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 Status
Claims 1-23 have been canceled. Claims 24-43 are new and pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 24 and 42 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims recite “an first groove.” This is incorrect and should be amended to --a first groove--. 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 24-43 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.
The term “front-rear direction” in claims 1 and 42 is a relative term which render the claims indefinite. The term “front-rear direction” is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claims do not define a fixed orientation of the apparatus, therefore the relative directions are unclear and indefinite.
Claims 25-26, 30-31, 35, and 40-41 recites the limitation "the extension direction.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in these claims.
Claims 28-31 are rejected to because of the following: claim 28 recites “an ice maker” however claim 24 already recites “an ice maker.” It is therefore unclear and indefinite if this is an additional ice maker or the one previously recited in claim 24. For purposes of examination, the limitation in claim 28 is interpretated as the same one recited in claim 24.
By virtue of dependency, claims 25-41 and 43 are also rejected.
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.
Claims 24-25, 28-30, 37, and 39-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 20150025823 A, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Lee,” in view of (KR 200457271 Y1, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Y1.”
Regarding Claim 24: Lee teaches an ice-making evaporator (100, 200, 220), comprising:
a first body (long body of 200) configured to have a first space therein configured to extended in the front-rear direction to allow refrigerant to flow (see Figure 1);
a first wall (tube walling of 1st 210 surrounding inner space of 210 in the three dimensions) configured to extended in the same direction as the first space to divide the first space into a second space and a third space (see wall edges of prongs 210);
an ice-maker (multiple 210) configured to have a fourth space therein in fluid communication with the first space (see Figure 3), and an first groove (first 410) formed on the outer portion thereof (see Figures 3-4);
Lee fails to teach the following: a second wall disposed in the fourth space such that the fourth space is divided into a fifth space in fluid communication with the second space and a sixth space in fluid communication with the third space; a coupler interposed between the first wall and the second wall to couple the first wall and the second wall; a first passage connected to the second space to introduce a refrigerant into the second space; and a second passage connected to the third space to discharge a refrigerant flowing in the third space to the outside.
Y1 teaches a second wall (120) disposed in a fourth space such that the fourth space is divided into a fifth space in fluid communication with a second space and a sixth space in fluid communication with a third space (see Figure 3); a coupler (140) interposed between a first wall (110) and a second wall (120) to couple the first wall and the second wall (see Figure 1); a first passage connected to the second space to introduce a refrigerant into the second space (spaces around 120); and a second passage connected to the third space to discharge a refrigerant flowing in the third space to the outside (refrigerant around 120 in 110 in the multiple spaces in 100, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second wall disposed in the fourth space such that the fourth space is divided into a fifth space in fluid communication with the second space and a sixth space in fluid communication with the third space; a coupler interposed between the first wall and the second wall to couple the first wall and the second wall; a first passage connected to the second space to introduce a refrigerant into the second space; and a second passage connected to the third space to discharge a refrigerant flowing in the third space to the outside to the structure of Lee as taught by Y1 in order to advantageously provide refrigerant flow splitting and enhanced performance (see abstract of Y1, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 25: Lee fails to teach wherein the coupler comprises a first part coupled to a side in the extension direction of the first wall and an second part coupled to the second wall.
Y1 teaches a coupler (140) comprises a first part (distal ends of 140) coupled to a side in an extension direction (see Figure 3) of a first wall (110) and an second part (bent portion) coupled to a second wall (120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the coupler comprises a first part coupled to a side in the extension direction of the first wall and an second part coupled to the second wall to the structure of Lee as taught by Y1 in order to advantageously provide refrigerant flow splitting and enhanced performance (see abstract of Y1, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 28: Lee teaches further comprising an ice-maker (multiple 210 and 400) comprising: a first part configured to have an upper portion coupled to the first body (length of 210 couples to 200) and configured to have a fourth space therein in fluid communication with the first space (see Figure 1), and a second part (body of 400) provided below the first part (210) and configured to have an first groove (curve of 400) formed at a lower portion of the ice-maker (curve of 400); wherein the second part comprises a first portion located in the first space (edges by 210) and a second portion formed around the first portion to cross the interior (hole 420) of the first part (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 29: Lee modified supra fails to teach wherein the second part has a first surface configured to protrude convexly toward the first body and a second surface configured to face the first surface, and wherein the first groove is formed on the second surface.
Therefore, since the general condition of the claim is disclosed by the prior art reference, it is not inventive to change shape of the structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the second part has a first surface configured to protrude convexly toward the first body and a second surface configured to face the first surface, and wherein the first groove is formed on the second surface to the structure of Lee modified supra in order to advantageously provide varying shape of wherein the second part has a first surface configured to protrude convexly toward the first body and a second surface configured to face the first surface, and wherein the first groove is formed on the second surface components. Furthermore, absent evidence of criticality, change in shape is merely design choice and would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art would before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. and B.
Regarding Claim 30: Lee teaches wherein a second groove (another 400) in contact with at least a portion of the first portion (see structure of 400 in Figure 1) is formed on a side in the extension direction of the first wall (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 37: Lee modified supra teaches wherein the first wall (walls of 210 of Lee and 110 of Y1) and the second wall (120 of Y1) are disposed side by side on the same plane (see Figure 3 of Y1).
Regarding Claim 39: Lee teaches wherein the first groove (400) has a semi-spherical shape (Figure 1) or polyhedral shape (see Figures 8-9).
Regarding Claim 40: Lee modified supra fails to teach wherein the ice-maker is provided in plural, and wherein the plurality of ice-makers are arranged along the extension direction of the first space.
Therefore, since the general condition of the claim is disclosed by the prior art reference, it is not inventive to make multiple or a plurality of the structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the ice-maker is provided in plural, and wherein the plurality of ice-makers are arranged along the extension direction of the first space to the structure of Lee modified supra in order to advantageously provide multiple or duplicate of the ice-maker of the structure. Furthermore, absent evidence of criticality, duplication of parts is merely design choice and would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art would before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B. and C.
Regarding Claim 41: Lee wherein the cross-section perpendicular to the extension direction of the first body has a semi-spherical shape or a semi-elliptical shape (see the circular edges of prongs and curves of 400).
Regarding Claim 42: Lee teaches a method for manufacturing an ice-making evaporator (220, abstract, Figures 1-12, 100), the method comprising: providing a first body (long body of 200) configured to have a first space (see Figures 1-12) therein that extends in the front-rear direction (see Figures 1-12) and has both ends open (200 is connecting to a refrigerant circuit not shown via 220); assembling a first wall (tube walling of 1st 210 surrounding inner space of 210 in the three dimensions) to the first body (long body of 200) so that the first space is divided into a second space and a third space (see Figures 3-4); providing an ice-maker (prongs 210) configured to have a fourth space therein and an first groove (400) on the outer side (see Figure 1); assembling the ice-maker (210) to the first body (length of 200); and closing an open end of the first space (100 is closed system).
Lee fails to teach assembling a second wall that divides the fourth space into a fifth space and a sixth space to either the first body or the first wall.
Y1 teaches assembling a second wall (120) that divides a fourth space into a fifth space and a sixth space to either a first body (body of 10) or a first wall (110).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided assembling a second wall that divides the fourth space into a fifth space and a sixth space to either the first body or the first wall to the structure of Lee as taught by Y1 in order to advantageously provide refrigerant flow splitting and enhanced performance (see abstract of Y1, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 43: Lee fails to teach further comprising inspecting whether a seventh space configured to consist of the second space and the fifth space capable of fluid communication with each other and a eighth space configured to consist of the third space and the sixth space capable of fluid communication with each other are fluidly isolated from each other.
Y1 teaches inspecting whether a seventh space configured to consist of a second space and a fifth space capable of fluid communication with each other and a eighth space configured to consist of a third space and a sixth space capable of fluid communication with each other are fluidly isolated from each other (abstract, via the welding of partitions withing the ice maker, see abstract and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second wall disposed in the fourth space such that the fourth space is divided into a fifth space in fluid communication with the second space and a sixth space in fluid communication with the third space; a coupler interposed between the first wall and the second wall to couple the first wall and the second wall; a first passage connected to the second space to introduce a refrigerant into the second space; and a second passage connected to the third space to discharge a refrigerant flowing in the third space to the outside to the structure of Lee as taught by Y1 in order to advantageously provide refrigerant flow splitting and enhanced performance (see abstract of Y1, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Claims 24-25, 28, 30, and 37-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR20210003525 A, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Lee 525,” in view of Lee et al. (KR 20150025823 A, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Lee.”
Regarding Claim 24: Lee ‘525 teaches an ice-making evaporator (200), comprising: a first body (length of 200) configured to have a first space therein configured to extended in the front-rear direction to allow refrigerant to flow (see Figure 4); a first wall (420) configured to extended in the same direction as the first space to divide the first space into a second space and a third space (see Figure 2); an ice-maker (300) configured to have a fourth space therein in fluid communication with the first space (see refrigerant arrows in Figure 5), and a second wall (520) disposed in the fourth space such that the fourth space is divided into a fifth space in fluid communication with the second space and a sixth space in fluid communication with the third space (see Figure 5); a coupler (400, 410) interposed between the first wall (420) and the second wall (520) to couple the first wall (420) and the second wall (520); a first passage (via inlet pipe PI) connected to the second space to introduce a refrigerant (see arrows in Figure 5) into the second space (see Figures 4-5); and a second passage (refrigerant around the bend of 400, see Figure 6) connected to the third space to discharge a refrigerant flowing in the third space to the outside (via discharge pipe PO, see Figure 4).
Lee ‘525 fails to teach a first groove formed on the outer portion thereof (the ice maker).
Lee teaches a first groove (400) on an outer portion of an ice maker (210).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a first groove on an outer portion of an ice maker to the structure of Lee ‘525 as taught by Lee in order to advantageously provide spherical ice cubes (see abstract of Lee, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 25: Lee ‘525 modified supra further teaches wherein the coupler (410 of Lee ‘525) comprises a first part coupled to a side in the extension direction of the first wall (420 of Lee ‘525) and an second part coupled to the second wall (520 of Lee ‘525).
Regarding Claim 28: Lee ‘525 teaches further comprising an ice-maker (300) comprising: a first part (tube of 300) configured to have an upper portion (see Figure 3) coupled to the first body (210) and configured to have a fourth space therein in fluid communication with the first space (see refrigerant arrows in Figure 5).
Lee ‘525 fails to teach a second part provided below the first part and configured to have an first groove formed at a lower portion of the ice-maker; wherein the second part comprises a first portion located in the first space and a second portion formed around the first portion to cross the interior of the first part.
Lee teaches a second part (body of 400) provided below a first part (210) and configured to have an first groove (curve of 400) formed at a lower portion of an ice-maker (210 having curve of 400); wherein the second part comprises a first portion located in a first space (edges by 210) and a second portion formed around a first portion to cross the interior (hole 420) of the first part (see Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second part provided below the first part and configured to have an first groove formed at a lower portion of the ice-maker; wherein the second part comprises a first portion located in the first space and a second portion formed around the first portion to cross the interior of the first part to the structure of Lee ‘525 as taught by Lee in order to advantageously provide spherical ice cubes (see abstract of Lee, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 30: Lee ‘525 modified supra teaches wherein a second groove (another 400 of Lee) in contact with at least a portion of the first portion (see structure of 400 in Figure 1 of Lee) is formed on a side in the extension direction of the first wall (see Figure 1 of Lee).
Regarding Claim 37: Lee ‘525 teaches wherein the first wall (420) and the second wall (520) are disposed side by side on the same plane (at the intersection of 420 and 520 the meeting point line).
Regarding Claim 38: Lee ‘525 teaches wherein a seventh space for allowing the refrigerant to flow from the second space to the third space is provided in the first body (see arrow of refrigerant flow, Figure 5), and wherein a partition (230) is disposed between the first space and the seventh space to divide the first space and the seventh space and comprises a first hole (see Figure 11) configured to connect the second space and the seventh space so that the second space and the seventh space are in fluid communication (via space for refrigerant pipe, PI), and a second hole (groove for GT, 600) configured to connect the third space and the seventh space so that the third space and the seventh space are in fluid communication (see Figure 11).
Regarding Claim 39: Lee ‘525 modified supra teaches wherein the first groove (400 of Lee) has a semi-spherical shape (see Figure 1 of Lee) or polyhedral shape.
Regarding Claim 40: Lee ‘525 modified supra fails to teach wherein the ice-maker is provided in plural, and wherein the plurality of ice-makers are arranged along the extension direction of the first space.
Therefore, since the general condition of the claim is disclosed by the prior art reference, it is not inventive to make multiple or a plurality of the structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the ice-maker is provided in plural, and wherein the plurality of ice-makers are arranged along the extension direction of the first space to the structure of Lee ‘525 modified supra in order to advantageously provide multiple or duplicate of the ice-maker of the structure. Furthermore, absent evidence of criticality, duplication of parts is merely design choice and would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art would before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B. and C.
Regarding Claim 41: Lee ‘525 teaches wherein the cross-section perpendicular to the extension direction of the first body (see Figure 1, along length of 200) has a semi-spherical shape or a semi-elliptical shape (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 42: Lee ‘525 teaches a method for manufacturing an ice-making evaporator (abstract, 100, 200), the method comprising: providing a first body (body of 200) configured to have a first space therein that extends in the front-rear direction and has both ends open (evaporator connected to a refrigerant circuit not shown); assembling a first wall (420) to the first body (length of 200) so that the first space is divided into a second space and a third space (see Figure 2); providing an ice-maker (300) configured to have a fourth space therein (see Figure 2); assembling a second wall (520) that divides the fourth space into a fifth space and a sixth space to either the first body (length of 200) or the first wall (420); assembling the ice-maker (300) to the first body (see Figure 1); and closing an open end of the first space (abstract, technical-field paragraph, the evaporator is in a closed loop refrigerant system).
Lee ‘525 fails to teach an first groove on the outer side.
Lee teaches an first groove (400) on an outer side of an ice maker (210).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided an first groove on an outer side of an ice maker to the structure of Lee ‘525 as taught by Lee in order to advantageously provide spherical ice cubes (see abstract of Lee, and technical field paragraph of machine translation).
Regarding Claim 43: Lee ‘525 teaches further comprising inspecting whether a seventh space configured to consist of the second space and the fifth space capable of fluid communication with each other and a eighth space configured to consist of the third space and the sixth space capable of fluid communication with each other are fluidly isolated from each other (see abstract, and technical field paragraph of machine translation, and method of manufacturing evaporator section).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-27 and 31-36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form and amended without any patentably significant broadening of the claims and including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and overcoming the indefiniteness rejections made herein.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Guarino et al. (US 2014/0165623 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRSTIN U OSWALD whose telephone number is (571)270-3557. The examiner can normally be reached 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. M-F.
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.
/KIRSTIN U OSWALD/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/ERIC S RUPPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights