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 of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 4/21/2026. Claims 1 - 6 are pending for consideration in this Office Action.
Response to Amendment
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satou et al. (US2020/0363107) in view of Okuda et al. (US2023/0117450).
Regarding Claim 1, Satou teaches an outdoor unit [fig 2] comprising:
a housing [30] having a rectangular plan-view shape with an air outlet [302] provided at a top center [0088; 0094; fig 2];
three outdoor heat exchangers [40] provided inside the housing [0098; fig 4]; and
an outdoor fan [18] provided above the three outdoor heat exchangers [40] and configured to blow air upward through the air outlet [0061; fig 5],
wherein each of the three outdoor heat exchangers includes a flat-tube group including a plurality of flat tubes through insides of which refrigerant is to flow, the flat tubes extending in a top-bottom direction and arranged side by side at flat faces of the flat tubes in such a manner as to be parallel to one another [0005; 0109],
wherein the housing has four lateral faces, three of the four lateral faces serving as permeable faces through which air is permeable [see at least right face, rear face and left face], a remaining one of the four lateral faces [front face at 37] serving as a sealed face through which air is nonpermeable [see fig 4],
wherein the three outdoor heat exchangers extend along the respective permeable faces, and wherein with reference to the sealed face, letting the three outdoor heat exchangers arranged in a direction of rotation of the outdoor fan be denoted in order as a first outdoor heat exchanger [at right face]; a second outdoor heat exchanger [at rear face]; and a third outdoor heat exchanger [at left face; see in combination figs 3 & 4].
Satou does not teach where the three outdoor heat exchangers are connected to one another such that, in a cooling operation, the first outdoor heat exchanger and the third outdoor heat exchanger are located on an upstream side in a flow of the refrigerant, and the second outdoor heat exchanger is located on a downstream side in the flow of the refrigerant.
However, Okuda teaches a heat pump having a first outdoor heat exchanger 5a, a second outdoor heat exchanger 5c, and a third outdoor heat exchanger 5b [fig 1] where the three outdoor heat exchangers are connected to one another such that, in a cooling operation, the first outdoor heat exchanger and the third outdoor heat exchanger are located on an upstream side in a flow of the refrigerant, and the second outdoor heat exchanger is located on a downstream side in the flow of the refrigerant [0030; 0031] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a flow arrangement where the flow rate of refrigerant through the third heat exchanger increases and thereby improves a heat transfer efficiency [0031].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Satou to have where the three outdoor heat exchangers are connected to one another such that, in a cooling operation, the first outdoor heat exchanger and the third outdoor heat exchanger are located on an upstream side in a flow of the refrigerant, and the second outdoor heat exchanger is located on a downstream side in the flow of the refrigerant in view of the teachings of Okuda where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a flow arrangement where the flow rate of refrigerant through the third heat exchanger increases and thereby improves a heat transfer efficiency.
Regarding the limitation, in combination…Satou and Okuda teach “…wherein, during the cooling operation, the refrigerant is in a two-phase gas-liquid state when flowing through the first outdoor heat exchanger subjected to a highest wind speed of airflow and the third outdoor heat exchanger subjected to a lowest wind speed of airflow [see at least Drawings I & II].”
Additionally, the limitation does not further limit the structure already disclosed by the prior art references. Drawings I & II have been added to show how Satou and Okuda disclose the respective heat exchangers, fan and piping as recited in the claims.
In this instance, Applicant appears to be reciting a functionality that is an inherent characteristic of the prior art when the prior art is evaluated under a 103 analysis. Additionally, an apparatus claim covers that a device is and not what the device does.
A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. In this instance, the prior art contains all of the structural limitations.
See MPEP 2114 (I), (II) Apparatus and Article Claims — Functional Language
Lastly, "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle."
See MPEP 2141.03 Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art
PNG
media_image1.png
828
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Drawing I (Satou fig 4)
PNG
media_image2.png
718
788
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Drawing II (Okuda fig 1)
Regarding Claim 4, Satou, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Satou teaches wherein an airflow resistance of the third outdoor heat exchanger [left face] is smaller than an airflow resistance of the first outdoor heat exchanger [right face; see in combination figs 3 & 4; see also MPEP 2112.01; which states in part “…Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established].
Regarding Claim 5, Satou, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Satou teaches wherein a flow resistance between the second outdoor heat exchanger [rear face] and the third outdoor heat exchanger [left face] is greater than a flow resistance between the second outdoor heat exchanger and the first outdoor heat exchanger [right face; see in combination figs 3 & 4; see also MPEP 2112.01; which states in part “…Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established].
Regarding Claim 6, Satou, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Satou teaches an air-conditioning apparatus comprising the outdoor unit [10] and an indoor unit [20; 0051; fig 1].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satou et al. (US2020/0363107) and Okuda et al. (US2023/0117450) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okazaki (US2017/0122630).
Regarding Claim 2, Satou, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Satou teaches wherein the three outdoor heat exchangers each include flat-tube groups each being the flat-tube group, the flat-tube groups forming two respective rows that are side by side in an airflow direction [See fig 6].
Satou does not teach where two distribution headers that are located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction, each receive one end of a corresponding one of the flat-tube groups; and a row-connecting header that receive other ends of the two flat-tube groups, and wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups has a refrigerant inlet provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow.
However, Okazaki teaches an outdoor heat exchanger [fig. 7] where two distribution headers [31, 32] that are located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction, each receive one end of a corresponding one of the flat-tube groups [0055; 0062-0064; fig 7]; and
a row-connecting header [35] that receive other ends of the two flat-tube groups, and wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups have a refrigerant inlet provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow [0055; 0062-0064; fig 7] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide an even distribution of refrigerant regardless of the degree of dryness and the flow rate and thereby improves the system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Satou to have where two distribution headers that are located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction, each receive one end of a corresponding one of the flat-tube groups; and a row-connecting header that receive other ends of the two flat-tube groups, and wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups has a refrigerant inlet provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow in view of the teachings of Okazaki where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide an even distribution of refrigerant regardless of the degree of dryness and the flow rate and thereby improves the system.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satou et al. (US2020/0363107) and Okuda et al. (US2023/0117450) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mori (JP2020085285A).
Regarding Claim 3, Satou, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Satou teaches wherein the three outdoor heat exchangers each include flat-tube groups each being the flat-tube group, the flat-tube groups forming two respective rows that are side by side in an airflow direction [fig 6].
Satou does not teach four distribution headers that receive both ends of the flat-tube groups, wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups has a refrigerant inlet provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow, and wherein another one of the distribution headers that receives an other end of the leeward flat-tube group and yet another one of the distribution headers that is located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction as the another distribution header and that receives one end of a windward one of the flat-tube groups are connected to each other by an inter-row connection pipe.
However, Mori teaches a heat exchanger [fig. 7] where four distribution headers [2 4, 11a, 11b] that receive both ends of the flat-tube groups, wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups has a refrigerant inlet [13] provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow [0067; fig 2], and
wherein another one of the distribution headers that receives an other end of the leeward flat-tube group and yet another one of the distribution headers that is located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction as the another distribution header and that receives one end of a windward one of the flat-tube groups are connected to each other by an inter-row connection pipe [67; 0062; 0063; 0067; fig 7] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a system the improves heat exchange performance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Satou to have teach four distribution headers that receive both ends of the flat-tube groups, wherein one of the distribution headers that receives one end of a leeward one of the flat- tube groups has a refrigerant inlet provided such that a gas refrigerant in the cooling operation acts as a counterflow to an airflow, and wherein another one of the distribution headers that receives an other end of the leeward flat-tube group and yet another one of the distribution headers that is located at a same position in a same direction in a height-wise direction and extending in a same direction as the another distribution header and that receives one end of a windward one of the flat-tube groups are connected to each other by an inter-row connection pipe in view of the teachings of Mori where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a system the improves heat exchange performance.
Response to Arguments
On pages 5-8 of the remarks, Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Satou et al. (US2020/0363107, hereinafter “Satou”) as modified by Okuda et al. (US2023/0117450, hereinafter “Okuda”) does not teach “…wherein, during the cooling operation, the refrigerant is in a two-phase gas-liquid state when flowing through the first outdoor heat exchanger subjected to a highest wind speed of airflow and the third outdoor heat exchanger subjected to a lowest wind speed of airflow.” Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A)
On page 7 of the remarks, Applicant argues that Satou does not teach an outdoor unit having three heat exchangers. Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Applicant is directed to Tanaka et al. (JPH11108567A, hereinafter “Tanaka”) which shows at figs 4a and 4b the different ways a heat exchanger can bend. Satou’s heat exchanger is shown more in line with a heat exchanger that has a bend (see Tanaka 4b) but one skilled in the art would recognize that the heat exchanger in Satou could very well have a different bend (see Tanaka 4a). See Tanaka 0029-0032; fig 1. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
B)
On page 7 of the remarks, Applicant argues that Satou does not contemplate the problem of reduced operating efficiency of an outdoor heat exchanger. Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, "Arguments that the alleged anticipatory prior art is ‘nonanalogous art’ or ‘teaches away from the invention’ or is not recognized as solving the problem solved by the claimed invention, [are] not ‘germane’ to a rejection under section 102. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
See MPEP 2131.05
The examiner has no comment regarding Applicant’s comment with respect to Okuda on pages 7-8 of the remarks,
For at least the reasons above, claims 1-6 remain rejected.
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 LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights