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
The status of the claims as filed in the submission dated 12/2/2024 are as follows:
Claims 1-10 are pending and are being examined.
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The specification does not have section headers as outlined above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 6 recites “preassembly means for preassembly”, which invokes 112(f). The applicants’ disclosure outlines the preassembly means for as a protrusion and hole between the two side plates. Thus, the “preassembly means for preassembly will be interpreted as such and equivalent structure.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kolder (US2018/0306520A1).
Re Claim 1. Kolder teaches a heat exchanger (1) comprising (Figures 1-3):
an exchange core bundle (3) through which a heat-transfer liquid and a gas flow are intended to pass, the exchange core bundle comprising (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44):
a plurality of plates (2) stacked one on another along a stacking direction and delimiting, between at least two adjacent plates (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44); and
at least one circulation duct (internal flow path between plates) for the heat-transfer liquid, wherein each circulation duct communicating by way of a first end with a first channel of the exchange core bundle and by way of a second end with a second channel of the exchange core bundle (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44); and
a housing (8) surrounding the exchange core bundle (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44), the housing comprising:
at least one upper cover plate (12), a lower cover plate (opposite plate to 12), at least one main side cover plate (13), wherein the main side cover plate is arranged in a continuation of the upper cover plate and/or of the lower cover plate, and at least one intermediate side cover plate (4) interposed between the exchange core bundle and the main side cover plate (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44) .
Re Claim 2. Kolder teaches the first channel and the second channel are formed by stacking the plates in a stacking direction (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
Re Claim 4. Kolder teaches the housing has at least one junction zone (i.e. connection points between components) between at least one main side cover plate and the upper cover plate and/or the lower cover plate, wherein the intermediate side cover plate extending along the main side cover plate, the lower cover plate and/or the upper cover plate and said junction zone (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
Re Claim 6. Kolder teaches the housing comprises a preassembly means (6, 7, 16) for preassembly between the intermediate side cover plate and the main side cover plate against which said intermediate side cover plate bears (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44; Plate 4 comprises protrusions 6, 7 and the main cover 13 comprises a recessed housing with holes 16 for the protrusions of 4).
Re Claim 7. Kolder teaches the preassembly means comprises an interaction between at least one protruding element (6, 7) and one hole (16), wherein the protruding element is integral with one of the side cover plates and the hole is formed in the other side cover plate (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
Re Claim 8. Kolder teaches the intermediate side cover plate comprises: a first edge in contact with the upper cover plate; and a second edge in contact with the lower cover plate (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44; The intermediate side cover plate extends between the upper and lower cover plates).
Re Claim 9. Kolder teaches the upper cover plate and/or the lower cover plate comprises at least one edge provided with a fillet (edges are curved and thus are considered a fillet. No specific dimensional requirement for the fillet is recited), wherein the first edge and/or the second edge of the intermediate side cover plate having a complementary rounding to the fillet (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
Re Claim 10. Kolder teaches the housing comprises two intermediate side cover plates (4, 5), each being connected to a main side cover plate (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolder (US2018/0306520A1) in view of Garrett (US2011/0168365A1).
Re Claim 5. Kolder teaches the junction zone comprises: at least one first join between the intermediate side cover plate and the upper cover plate and/or the lower cover plate; a second join between the intermediate side cover plate and the main side cover plate; and a third join between the main side cover plate and the upper cover plate and/or the lower cover plate (Figures 1-3; Paragraphs 37-44).
Kolder fails to specifically teach the joins are brazed together.
However, Garrett teaches it is known to braze together a heat exchanger with multiple joints (Figures 1-2; Paragraphs 21-27, 37-38, 43, 46, 56-61).
Therefore, in view of Garrett's teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to braze the assembly of Kolder in order to provide a fluid tight assembly, as is well-known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 3 recites “the intermediate side cover plate has a dimension greater than a dimension of the main side cover plate against which said intermediate side cover plate bears, these dimensions being measured parallel to the stacking direction”. The intermediate cover of Kolder is overlapped by the main cover. If the intermediate cover of Kolder was modified to have a dimension greater than a dimension of the main side cover plate against which said intermediate side cover plate bears, the main side cover plate of Kolder would not be able to be secured to the rest of the housing. There would be no motivation to further modify the prior art without utilizing impermissible hindsight reasoning or without changing the principle of operation of the prior art. Therefore, the invention is novel and non-obvious in view of the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 for other relevant prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS RUBY whose telephone number is (571)270-5760. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM-5PM.
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.
/TRAVIS RUBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights