as shown on figures 4 and 13); and a diverter (partition part 640) located between the air inlet and the air outlet (as shown on figure 13) and arranged such that a portion of the cooling air flow contacts the diverter (upon air entering passage 620, figure 13) and is diverted by the diverter (partition part 640) into the enclosure (paragraph 0069) in a second direction different to the first direction (as shown on figure 13); wherein the second direction is downwards (as shown on figure 13) relative to the first direction (downwards towards duct 70, as shown on figure 11 and 13).
Chae teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach a fan mounting plate adjacent the air inlet and comprising at least one opening holding a fan.
However, Zhu teaches a fan mounting plate (mounting frame 516) adjacent the air inlet (first air passage part 130) and comprising at least one opening (as shown on figure 5) holding a fan (as shown on figure 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the refrigerator in the teachings of Chae to include a fan mounting plate adjacent the air inlet and comprising at least one opening holding a fan in view of the teachings of Zhu in order to yield the predictable result of accelerating the speed of the air flow and improve the heat exchange efficiency.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach the diverter comprises a louvre vent.
However, Kawamoto teaches wherein the diverter (duct plate 52, corresponding to partition 640 of Chae) comprises a louvre vent (louver vents, 174, 176, 178 and 180, as shown on figure 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the refrigerator in the combined teachings to include the diverter comprises a louvre vent in view of the teachings of Kawamoto in order to yield the predictable result of blowing cold air into the storage chamber.
Further, it is understood, claim 1 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach wherein the first direction (outwards towards duct 90, paragraph 0070 and as shown on figure 4 and 13 of Chae) is parallel to an upper surface of the enclosure (parallel to the upper surface of cabinet 11, as shown on figure 4 of Chae).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein the air duct (cooling air duct 60 of Chae) and the upper surface of the enclosure (upper surface of cabinet 11, as shown on figure 4 of Chae) define a channel (towards duct 90, as shown on figures 4 and 13 of Chae).
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach wherein the diverter (partition part 640 of Chae) comprises a plurality of openings (as shown on figure 13 of Chae).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein the louvre vent (louver vents, 174, 176, 178 and 180, as shown on figure 7 of Kawamoto) comprises a plurality of blades (as shown on figure 7 of Kawamoto).
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach wherein at least two of the blades (vents 174/178 of Kawamoto) point in different directions (point in different directions than vents 176/180, as shown on figure 7 of Kawamoto).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach further comprising a duct body (body where passage 620 is located, as shown on figure 13 of Chae) between the air inlet (cooling air inlet 610 of Chae) and the outlet (cooling air outlet 611 of Chae).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach wherein the duct body (body prior to where passage 620 is located, as shown on figure 13 of Chae) comprises an inlet body portion (inlet body adjacent to cooling air inlet 610, as shown on figures 13 and 15 of Chae) adjacent the air inlet (cooling air inlet 610 of Chae).
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach wherein the duct (cooling air duct 60 of Chae) comprises an outlet body portion (outlet body portion adjacent to the outlet 611, as shown on figures 8 and 13 of Chae) adjacent the air outlet (cooling air outlet 613 of Chae).
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach wherein the duct body (body prior to where passage 620 is located, as shown on figure 13 of Chae) comprises an inlet body portion (inlet body adjacent to cooling air inlet 610, as shown on figures 13 and 15 of Chae) adjacent the air inlet (cooling air inlet 610 of Chae) and an outlet body portion (outlet body portion adjacent to the outlet 611, as shown on figures 8 and 13 of Chae) adjacent the air outlet (cooling air outlet 613 of Chae).
Regarding claim 18, the combined teachings teach wherein at least a portion of the duct body (a portion of the body prior to where passage 620 is located, as shown on figure 13 of Chae) is planar (forming a flat surface, as shown on figure 13 of Chae).
Regarding claim 23, the combined teachings teach wherein the diverter (partition part 640 of Chae) of the air duct (cooling air duct 60 of Chae) diverts a portion of the cooling airflow towards the door (cooling air flowing along the first cooling air passage 620 is introduced into the door discharge duct 70 through the first cooling air outlet 611, paragraph 0069 of Chae).
Regarding claim 26, the combined teachings teach a refrigerator (refrigerator 1 of Chae) comprising: an enclosure (cabinet 11 of Chae); a refrigeration system (as shown on figure 2 of Chae) for generating a cooling airflow (paragraph 0032 of Chae), an air duct (cooling air duct 60 of Chae), the air duct comprising: an air inlet fluidly coupled to and arranged for receiving the cooling airflow from the refrigeration system (refrigerator 1 may include a cooling air duct 60 to receive cooling air through the connection fluid passage 114 and a plurality of discharge ducts 70 and 90 communicating with the cooling air duct 60 for discharging cooling air to the refrigerating compartment 112, paragraph 0028 of Chae); an air outlet (air outlet 613 of Chae) downstream of the air inlet (paragraph 0060 of Chae), arranged to direct the cooling airflow from the refrigeration system into the enclosure in a first direction (outwards towards duct 90, paragraph 0070 and as shown on figures 4 and 13 of Chae); and a diverter (partition part 640) located between the air inlet and the air outlet (as shown on figure 13 of Chae) and arranged such that a portion of the cooling air flow contacts the diverter (upon air entering passage 620, figure 13 of Chae) and is diverted by the diverter (partition part 640 of Chae) into the enclosure (paragraph 0069 of Chae) in a second direction different to the first direction (as shown on figure 13 of Chae); a fan mounting plate (mounting frame 516 of Zhu) adjacent the air inlet (first air passage part 130 of Zhu) and comprising at least one opening (as shown on figure 5 of Zhu) for holding a fan (as shown on figure 5 of Zhu); wherein the diverter (duct plate 52 of Kawamoto, corresponding to partition 640 of Chae) comprises a louvre vent (louver vents, 174, 176, 178 and 180, as shown on figure 7 of Kawamoto).
Regarding claim 27, the combined teachings teach wherein: the second direction is parallel to an upper surface of the enclosure; or the second direction is sideways relative to the first direction; or the second direction (as shown on figure 13 of Chae) is downwards relative to the first direction (downwards towards duct 70, as shown on figure 11 and 13 of Chae); or the second direction is towards a door of the refrigerator or towards a back surface of the enclosure opposite to the door.
Claims 16-17, 21-22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae as modified by Zhu and Kawamoto, as applied to claim 15 above, and in further view of Hirosawa et al (US 6014868 A, hereinafter Hirosawa).
Regarding claim 16, Chae teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the inlet body portion and the outlet body portion are adjoined by a folded portion.
However, Hirosawa teaches wherein the inlet body portion (drawn air is cooled by the evaporator 27, being supplied into the blowout duct 71 by the compartment fan 31, col 5 lines 17-19) and the outlet body portion (blowout hole 75) are adjoined by a folded portion (guide plate 72 having a rising gradient, col 4 lines 65-66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the refrigerator in the teachings of Chae to include wherein the diverter comprises a louvre vent in view of the teachings of Hirosawa in order to yield the predictable result of cold air that is further supplied from the blowout hole toward the ceiling of the cold storage compartment.
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein an obtuse angle is formed between the inlet body portion and the outlet body portion.
However, the Applicant has not disclosed that having “wherein an obtuse angle is formed between the inlet body portion and the outlet body portion” does anything more than produce the predictable result of providing cold air towards the cold storage compartment. Since it has been held that changes in shape has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, [In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)], see MPEP 2144.04 IV B, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the blowout duct to form an obtuse angle is formed between the inlet body portion and the outlet body portion of Hirosawa and meet the claimed limitations in order to provide the predictable results of providing cold air towards the cold storage compartment.
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach wherein the enclosure (body 1 of Hirosawa) comprises a first side (left side, figure 8 of Hirosawa), a second side opposite the first side (right side, figure 8 of Hirosawa), an upper surface (upper portion, figure 8 of Hirosawa), a back surface (back surface of body 1, figure 6 of Hirosawa) and at least one door (door 3 of Hirosawa) opposite the back surface (figure 4 of Hirosawa).
Regarding claim 22, the combined teachings teach wherein the air duct (cold air blowout duct 71 of Hirosawa) is arranged on the upper surface of the enclosure (as shown on figure 5 of Hirosawa), the refrigerator system is arranged on the first side of the enclosure (as shown on figure 5 of Hirosawa), and the air outlet is directed towards the second side of the enclosure (as shown on figure 5 of Hirosawa).
Regarding claim 24, the combined teachings teach wherein the door (door 3 of Hirosawa) is proximal to the first side (as shown on figure 5 of Hirosawa).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that “In Chae, the asserted second direction is not downwards relative to the first direction. Moreover, Chae lacks a fan mounting plate and lacks a diverter that comprises a louvre vent. With respect to the fan mounting plate, the Office relies on Zhu. However, there is no reasonable basis for modifying the Chae cooling air duct 60. Zhu teaches that a fan 25 is already included in the refrigerator and would produce the flow necessary to direct cooling air into the cooling air duct inlet where the damper 12 is located (see Figs. 2 and 7). There is no reason to modify the Chae air duct 60 to include a fan mounting plate as specified”, the Examiner disagrees. For clarity, Chae is used in the rejection as a primary reference to teach cooling air duct 60 may further include a partition part (or partition) 640 to separate the first cooling air passage 620 and the second cooling air passage 622 from each other. The partition part 640 may vertically separate a portion of the first cooling air passage 620 from a portion of the second cooling air passage 622. for example, at least a portion of the first cooling air passage 620 may positioned under the partition part 640 and at least a portion of the second cooling air passage 622 may be positioned above the partition part 640 (as described in paragraph 0058). Further, Zhu is established in the rejection as a secondary reference to teach wherein mounting frame 516 includes fan 512 adjacent to the first air passage part 130 in which the motivation for such modification accelerates the speed of the air flow and improve the heat exchange efficiency. Therefore, the Applicant’s argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that “With respect to the louvre vent, the Office relies on Kawamoto. However, in Chae the secondary flow from the cooling air duct 60 is into a further duct 70 at the top of the refrigerator. See Chae Figs. 4 and 14. The further duct 70 is used to direct the discharge into the refrigerator. Therefore, adding a louvre vent to the Chae air duct to control flow direction into further duct 70 would add no benefit”, the Examiner disagrees. For clarity, Chae is used in the rejection as a primary reference to teach cooling air duct 60 may further include a partition part (or partition) 640 to separate the first cooling air passage 620 and the second cooling air passage 622 from each other. The partition part 640 may vertically separate a portion of the first cooling air passage 620 from a portion of the second cooling air passage 622. for example, at least a portion of the first cooling air passage 620 may positioned under the partition part 640 and at least a portion of the second cooling air passage 622 may be positioned above the partition part 640 (as described in paragraph 0058). Further, Kawamoto is used in the rejection as a secondary reference to modify the partition 640 of Chae with duct plate 52 of Kawamoto which includes louver vents 174/176/178/180 (as shown on figure 7 of Kawamoto) in which the motivation for such modification is to blow cold air into the storage chamber.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jerry Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights