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 Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1,
Line 3 recites, “said nacelle” and should read “said turbine-engine nacelle” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Lines 4-5 recite, “said nacelle” and should read “said turbine-engine nacelle” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 6 recites, “the secondary-duct side” and should read “the annular secondary-flow duct” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Lines 7-8 recite, “the secondary-duct side” and should read “the annular secondary-flow duct” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Line 8 recites, “the primary duct” and should read, “the annular primary-flow duct” to maintain consistency among the claims.
Regarding claim 2,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 3,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 4,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 5,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 4” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 6,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 7,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 8,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 9,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Regarding claim 10,
Line 1 recites, “Nacelle according to claim 1” and should read “The turbine-engine nacelle according to claim 1.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the side external to said external structure" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, the Examiner respectfully notes that the claim does not require “said external structure” to have “an external side” as there is no antecedent for the external structure to be annular or have a defined shape to draw an “external side” or an “internal side”
Claims 2-10 are rejected based on their dependencies.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cerny et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0198719 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cerny et al. discloses a turbine engine nacelle (Fig. 13) comprising an external structure (316), and internal structure (318) delimiting an annular secondary flow duct (348), said nacelle comprising a housing (318, the Examiner notes that the internal structure indicated above includes the casing for the core engine. Fig. 13) for a turbine engine (314) delimiting with the internal structure an annular primary-flow duct (356), the nacelle comprising at least one surface heat exchanger (10) attached to the internal structure (Fig. 13), the surface heat exchanger comprising a first metal sheet (102) and a second metal sheet (106) which are joined together and at least three distribution channels (110) disposed between the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet (Figs. 10-12), the exchanger furthermore comprising an inlet hydraulic interface (222, the Examiner notes that the curvilinear plate 100, as seen in Fig. 10, extends from an inlet side 30, as seen in Fig. 4, to an outlet side 32; and therefore the interface discussed in [0044]-[0045] can be both an inlet and outlet interface) and an outlet hydraulic interface (222), each of the distribution channels being connected directly to the inlet hydraulic interface and to the outlet hydraulic interface (Fig. 4, Figs. 10-12), wherein the distribution channels are regularly distributed over the whole circumference of the inlet hydraulic interface (Fig. 7 shows the distribution channels as regularly distributed) and/or of the outlet hydraulic interface (Fig. 7), and wherein the distribution channels each comprise an inlet end (120) and an outlet end (128) each having a curved form (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 2, Cerny et al. discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the distribution channels have cross-sections identical to each other (Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4, Cerny et al. discloses all of claim 1 as above, comprising a plurality of spacing members (106, 102, 112; Fig. 11 shows spacing members between each channel of the curvilinear plate) disposed between the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet, two adjacent spacing members delimiting a distribution channel (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 5, Cerny discloses all of claim 4 as above, wherein the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet are assembled together by an assembly zone ([0049], Fig. 11) at the spacing, said assembly zone extending from the first metal sheet to the second metal sheet (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 6, Cerny discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the first metal sheet comprises a plurality of corrugations (Fig. 11), the distribution channels being delimited by a corrugation on the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 7, Cerny discloses all of claim 6 as above, wherein each distribution channel has a cross-section in a semicircle (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 8, Cerny discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the exchanger comprises an axis of symmetry (112) passing through the inlet hydraulic interface and the outlet hydraulic interface, the distribution channels being disposed symmetrically with respect to said axis of symmetry (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 9, Cerny discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the inlet and outlet hydraulic interfaces have a circular-shaped cross-section (224) and each comprise an outlet orifice (208) extending in a plane perpendicular to the extension planes of the metal sheets (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10, Cerny discloses all of claim 1 as above, wherein the thickness of each distribution channel is constant over the entire length of the corresponding channel (Fig. 11).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cerny et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0198719 A1) in view of Sjödin et al. (US PGPUB 2019/0178586 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Cerny et al. discloses all of claim 1 as above.
However, Cerny et al. does not disclose, “wherein the distribution channels have cross-sections different from each other.”
Sjödin et al. teaches in the field of heat exchanger plates (Fig. 1b), that “[0013] The maximum width of a channel further away from the symmetry line between the inlet and the outlet may be larger than the maximum width of a channel closer to said symmetry line. Thereby an even flow distribution and residence time may be provided across all channels.
[0014] In case each of the plurality of channels along at least a portion of its longitudinal extension has a chamfered triangular cross-section or a chamfered parallelogram cross-section, the chamfering may extend parallel to the plane corresponding to the major surface extension of the first and second plates. The chamfered cross section of the channels contributes to the provision of an even flow distribution across all channels and thereby that the full available heating area is evenly used. The chamfering also facilitates the pressing.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the heat exchanger plate of Cerny et al. to have the different sized distribution channels as taught by Sjödin et al., as both references are in the same field of endeavor, and one of ordinary skill would appreciate that, “The chamfered cross section of the channels contributes to the provision of an even flow distribution across all channels and thereby that the full available heating area is evenly used. [0014]”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
US PGPUB 2019/0107338 A1 discloses a conformable heat exchange system and method.
PNG
media_image2.png
304
220
media_image2.png
Greyscale
US Patent 7,044,207 B1 discloses a heat exchanger and related exchange module.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C CLARK whose telephone number is (571)272-2871. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0730-1730, Alternate Fridays 0730-1630.
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, Courtney D Heinle can be reached at (571)-270-3508. 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.
/RYAN C CLARK/Examiner, Art Unit 3745