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
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/232,162
`
`01/10/2014
`
`Subaru Matsumoto
`
`14434.0537USWO
`
`6141
`
`04’05’2018 —HAMRE, SCHUMANN,MUELLER&LARSONP.C. m
`7590
`53148
`45 South Seventh Street
`ARANT, HARRY E
`Suite 2700
`
`3744
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/05/2018
`
`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.
` 14/232,162 MATSUMOTO ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`HARRY ARANT its“ 3744
`
`-- 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 12/4/2017.
`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) 1-8 10-12 and 14-16is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s) 1_6 is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 1 -8 10- 1214 and 15is/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
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`hI/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 1/10/2014 is/are: a)lX| accepted or b)I:I 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)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl 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.
`SIXI 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 20180328
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA 0r 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 l.l7(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 l.l7(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 12/4/2017 has been entered.
`
`Status of the Claims
`
`3.
`
`The status of the claims as filed in the reply dated 10/24/2017 are as follows:
`
`Claims 1 and 10 are currently pending,
`
`Claims 9 and 13 are canceled,
`
`Claims 15 and 16 are new,
`
`Claims 1—8, 10—12, and 14—16 are currently pending.
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`4.
`
`Newly submitted claim 16 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from
`
`the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Claim 16 is directed to a method for
`
`using an outdoor heat exchanger rather than an outdoor heat exchanger or vehicle air conditioner
`
`as previous presented.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented
`
`invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution
`
`on the merits. Accordingly, claim 16 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a
`
`non—elected invention. See 37 CFR l.l42(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`5.
`
`Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`a.
`
`Claim 10 recites “the louver” in line 2, and should recite ——a louver——.
`
`———Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`6.
`
`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.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, and 10-12 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Yamamoto et al. (Japanese Patent Publication JP6315092A,
`
`“Yamamoto”, previously cited) alone.
`
`Regarding Claim 1, Yamamoto discloses an outdoor heat exchanger (fig 6) comprising:
`
`flat tubes (2) in which the refrigerant flows (implicit), the flat tubes having a cross—
`
`sectional shape extended in a first direction (see annotated fig 5 below), the flat tubes being
`
`arranged in a second direction (see annotated fig 5 below) orthogonal to the first direction so as
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`to face each other, wherein the outdoor air is caused to flow between the flat tubes from one side
`
`to the other in the first direction; and
`
`a corrugated fin (l) disposed between the flat tubes adjacent to each other, the corrugated
`
`fin comprising: a plurality of plate portions (see annotated fig 5 below) arranged in a third
`
`direction (see annotated fig 5 below) orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction;
`
`and a plurality of folded portions (see annotated fig 5 below) joined alternately to the flat tubes
`
`adjacent to each other,
`
`wherein each of the plurality of plate portions has a plurality of louvers (3), the plurality
`
`of louvers being inclined with respect to the first direction and being substantially continuous
`
`with each other in the first direction (see fig 7),
`
`each of the plurality of plate portions has a joining region (see annotated fig 5 below)
`
`corresponding to a region of the folded portion that is in contact with the flat tubes, and an
`
`extension portion (corresponding to L, fig 6) corresponding to a region of the folded portion that
`
`is not in contact with the flat tubes,
`
`the joining region and the extension portion are arranged in the first direction,
`
`the extension portion projects windward in the first direction from an end position of
`
`the joining region (fig 6),
`
`a foremost louver (3a) that is located on the most windward side among the plurality of
`
`louvers is disposed entirely within the extension portion (fig 6),
`
`each of the plurality of plate portions has a front flat portion (corresponding to L1) as a
`
`part of the extension portion, the front flat portion being located windward of the foremost louver
`
`(fig 3), and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`a leeward end of the foremost louver is located windward of the end position of the
`
`joining region in the first direction (fig 6), and
`
`the outdoor heat exchanger is capable to function as both an evaporator that evaporates
`
`the refrigerant by heat exchange with outdoor air and a condenser that condenses the refrigerant
`
`by heat exchange with outdoor air.
`
`;i,
`
`\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\n
`
`VII/((111111
`
`xxx/xx!!!
`W53
`
`(fr/M..//
`W3
`
`/// g”
`
`,E,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,7 ,.,,5
`
` 7WWW:
`
` ””11”,”,
`
`\1
`WW1
`
`’I
`‘9i"
`‘-
`
`
`ini.‘x’fl..a'fl1
`
`
`\\\\\
`
`
`§\X\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\-.E
`
`Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the front flat portion has an area larger
`
`than half of that of the extension portion and the entire foremost louver is disposed leeward of a
`
`center of the extension portion in the first direction. However, Yamamoto does teach wherein the
`
`length of the flat portion (L1) and the length of the extension (L) are variables which can vary
`
`(page 2, line 9 — page 3, line 2). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art at the time of the invention for Yamamoto to have the flat portion have an area larger than
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`half of the extension portion and the entire foremost louver is disposed leeward of a center of the
`
`extension portion in the first direction in order to optimize the heat exchange performance.
`
`The limitations of “formed by cutting and raising” is being treated as a product—by—
`
`process limitation. In product—by—process claims, “once a product appearing to be substantially
`
`identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 102/ 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant
`
`to show an unobvious difference.” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 is
`
`proper because the “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.” In
`
`re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
`
`Regarding Claim 2, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein the foremost louver (3a) is continuous with the front flat
`
`portion (corresponding to L1, fig 6) and is a one—protrusion louver that protrudes from the plate
`
`portion on only one side in the third direction (see annotated fig 7 below).
`
`13 Marl-«S?
`
`1 #4?
`
`3 ’1’”
`1
`L Bra git-mum
`#fig—— Axxxxx/«rrwzz a:
`
`abiwgmfl
`
`3cm“-
`
`
`
`;,%7@
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`Regarding Claim 4, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein each of the plurality of folded portions is formed in a shape
`
`having a flat central portion (see annotated fig 6 below) so as to be in surface contact with the
`
`flat tube (2).
`
`Baum"
` ‘
`3:.»
`32a
`I
`fffffffiffffffli
`I
`‘mfimzmrnamzxmf“t '
`x
`
`l
`.3
`3
`i w l
`E
`g
`‘
`u
`I
`*E n w. Ha +
`:
`g?
`Am
`u g:
`
`”a
`i
`:E
`i
`2
`i Ni H
`
`
`‘
`
`‘
`
`g
`1|
`3
`“w
`i
`am} :2
`2’
`2
`3.x???
`
`
`
`“~«*.
`
`.
`
`a
`
`l
`i
`
`.
`
`i
`
`l
`
`j
`
`l
`
`”W
`
`l
`
`‘*
`
`:
`
`Regarding Claim 6, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein the plurality of louvers (3) form a windward louver group
`
`(see annotated fig 7 below) constituted by parallel louvers including the foremost louver (3a),
`
`and a leeward louver group (see annotated fig 7 below) constituted by louvers inclined in an
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`opposite direction to inclination of the foremost louver with respect to the first direction (see
`
`annotated fig 7 below), and
`
`the windward louver group and the leeward louver group are aXisymmetric when viewed
`
`in the second direction (fig 7).
`
`\\\\\mam.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ,
`
`I/I/I/I/I/I/x/I/I/I/7
`
`W
`
`//
`
`.2
`
`E\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ '
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Lt
`
`‘54 fl
`
`/ ”
`
`\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\V
`,
`
`”11””,
`”a
` \ /
`
`Regarding Claim 10, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein a louver (see annotated fig 6 below) that is adjacent to the
`
`foremost louver (3a) comprises a part that is disposed within the extension portion
`
`(corresponding to L) and a residual part that is disposed outside the extension portion (see
`
`annotated fig 6 below).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`3‘
`
`§
`(
`mamzmxw*‘W‘mfim‘fiW
`
`
`s
`5"“ ‘
`! g a
`
`
`V\‘1
`
`
`
`filial?
`‘4
`,A
`AA
`‘
`\
`g \ §WV§~VWW®‘\\W§§NM mm; ‘ MEN“ ¥~£~»i““
`
`'
`'
`' g .
`****~ N am»
`gm ‘
`i
`ii
`i
`s
`i H
`’
`‘
`‘
`WEE
`:
`E s;
`
`:g:
`a
`i
`535% t
`I
`a“
`t
`.
`E
`§
`t
`5
`t
`l
`g
`l
`i
`§
`§
`ii if“ E‘ixgiy
`l
`1ES5
`we“?
`
`E$
`
`E‘
`
`i
`
`s
`§
`§
`
`.5
`
`
`
`55555555555,
`
`r///////////1
`
`'V. .,,
`
`Regarding Claim 11, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein the plurality of louvers (3) have the same length in the
`
`second direction (see annotated fig 6 below).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`v...
`
`.
`
`\‘A
`.3.;i.‘\
`', ‘.
`
`.
`
`4.
`
`_
`
`g
`
`-
`
`
`
`it
`
`it?
`
`
`
`3
`z
`i
`‘mmvxm‘stsmficmtmif‘wymmwxm,
`\
`g
`.-‘
`.
`J
`8.
`‘g
`a“
`E
`t\
`q§
`“W33fix‘mfiu‘”¢m§{{{RX-n-smema-W“v. $9?
`
`8"“ 3
`\
`lo
`5
`§
`'-
`'
`g
`:
`i
`‘
`-
`'
`\:
`is}
`.
`\-
`§
`§
`‘
`z
`<
`§
`-
`$;;
`$
`i
`: $§ i
`3
`a
`s.
`a»?
`\
`§
`.
`.
`g
`§
`§
`§
`\‘
`§
`\
`V}
`k
`3
`§
`x
`§
`g H ‘
`s
`§
`‘
`i
`
`i
`i
`tigwflwflgu i
`.é:
`..
`.\§‘\v\v\‘v\vn~§l\v‘v\ m‘ “in?“ .
`\§“\.\.§.\M\\ “N‘? “.§““‘ ‘2‘
`§
`l
`S
`i.
`§
`l
`V
`i
`l: i
`l
`i
`3
`3 :~ s
`i
`§
`§
`§
`§*-
`3
`i
`‘
`$ §
`g
`g
`§
`§
`g;
`i:
`i
`l
`$ §
`3
`*2
`§-
`{4
`3
`:
`§
`.
`§
`if
`§
`§
`.
`<
`§
`§
`§ \‘
`k
`§
`§
`Mi
`4
`g
`z
`i §
`at
`i
`i M x
`‘
`*
`3
`*
`x
`*'
`E
`,w “é.
`;:
`g
`g
`§
`:-
`§
`§
`ii
`.
`,
`z
`s
`s
`,
`is”
`.
`a
`«19%
`3“” !
`
`
`
`§
`§
`g
`2-
`
`,.
`
`\
`§
`§
`§
`5
`§
`\
`§
`
`i
`i
`§
`§
`3
`s
`\
`é
`
`\
`§
`
`§
`§
`k
`
`§
`§
`§
`.
`
`WNWfifimW‘; “w «mrmammmmmm nmmgmwd
`§
`-.‘_
`§.
`,-
`Q
`__
`is
`3?
`
`iwmmvmmé:
`
`\\\
`\§
`\
`
`/?7////////////////IZZZZZZ?W
`
`\~.\.\.\.\.\.\.\\.\.\.\.\.\.\.\\\\\\\\.\\\\€\\\\\\\\\\\
`
`w/
`"Ill/111111!!!
`
`
`'>>>>>>>>>>>>>,
`
`
`
`Regarding Claim 12, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`However, Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the extension portion has a length of
`
`1.5 mm or more and 3.5 mm or less in the first direction.
`
`However, since Yamamoto teaches an extension portion (corresponding to L) which will
`
`vary in length, the length of the extension portion is recognized as a result—effective variable, i.e.
`
`a variable which achieve a recognized result. In this case the recognized result being that the
`
`length of the extension portion will affect the heat exchange capacity of the heat exchanger.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`of the invention for Jiang to have the extension portion has a length of 1.5 mm or more and 3.5
`
`mm or less in the first direction in order to optimize the heat exchanger.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 3 and 7 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Yamamoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in View of Beamer et al. (US.
`
`Patent Application No. 2009/0173478, “Beamer”, previously cited).
`
`Regarding Claim 3, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`However, Yamamoto, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of louvers
`
`are inclined at an angle of 15 degrees or more and 25 degrees or less. Beamer, however,
`
`discloses a heat exchanger wherein the plurality of louvers (56, fig 4) are inclined at an angle of
`
`20 degrees (‘fl 0020). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time of the invention for Yamamoto, as modified, to have the louvers inclined at 20 degree
`
`as taught by Beamer in order to optimize the heat exchange efficiency of the heat exchanger.
`
`Regarding Claim 7, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein the first direction and the second direction are horizontal
`
`directions, and the third direction is a vertical direction (See annotated fig 5 below).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
` ,
`
`arm”
`W5
`
`
`
`However, Yamamoto, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein a pair of headers
`
`that extend in the second direction and to which both ends of the flat tubes are connected.
`
`However, the use of header tanks are old and well known in the art of heat exchangers. For
`
`example, Beamer discloses a heat exchanger (fig 1) wherein header tanks (22, 24) are provide to
`
`which flat tubes (30) are connected. Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art at the time of the invention for Yamamoto to provide header tanks in order
`
`distribute and collect the refrigerant flowing through the tubes.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Yamamoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in View of Iwasaki et al. (Japanese
`
`Patent Publication JP2002350077A, "Iwasaki", previously cited).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`Regarding Claim S, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto further discloses wherein each of the plurality of plate portions has a rear flat portion
`
`located leeward of a rearmost louver (3c) that is located on the most leeward side among the
`
`plurality of louvers (see annotated fig 7 below).
`
`
`
`i; 3.3 gmm
`5'
`‘
`'
`.
`
`a“
`V
`
`-
`
`.
`
`3+3 *‘W‘m @"
`.. o‘“
`\\
`'
`
`‘
`‘
`
`333 §§§§§3§m
`
`3§§$§N¥K
`
`i§ '3‘
`
`However, Yamamoto, as modified, does not explicitly disclose wherein the rear flat
`
`portion has a length greater than that of the front flat portion in the first direction. Rather,
`
`Yamamoto teaches the front flat portion may vary in length. Iwasaki, however, discloses a heat
`
`exchanger (fig 3) wherein the rear flat portion (15m) has a length greater that the front flat
`
`portion (15k). Iwasaki teaches this as an alternative embodiment of having the front flat portion
`
`and rear flat portion of equal length (fig 1). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Yamamoto, as modified, to have the rear
`
`flat portion of greater length than the front rear passage as taught by Iwasaki as this constitutes as
`
`choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation
`
`of success.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Yamamoto and Iwasaki disclose all previous
`
`claim limitations. However, they do not explicitly disclose wherein a distance from the
`
`windward edge of the front flat portion to the foremost louver in the first direction is smaller than
`
`a distance from the leeward edge of the rear flat portion to the rearmost louver in the first
`
`direction. However, since Yamamoto does teach varying the distance (L1) between the
`
`windward edge of the front flat portion to the foremost louver (3a), it would have been obvious
`
`to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Yamamoto, as modified, to
`
`have the distance from the windward edge of the front flat portion to the foremost louver in the
`
`first direction is smaller than a distance from the leeward edge of the rear flat portion to the
`
`rearmost louver in the first direction, in order to optimize the heat exchanger.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 8 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Yamamoto and Beamer as applied to claim 7 above, and in further View of Hu (US. Patent
`
`No. 7,506,683, previously cited).
`
`Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Yamamoto and Beamer disclose all previous
`
`claim limitations. However, they do not explicitly disclose wherein one or more partition plates
`
`are provided inside each of the pair of headers so as to divide the flat tubes into a plurality of
`
`tube groups between which a flow direction of the refrigerant is alternately reversed, and the
`
`corrugated fin is disposed at least between the flat tubes that constitute an evaporation—upstream
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`tube group in which the refrigerant flows first in the heating operation among the plurality of
`
`tube groups.
`
`Hu, however, discloses a heat exchanger (fig 1) wherein partition plates (15a, 15b) are
`
`provided inside each of the pair headers (16a, 16b) so as to divide flat tubes (12a, 12b) into a
`
`plurality of tube groups (A, B) between which a flow direction of the refrigerant is alternately
`
`reversed, and corrugated fin (14) is disposed at least between the flat tubes that constitute an
`
`evaporation—upstream tube group in which refrigerant would flow first in a heating operation
`
`among the plurality of groups. Hu teaches that this can configuration can increase heat exchanger
`
`efficiency (col 2, lines 60-66).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
`
`of the invention for Yamamoto, as modified, to provide the partitions of Hu in order to increase
`
`the thermal efficiency of the heat exchanger.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 13 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Yamamoto in View of Itoh et al. (US. Patent Application No. 2002/0036080, "Itoh",
`
`previously cited).
`
`Regarding Claim 15, Yamamoto, as modified, discloses all previous claim limitations.
`
`Yamamoto, as modified, further discloses an outdoor heat exchanger according to claim 1.
`
`However, Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose a refrigeration circuit comprising: a
`
`compressor that compresses a refrigerant;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 16
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`an indoor heat exchanger that exchanges heat between the refrigerant and air to be fed
`
`into a vehicle interior;
`
`an expansion mechanism that expands the refrigerant; wherein
`
`the vehicle air conditioner is configured to perform a heating operation and a cooling
`
`operation, and
`
`the outdoor heat exchanger functions as both a condenser that condenses the refrigerant
`
`in the cooling operation and an evaporator that evaporates the refrigerant in the heating
`
`operation.
`
`Itoh, however, discloses a refrigeration circuit (fig 1) comprising: a compressor (110) that
`
`compresses a refrigerant (‘J[ 0033); an indoor heat exchanger (120) that exchanges heat between
`
`the refrigerant and air to be fed into a vehicle interior (‘fl 0033); an expansion mechanism (161,
`
`162) that expands the refrigerant (‘fl 0035);
`
`the vehicle air conditioner is configured to perform a heating operation and a cooling
`
`operation (‘JI 0034—0035), and
`
`the outdoor heat exchanger functions as both a condenser that condenses the refrigerant
`
`in the cooling operation and an evaporator that evaporates the refrigerant in the heating operation
`
`(‘JI 0034—0035).
`
`Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention for Yamamoto, as modified, to provide the outdoor heat exchanger of Claim 1 in place
`
`of the outdoor of heat exchanger (130) of Itoh in order to increase the thermal efficiency of the
`
`refrigerant circuit of Hu.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 17
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`12.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 10/24/2017 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`persuasive.
`
`a.
`
`Applicant argues (page 7) that Yamamoto does not suggest that ”the front fiat
`
`portion has an area larger than half of that of the extension portion ” and ”the entire
`
`foremost louver is disposed leeward of a center of the extension portion in the first
`
`direction ” as required by claim I . As the Extension portion (LI) of Yamamoto is
`
`significantly smaller than half of the extension portion and the foremost louver (3a) is
`
`windward of the center of the extension portion. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; as
`
`explained in the rejection it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art to extend the flat portion of Yamamoto, as Yamamoto presents the length of the flat
`
`portion as a variable. This would result in the entire foremost louver is disposed leeward
`
`of a center of the extension portion in the first direction.
`
`b.
`
`Applicant argues (page 7) the text at lines 7-17 on page 2 of the translation
`
`indicates that an embodiment like that of Figs. 6 to 8 is undesirable, and Yamamoto
`
`teaches away from the invention of claim I . Extending the length L] of the front fiat
`
`portion in Figs. 6-8 results in inferior performance for the radiator of Yamamoto, so one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art would have no reason to modify the radiator heat exchanger
`
`Yamamoto to meet that the front fiat portion has an area larger than half of that of the
`
`extension portion and the entire foremost louver is disposed leeward of a center of the
`
`extension portion in the first direction; which in the invention of claim I , lead to reduced
`
`heat transfer to reduce deposition offrost on the windward end of the plate portion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 18
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`during a heating operation. The Examiner respectfully disagrees; Yamamoto presents the
`
`heat exchanger shown in figures 6 to 8 as a conventional design, a person of ordinary
`
`skill in would conceive the flat portion "Ll" of figures 6 and 8 as a variable which could
`
`be optimized. Especially considering Yamamoto teaches the relationship of the the
`
`extension portion and the flat portion as an import variable in their design (See page 3 of
`
`previously provided translation).
`
`c.
`
`Applicant further contends that the rejections reliance on the mere indication of
`
`certain features being variables that could be modified as a matter of routine to reach the
`
`invention of claim I is misplaced. As the Federal Circuit recently explained in In re
`
`Stepan Co., 868 F.3d 1342, I 347 (Fed. Cir. 2017), a reasonable expectation of success
`
`requires motivation beyond simply varying parameters until possibly arriving at a
`
`successful result. Given Yamamotos teaching of the undesirable nature of the
`
`embodiment of Figs. 6-8, the present record establishes neither motivation nor a
`
`reasonable expectation of success to modify the variables of Yamamoto in the manner
`
`necessary to reach the features required by claim I. The Examiner repsectfully disagrees;
`
`Yamamoto specifically points out the length of the flat portion (Ll) as a variable (see figs
`
`6 and 8). Thus it is not unreasonable hindsight to optimize this parameter, especially
`
`considering Yamaoto specifically teaches the relationship of the the extension portion
`
`and the flat portion as an important variable (See page 3 of previously provided
`
`translation).
`
`d.
`
`Applicant argues (pages 7-8) that Yamamoto is directed to a component for an
`
`automobile radiator. Such devices are intended to remove heat from the coolant for the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 19
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`engine. In contrast, the outdoor heat exchanger of claim I is configured to function not
`
`only as a condenser but also as an evaporator. In the case of an automotive radiator as
`
`in Yamamoto, a configuration like that of claim 1, where the length LI of the references
`
`front flat portion la of the fin I would be extended, only hampers the radiators
`
`performance. On the other hand, the outdoor heat exchanger of claim I is required to
`
`perform not only as a condenser but also as an evaporator. In this context, the features of
`
`the entire foremost louver is disposed leeward of a center of the extension portion in the
`
`first direction and a leeward end of the foremost louver is located windward of the end
`
`position of the joining region in the first direction as required by claim I. The Examiner
`
`respectfully disagrees; a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heat
`
`exchanger of Yamamoto could be provided as an evaporator/condenser which a common
`
`use for such heat exchangers. Especially considering the heat exchanger of Yamamoto is
`
`meant to radiate heat such as a condenser.
`
`e.
`
`Applicant argues (pages 9-10) that Claim 15 further requires that the vehicle air
`
`conditioner is configured to perform a heating operation and a cooling operation, and
`
`that the outdoor heat exchanger functions both as a condenser in the cooling operation
`
`and anevaporator in the heating operation. Even assuming, without conceding, that Itoh
`
`provides the basic components for the vehicle air conditioner required by claim 15, Itoh
`
`does not provide any particular focus on the features of the outdoor heat exchanger, and
`
`provides nothing that would lead one of ordinary skill to assume that components from
`
`an automotive radiator would be of any use in Itohs device. Therefore, combining Itoh
`
`and Yamamoto to meet the features of claim 15 requires one of ordinary skill to remove
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 20
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`the Yamamoto radiator from its normal environment of use, apply it to another type of
`
`device with difi‘erent characteristics and requirements, and then not only make use of but
`
`modify the embodiment of Yamamoto taught to undesirableThe Examiner respectfully
`
`disagrees; again a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heat
`
`exchanger of Yamamoto could be provided as an evaporator/condenser which a common
`
`use for such heat exchangers. Especially considering the heat exchanger of Yamamoto is
`
`meant to radiate heat such as a condenser.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to HARRY ARANT whose telephone number is (571)272—1105.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on Monday—Friday 8am—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.
`
`lf attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Jianying C. Atkisson can be reached on (571)270—7740. The fax phone number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/232,162
`
`Page 21
`
`Art Unit: 3744
`
`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). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/HARRY ARANT/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3744
`
`/GRANT MOUBRY/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
`
`