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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
Figure 1 and 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract exceeds 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
(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) 1-7, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ognibene et al. (US 6,273,186 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Ognibene discloses (Figure 1-4) a fin assembly, comprising at least one first fin and at least one second fin (adjacent fin members 102 form a first fin member 102 and an adjacent fin member 102 as seen in figure 1) , wherein the at least one first fin and the at least one second fin are arranged in a stacked manner (as seen in figure 1 and 3A-3B and per Col.4, line 18-46 where the fin members 102 are stacked to form a staggered array of individual fins 104); each of the at least one first fin comprises a first tooth seat ( at the connector 106 of a fin member 102) and a plurality of first teeth (at the individual fins 104 of the fin member 102), the plurality of first teeth (104) are spaced apart along a length direction of the first tooth seat (fins 104 are spaced along the connector 106 as seen in figure 1 and); each of the at least one second fin comprises a second tooth seat ( at the connector 106 of an adjacent fin member 102) and a plurality of second teeth (at the individual fins 104 of the adjacent fin member 102), and the plurality of second teeth are spaced apart along a length direction of the second tooth seat (fins 104 are spaced along the connector 106 as seen in figure 1 and); and the plurality of first teeth and the plurality of second teeth are arranged in a staggered manner, so that staggered fluid channels are formed between the at least one first fin and the at least one second fin (as seen in figure 1 and 3A-3B).
Regarding claim 2, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 above and Ognibene further discloses wherein a first gap is formed between two adjacent first teeth (at slots 108 between fins 104 of the first fin member 102), a second gap is formed between two adjacent second teeth (at slots 108 between fins 104 of the second adjacent fin member 102), and the first gap and the second gap are arranged in a staggered manner (as seen in figure 1and 3A-3B).
Regarding claim 3, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 2 above and Ognibene further discloses each of the plurality of first teeth (fins 104 of the first fin 102) is arranged to confront the corresponding second gap (slots 108 of the adjacent second fin member 102), and each of the plurality of second teeth (fins 104 of the adjacent second fin member 102) is arranged to confront the corresponding first gap (slots 108 of the first fin member 102), so that staggered fluid channels are formed between the at least one first fin and the at least one second fin (as seen in figure 1 and 3A-3B with the fluid flow described in Col. 5, line 6-27).
Regarding claim 4, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 2 above and Ognibene further discloses wherein a width of each of the plurality of first teeth (fins 104 of the first fin member 102) is less than a width of the second gap (as seen in figure 1 and 3A-3B, where each of the slots 108 are clearly shown as wider than a width of the fin to form the staggered flow pattern), and a width of each of the plurality of second teeth is less than a width of the first gap (as seen in figure 1 and 3A-3B).
Regarding claim 5, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 4 above and Ognibene further discloses wherein the fluid channel is formed between the first tooth and the second tooth (fins 104 of the first and second adjacent fin members 102 which are adjacent to each other (as seen by the fluid flow lines in figure 3A and 3B).
Regarding claim 6, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 4 above and Ognibene further discloses the width of the first tooth is equal to the width of the second tooth; and the width of the first gap is equal to the width of the second gap (where each fin member is noted as identical as noted in claim 1 of Ognibene and each fin member is described as a reverse mirror of adjacent fin members per Col. 3, line 29-37).
Regarding claim 7, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 above and Ognibene further discloses a first punching point is provided on the first tooth seat; and a second punching point that matches the first punching point is provided on the second tooth seat (although not shown in the figures the connectors 106 of adjacent fin members can be joined by pins or rivets per Col. 4, line 18-23) .
Regarding claim 9, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 above and Ognibene further discloses wherein the at least one first fin and the at least one second fin are flexible fins (flexible is a broad limitation that implies the material can flex in some way such as being abele to bend or deform in some way. Ognibene discloses that any suitable stock may be used for the fin members such as metal polymer, plastic or resin, Per Col. 6, line 60-66, any of which possess some flexibility. Metals such as aluminum would possess some flexibility in that they are ductile and capable of being deformed and polymers plastics and resin all are capable of bending or flexing).
Regarding claim 10, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 1 above and Ognibene further discloses a bottom plate, wherein the bottom plate comprises a first side and a second side, the first side is configured to contact a heat source, and the fin assembly is mounted on the second side (the assembly of fin members 102 can be mounted to common base plate per Col. 4, line 23-29 for heat to be transferred to the array of fins from a heat source per Col. 4 line 50 through Col. 5, line 5).
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ognibene et al. (US 6,273,186 B1) in view of Abiko (JP H1117078 A).
Regarding claim 8, Ognibene discloses the claim limitations of claim 7 above and However Ognibene does not explicitly disclose wherein the number of the first punching points is three, two of the three first punching points are respectively located at two ends of the first tooth seat, and one of the three first punching points is located in the middle of the first tooth seat; and the number of the second punching points are three, two of the three second punching points are located at two ends of the second tooth seat, and one of the three second punching points is located in the middle of the second tooth seat.
Abiko teaches (Figure 8 and 9) fin assembly of laminated fins (at plate members 102) each with a tooth seat (at base 103) and a plurality of teeth (at fins 104) where the tooth seat has a first punching point is provided on the first tooth seat; and a second punching point that matches the first punching point is provided on the second tooth seat (at caulking portions 105 described in paragraph 0005 on page 2 of the machine translation provided by the examiner) wherein the number of the first punching points is three (as seen in figure 8 and 9), two of the three first punching points are respectively located at two ends of the first tooth seat, and one of the three first punching points is located in the middle of the first tooth seat; and the number of the second punching points are three, two of the three second punching points are located at two ends of the second tooth seat, and one of the three second punching points is located in the middle of the second tooth seat (as seen in figure 8 and 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the connection points in the fin base disclosed by Ognibene to be three with two at the ends and one in the middle as taught by Abiko. Doing so would allow for an alternative structure for the members of the fin stack of Ognibene to be integrated by press fitting together to form a unified fins formed form unified fin stack as taught by Abiko (as described in paragraph 0005 on page 2 of the machine translation provided by the examiner).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ognibene (US 6,634421) and (Furusawa (US 5,421,406) both disclose similar fins structures made of arrays of adjacent fin members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANS R. WEILAND whose telephone number is (571)272-9847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-3 EST and alternating Fridays.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/HANS R WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/ERIC S RUPPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights