vs! “111%
`\.\_:
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/114,655
`
`10/29/2013
`
`Yasufumi Takahashi
`
`14434.0518USWO
`
`5479
`
`02/23/2017 —HAMRE, SCHUMANN,MUELLER&LARSONP.C. m
`7590
`53148
`45 South Seventh Street
`DIAZ, MARCOS 0
`Suite 2700
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402- 1683
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`3741
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/23/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/0r attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`PTOMail @hsml.com
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/114,655 TAKAHASHI, YASUFUMI
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`MARCOS o. DIAZ its“ 3741
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 11/18/2016.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 1-14 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s) flis/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 1and8- 14 is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`I/'/\WIIW.USOI.O. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`h/index.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Xl The drawing(s) filed on 10/29/2013 is/are: a)IXI accepted or b)|:l objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) D Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20170215
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
`
`2.
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth
`
`in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is
`
`eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR
`
`1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn
`
`pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/18/2016 has been entered.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`3.
`
`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.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1 and 8-14 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 pre-
`
`AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
`
`Claim 1 recites the limitation “the other end" in line 11. There is insufficient
`
`antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`Claim 1 recites the limitations “a relatively large first pitch and a relatively small
`
`second pitch" The term "relatively large" and “relatively small" in claim 1 are relative terms
`
`which renders the claim indefinite. The term "relatively" is not defined by the claim, 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.
`
`Because this term is relative, it is unclear how much variation would encompass
`
`"relatively”. In other words, it is unclear how large or small the pitches must be and still
`
`define “a relatively large first pitch and a relatively small second pitch".
`
`Claims 8-14 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 —
`
`(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country
`or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for
`patent in the United States.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1 , 8-11 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being
`
`anticipated by Yoshida (US 4,854,380, as previously cited).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Yoshida discloses: A heat exchanger that exchanges heat
`
`between a refrigerant and air, comprising:
`
`a plurality of heat transfer tubes (2) extending in a first direction in which the
`
`refrigerant flows (fig 8; 2 extend in direction of flow B) in the heat transfer tubes; and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`a corrugated member having a corrugated shape (Fig 8 corrugated element 1),
`
`comprising: a plurality of fins (fins of element 1; see annotated figures below) that are
`
`arranged at least two different pitches (Fig 8 col 7 lines 45-50; alternating larger and
`
`smaller fin portions), a relatively large first pitch (col 7 lines 45-50; larger portion A1) and
`
`a relatively small second pitch (col 7 lines 45-50; smaller portion A2), in the first direction
`
`(c019 lines 25-30; fig 8 uses the same fin arrangement as figures 3, 4 and 6; with portions
`
`A1 and A2 arranged in direction of B; see annotated figures below); and a plurality of
`
`folded portions (bent portions of 1 contacting 2) that are bonded alternately in the first
`
`direction to adjacent ones ofthe heat transfer tubes that are adjacent to each other (Fig 8
`
`col 9 lines 10-15; bent portions of 1 alternately contact adjacent tubes 2);
`
`wherein adjacent fins of the plurality of fins extend with a constant distance
`
`between the adjacent fins from one end to the other end of the adjacent fins in an external
`
`flow direction (see annotated fig 4 below; the fins adjacent at A1 extend in the constant
`
`distance A1 from one end to the other end of the adjacent fins,), the external flow direction
`
`being perpendicular to the first direction (A perpendicular to B) and to a direction in which
`
`the plurality of heat transfer tubes are arranged (fig 8 tubes 2 arranged from top to bottom,
`
`perpendicular to A).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`
`
`‘(QSRIQAAREQTfiTExQEIGQ‘SE‘
`
`Regarding claim 8, Yoshida discloses: The heat exchanger according to claim 1,
`
`wherein the fins are arranged so that the second pitch appears before and after the first
`
`pitch (Fig 8 shows smaller portions before and after larger portions in the A direction).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Yoshida discloses: The heat exchanger according to claim 1,
`
`wherein the first pitch and the second pitch appear alternately (Fig 8, col 7 lines 40-45;
`
`larger and smaller portions alternate).
`
`Regarding claim 10, Yoshida discloses: The heat exchanger according to claim 1,
`
`wherein when an odd number of the fins are arranged in series from above (from top to
`
`bottom in direction B) in the first direction (see annotated fig 3 below; as seen in the figure,
`
`the first fins arranged in series from top to bottom in direction B), and odd-numbered fins
`
`are defined as first fins (see annotated fig 3 below) and even-numbered fins are defined as
`
`second fins (see annotated fig 3 below), a total sum of the pitches between the first fins and
`
`the fins adjacent to and below the first fins (see annotated figs 3 and 8 below; between each
`
`first fin and the second fins adjacent to and below each other will give either A1+A2 or
`
`A2+A1; i.e. adjacent to first fin is A1, below first fin is A2 ) is equal to a total sum ofthe
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`pitches between the second fins and the fins adjacent to and below the second fins (see
`
`annotated figs 3 and 8 below; between each second fin and the first fins adjacent to and
`
`below will give either A2+A1 or A1+A2 ; i.e. adjacent to second fin is A2, below first fin is
`
`A1; therefore, the same total sum is being added; In other words, since the fin pitches
`
`alternate between A2 and A1, the pitches adjacent to and below the first fins will be A2+A1
`
`and the pitches adjacent to and below the second fins will be A1+A2, thus they are the
`
`same).
`
`‘3)"-\----)e+
`
`.ma‘aanMm i summits“
`
`Regarding claim 11, Yoshida discloses the heat exchanger according to claim 1,
`
`wherein the first pitch is 1.2 times or more and 3.0 times or less the second pitch (col 7
`
`lines 50-55; larger to smaller pitch is 3 times, e.g. 9mm/3mm ).
`
`Regarding claim 14, Yoshida discloses wherein the plurality of fins defines an air
`
`flow passage between adjacent fins ofthe plurality of fins (passage for flow of air A
`
`between adjacent fins, see annotated figure 4), the air flow passage having a constant cross
`
`sectional area from one end to the other ofthe adjacent fins in the external flow direction
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`(see annotated figure 4, the cross sectional area for A1 is constant from one end to the
`
`other end as depicted in the annotated figure 4).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as
`set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter
`pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Yoshida in view of Shinhama (US 2007/ 0163768, as previously
`
`cited).
`
`Regarding claims 12 and 13, Yoshida discloses the claimed invention substantially
`
`as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1.
`
`Yohida is silent regarding wherein the plurality of heat transfer tubes comprising at
`
`least four of the heat transfer tubes, and a pair ofthe corrugated members having the same
`
`shape are bonded to both sides of each of the heat transfer tubes that is interposed
`
`between the two adjacent heat transfer tubes in such a manner that the corrugated
`
`members coincide with each other by parallel displacement in an arbitrary direction,
`
`wherein the adjacent heat transfer tubes are flat tubes that are parallel to each other.
`
`However, Shinhama, also directed to a corrugated fin radiator, teaches a plurality of
`
`heat transfer tubes (tubes 5) comprising at least four heat transfer tubes (fig 2 shows more
`
`than four), and a pair of corrugated members are bonded to both sides of each ofthe heat
`
`transfer tubes (fig 2; fins 6 above and below each tube 5) interposed between two adjacent
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`heat transfer tubes in such a manner that the corrugated members coincide with each
`
`other by parallel displacement in an arbitrary direction (par 0039; fins 6 are separated by
`
`tubes 5), and wherein the adjacent heat transfer tubes are flat tubes that are parallel to
`
`each other (par 0039; tubes 5 are parallel and flat).
`
`Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
`
`invention was made to modify Yoshida with the plurality of heat transfer tubes comprising
`
`at least four heat transfer tubes, and a pair ofthe corrugated members having the same
`
`shape are bonded to both sides of each of the heat transfer tubes interposed between the
`
`two adjacent heat transfer tubes in such a manner that the corrugated members coincide
`
`with each other by parallel displacement in an arbitrary direction, and wherein the
`
`adjacent heat transfer tubes are flat tubes that are parallel to each other, as taught by
`
`Shinhama, as it is well known in the art for corrugated fin radiator heat exchangers to
`
`include at least four parallel heat transfer tubes, each in heat exchange relation with
`
`corrugated members attached on opposite sides, resulting in a larger heat transfer
`
`capacity. Further, flat tubes provide more contact area with the corrugated members.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`3.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 11/18/2016 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive.
`
`Applicant argues on pages 6-7 addressing claim 1, that “However, as shown in in
`
`Figs. 4 and 8, Yoshida discloses that thefirst and secondfins (1), which are adjacent to each
`
`other andform afluid passage (5), extend in the externalflow direction (A) with alternating
`
`larger distance A1 and smaller distance A2 between the first and secondfinsfrom one end to
`
`the other end ofthefins, contrary to the requirement ofclaim 1. In such a structure of
`
`Yoshida, each fluid passage 5 includes portions that have a smaller distance A2 between the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`fins 1 and thus cannot accommodate a higherflow rate ofthefluid. As such, the portions of
`
`the fluid passage 5 will tend to be blocked due to frost, which blocks the whole fluid passage.
`
`Nowhere does Yoshida suggest that the adjacentfins extend with a constant distance between
`
`themfrom one end to the other end 0fthe adjacentfins in the externalflow direction, as
`
`required in claim 1." Examiner respectfully disagrees.
`
`In response, examiner recognizes that the terms “one end" and "other end" as
`
`recited fail to define a specific location in the fins for the same and are recognized as
`
`broad terms which can be defined in a wide variety of locations, i.e. top end, bottom
`
`end, middle end, etc. As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation given by
`
`the Examiner, one end and the other end ofthe fins are illustrated and depicted in
`
`Annotated figure 4 above. Between these ends, A1 defines a constant distance
`
`between adjacent fins along external flow direction A. Therefore, the disclosure of
`
`Yoshida still anticipates Claim 1 and remains rejected.
`
`Applicant does not argue Claims 8-14 separately from Claim 1 and thus
`
`remain also rejected.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to Marcos Diaz whose telephone number is (571)272-1284.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri: 9:00AM-6:00PM EST.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Pascal M. Bui-Pho can be reached on (571) 272-2714. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published
`
`applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information
`
`for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information
`
`about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on
`
`access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-
`
`217-9197 (toll-free). Ifyou would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/114,655
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 3741
`
`Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA
`
`OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/MARCOS O DIAZ/
`Examiner, Art Unit 3741
`
`/Pascal M. Bui-Pho/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
`
`