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 .
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, 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) 1-3, 5-6, 8-14, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Horn (US20140165626A1) in view of Numata (JP6860095B1) via the English language equivalent (US20220341674A1), and Shimoya (US6401804B1).
Regarding claims 1, 5-6, 9-12, Van Horn teaches a heat exchanger (cooler – Fig. 1) that is provided in a refrigeration apparatus (Fig. 1) configured to be capable of performing a refrigeration cycle where an evaporation pressure of a refrigerant (1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene - ¶[0002]) is lower than an atmospheric pressure (below atmospheric pressure ¶[0038]), and that functions as an evaporator (flooded evaporator - ¶[0038]).
Van Horn does not explicitly teach the heat exchanger comprising: a shell forming an internal space; and a plate stack arranged in the internal space and including a plurality of heat transfer plates, wherein the plurality of heat transfer plates include first plates and second plates alternately arranged in a front-to-rear direction, the first plates and the second plates each have a corrugated pattern, a first channel sandwiched between a front surface of each first plate and a back surface of an associated second plate forms a refrigerant channel through which the refrigerant flows, a second channel sandwiched between a back surface of each first plate and a front surface of an associated second plate forming a heating medium channel through which a heating medium that exchanges heat with the refrigerant in the refrigerant channel flows, the refrigerant channel including a first channel on a back side of each second plate and a second channel on a front side of each first plate.
Numata teaches, a low-pressure refrigerant flooded evaporator type heat exchanger (¶[0015] & ¶[0053]), wherein the heat exchanger (see Fig. 1-3) comprising: a shell (shell 20) forming an internal space (internal space 21); and a plate stack (plate stack 40) arranged in the internal space and including a plurality of heat transfer plates (heat transfer plates 50a,50b), wherein the plurality of heat transfer plates include first plates and second plates alternately arranged in a front-to-rear direction, the first plates and the second plates each have a corrugated pattern (see pattern thereof), a first channel (41) sandwiched between a front surface of each first plate and a back surface of an associated second plate forms a refrigerant channel through which the refrigerant flows, a second channel (42) sandwiched between a back surface of each first plate and a front surface of an associated second plate forming a heating medium channel through which a heating medium that exchanges heat with the refrigerant in the refrigerant channel flows, the refrigerant channel including a first channel on a back side of each second plate and a second channel on a front side of each first plate.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Van Horn to include the shell and plate heat exchanger of Numata, in order to provide a heat exchanger with improved performance (¶[0064]).
Van Horn as modified teaches the limitations of claims 1, and Van Horn does not teach wherein a pitch P, which is an interval between a center line of the first channel in the front-to-rear direction and a center line of the second channel in the front-to-rear direction between the plurality of heat transfer plates is more than 1.2/1.5 mm and 2.1 mm or less.
Shimoya teaches wherein a pitch P, which is an interval between a center line of the first channel in the front-to-rear direction and a center line of the second channel in the front-to-rear direction (corresponds to vertical direction of Fig. 12), between the plurality of heat transfer plates is more than 1.2/1.5 mm and 2.1 mm or less, to balance strength and weight of the evaporator (Col. 15, lines 40-55, specifically, h is less than 2 mm and thickness = 0.1/0.35 mm, resulting in a pitch as defined in the instant application of an overlapping range of P < 1.9 mm).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Van Horn to include the pitch of Shimoya, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 2, Van Horn as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Van Horn further teaches the heat exchanger is provided in the refrigeration apparatus (R) configured to be capable of performing a refrigeration cycle where the evaporation pressure of the refrigerant at 0° C. or more is lower than the atmospheric pressure (see evaporator temperature and pressure of R-1233zd in Tables 2-4).
Regarding claim 3, Van Horn as modified teaches the limitations of claim 2, and Van Horn further teaches wherein the heat exchanger is provided in the refrigeration apparatus (R) using 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene as the refrigerant (1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene - ¶[0002]).
Regarding claims 8 and 13-14, Van Horn as modified further teaches a refrigeration apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising: the heat exchanger of claim 1-3 (as modified above), the refrigeration apparatus being configured to be capable of performing the refrigeration cycle where the evaporation pressure of the refrigerant is lower than the atmospheric pressure (below atmospheric pressure ¶[0038]).
Regarding claims 16-17, Van Horn further teaches a refrigeration apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising: the heat exchanger of claim 5-6 (as modified above), the refrigeration apparatus being configured to be capable of performing the refrigeration cycle where the evaporation pressure of the refrigerant is lower than the atmospheric pressure (below atmospheric pressure ¶[0038]).
Claim(s) 7 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Horn (US20140165626A1) in view of Numata (JP6860095B1), via the English language equivalent (US20220341674A1), Shimoya (US6401804B1) and Kilmer (US6644388B1).
Regarding claim 7, Van Horn as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Van horn as modified does not teach wherein a surface of the heat transfer plate has a rough portion.
Kilmer teaches (see Fig. 1-5) wherein a surface of the heat transfer plate has a rough portion (textured features – 6/26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Van Horn to include the rough portion of Kilmer, in order to improve heat transfer (Col. 4, lines 30-45).
Regarding claim 18, Van Horn as modified further teaches a refrigeration apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising: the heat exchanger of claim 7 (as modified above), the refrigeration apparatus being configured to be capable of performing the refrigeration cycle where the evaporation pressure of the refrigerant is lower than the atmospheric pressure (below atmospheric pressure ¶[0038]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the pitch of Shimoya is only a resul-effective variable with respect to the air flow outside of the plates, and thus is not proper rationale for optimizing the pitch to the recited value. Further Applicant argues the pitch as claimed recognizes and solves a specific problem, not identified by Shimoya. Further, Applicant argues an ordinarily skilled artisan would not look to Shimoya, as it is directed to a refrigerant/air heat exchanger, not a refrigerant/water heat exchanger.
Examiner contends the result effective variable, as illustrated by Shimoya is applicable to Van Horn. First, Examiner contends that Shimoya is directed to performing heat exchange via heat exchanging plates for an inside fluid and an outside fluid, with refrigerant and air being the primary disclosed example, and thus a skilled artisan would not consider the fluid to be restricted only to those two fluids. The result effective variable (pitch) is known, as taught by Shimoya, to be optimized to balance heat transfer performance, reducing weight, and improving corrosion resistance.
Further, regarding claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-11, and 12 are directed to a heat exchanger capable of exchanging heat between refrigerant and a heating medium, and thus Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claims, as these are merely statements of intended use.
In response to applicant's argument that the disclosed invention obtains suppressed bubble spread, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
In response to applicant's argument that Shimoya is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, while Applicant suggests a skilled artisan would not look to Shimoya, as different fluids are used, Examiner contends that plate heat exchangers for the purpose of exchanging heat between two fluids would be considered analogous, and one would look to any such heat exchangers for benefits thereof.
For at least the reasons stated above, Applicant’s arguments are found unpersuasive and the rejection is maintained.
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 ERIC S RUPPERT whose telephone number is (571)272-9911. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 pm.
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.
/ERIC S RUPPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights