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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 11-12, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hika et al. (US 20120194041).
Per claim 1, Hika teaches a mounting bracket and a plurality of electronic control circuit boards (70, 71, 73),
wherein the mounting bracket comprises
a first mounting plate (61),
a second mounting plate (63) and
a support member (64); and
the plurality of electronic control circuit boards (70, 71) are respectively provided on the first mounting plate (61) and the second mounting plate (63); and
wherein a first side edge (edge of 61 connected to 63) of the first mounting plate (61) and a first side edge (edge of 63 connected to 61) of the second mounting plate (63) are connected to each other and arranged at an angle to each other (see figure 8); and
the support member (64) is connected between the first mounting plate (61) and the second mounting plate (63);
wherein the support member comprises a support section (center section of 64) and two connections sections (left and right end sections of 64) are respectively connected to two ends of the support sections (left and right ends of the center section of 64); and
wherein a second side edge (opposite edge of first side edge of the first mounting plate) of the first mounting plate (61) and a second side edge (opposite edge of the first side edge of the second mounting plate) of the second mounting plate (63) opposite to the first side edge of the second mounting are each provided with a flange (flange with 61e; 63b), and the two connections sections are respectively connected to the flange of the first mounting plate and the flange of the second mounting plate (see figure 6).
Per claim 9, Hika meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Hika teaches
wherein the plurality of electronic control circuit boards comprises a first electronic control board (70), a second electronic control board (71), and a third electronic control board (72);
the electronic control component further comprises
a radiator (77);
the first electronic control board (70) is located on a side of the first mounting plate (61) facing the second mounting plate (63), and the radiator (77) is located on a side of the first mounting plate away from the second mounting plate (63);
the second electronic control board (71) an the third electronic control board (72) are respectively located on opposite sides of the second mounting plate (63).
Per claim 11, Hika teaches an air-conditioning outdoor unit comprising a casing (“casing”, para. 0031), a middle partition (50), a fan component (20), a compressor component (“compressor”, para. 0033) and the electronic control component (60) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the middle partition (50) is disposed inside the casing (see figure 1-3) and divides an interior of the casing into a first accommodation chamber (10) and a second accommodation chamber (11); the fan component (20) is disposed in the first accommodation chamber (10), and the compressor component (“compressor”, para. 0031) is disposed in the second accommodation chamber (11); the electronic control component (60) is installed on a side of the middle partition facing the second accommodation chamber (see figures 3).
Per claim 12, Hika meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 11. Further, Hika teaches wherein a gap (space that accommodates 77) is provided at a top of the middle partition (50), and the first mounting plate (61) of the electronic control component is self-embedded in the gap (space in that accommodates 77), and the second mounting plate (63) of the electronic control component extends in a direction away from the middle partition (see figure 4).
Per claim 21, Hika teaches an air conditioner comprising an air-conditioning indoor unit (“indoor unit”, para. 0029) and the air-conditioning outdoor unit according to claim 11, wherein the air- conditioning indoor unit is connected to the air-conditioning outdoor unit (inherent).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hika et al. (US 20120194041).
Per claim 3, Hika meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 2. Further, Hika teaches wherein a surface of the first mounting plate (61) and a surface of the second mounting plate (63) are at an angle to each other but fails to explicitly teach wherein the surfaces are perpendicular.
However, it is noted that the difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is a change in angle size. There is no evidence of record that this claimed proportion is critical or produces any unexpended results. In fact, it appears that a device having the claimed proportions would not operate differently than the device disclosed by Hika. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have angle be ninety degrees (i.e. perpendicular) since it has been held that changes in size/proportion when the claimed device and a prior art device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04, section IV, paragraph A, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.”).
Claim(s) 10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hika et al. (US 20120194041) in view of Tan (CN 106931541).
Per claim 10, Hika meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Hika fails to explicitly teach a reactance component comprising a three-phase reactor and a holder, and the three-phase reactor is provided on the first mounting plate or the second mounting plate through the holder.
However, Tan teaches an electrical control component for an air conditioner including a reactance component comprising a reactor (51) and a holder (51), and the reactor (51) is provided on a first mounting plate (62) through the holder (5) for an improved control system (pg. 2 of Translation). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a reactance component comprising a reactor and a holder, and the reactor is provided on a first mounting plate through the holder, as taught by Tan in the invention of Hika, in order to advantageously improve an air conditioner control system (pg. 2 Translation).
Regarding the reactor being a three phase reactor, the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that three phase reactors are old and well known in the refrigeration art for optimal power control of an air conditioner system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a three phase reactor in order to advantageously provide optimal power control of an air conditioner system.
In the Office Action dated 3/17/2026, the Examiner took Official Notice that three phase reactors are old and well known in the refrigeration art. Applicant has failed to traverse the(se) statement(s). As such, and in accordance with MPEP §2144.03, the statements are now considered admitted prior art.
Per claim 16, Hika meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 11. Further, Hika fails to explicitly teach wherein the electric control component comprises a reactance component comprising a three-phase reactor and a holder, and the three-phase reactor is provided on an upper end of the middle partition on its side facing the first accommodation chamber through the holder.
However, Tan teaches an air conditioner teaches wherein an electrical control component comprises a reactance component (5) and a holder (51), and the reactor is provided on an upper end (upper end of 6 as shown in figure 6) of a middle partition (6) on a side of the middle partition facing a first accommodation chamber (chamber housing 3) through the holder (51) for an improved control system (pg. 2 of Translation). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an electrical control component comprises a reactance component and a holder, and the reactor is provided on an upper end of a middle partition on a side of the middle partition facing a first accommodation chamber through the holder, as taught by Tan in the invention of Hika, in order to advantageously improve an air conditioner control system (pg. 2 Translation).
Regarding the reactance component being a three phase reactor, the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that three phase reactors are old and well known in the refrigeration art for optimal power control of an air conditioner system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a three phase reactor in order to advantageously provide optimal power control of an air conditioner system.
In the Office Action dated 3/17/2026, the Examiner took Official Notice that three phase reactors are old and well known in the refrigeration art. Applicant has failed to traverse the(se) statement(s). As such, and in accordance with MPEP §2144.03, the statements are now considered admitted prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is allowed.
Claim(s) 4-5, 7-8, 13-15, and 17-20 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DAVID J TEITELBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5142. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am-4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571) 272-66816681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID J TEITELBAUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
