Unrrep States PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE. re ‘O70 ‘Manin. Rinker ‘O22235-9082.00 738 MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP POs 100 E WISCONSIN AVENUE ROSATI: BRANDON MICHAP Suite 3300) = MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 anu peas arto PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. ‘The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication PTOL-9OA (Rev.0407)‘Application Wo. ‘Applicantsy 111489,709 RINIKER ET AL. Office Action Summary Examiner ARtUnit BRANDON M. ROSATI area = The MAILING DATE 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 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS, WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. + Exons n may be malas under he prose 37 CFR 1.1358). 0 even weve, yap be my Fd ~ fh pend oro spc aor, he ma oy pers vl pp an wee SK ®) MONTHS fo he ating ce of is cmentton Fae oop wrth str xened pore ro wit y tas eae be apeatn to btame ABANDONED (USC. 135) fyi ecto y tees te an bro mons ae te main ate isconmuiato, een Way fe, ay ede sy Samed atone tom aso Soe 37 CFR 70H), Status 1)E21_ Responsive to communication(s) filed on 23 June 2008, 2a)L] This action is FINAL. 2b) This action is non-final 3)E1 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 Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 483 0.6. 213, Disposition of Claims 4)Q3) Claim(s) 1-27 is/are pending in the application. 4a) Of the above claim(s) 1-7 and 17-22 isfare withdrawn from consideration, 5) Claim(s) is/are allowed. 6)B Claim(s) 8-16 and 23-27 islare rejected. 7D Claim(s)___ is/are objected to. 8)L] Claim(s)___are subject to restriction and/or election requirement. Application Papers 9)L1 The specification is objected to by the Examiner. 10) The drawing(s) fled on 04 October 2006 is/are: a)BQ accepted or b)C] objected to by the Examiner. Applicant may not request that eny 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). 14) The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152. Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a}(d) or (f). a)CIAN by] Some * }L None of: 1.1 Certified copies ofthe priority documents have been received 2.0 Centified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _. 3.01 Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage pplication from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)). * See the altached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received. Attachment(s) 1) Bi] Notce of References Cited (PT0.892) 4) inteniew Summary (PTO-419) 2) Notice of Drattsprson's Patent Dravang Review (PTO-948) Paper No(s) Mal Dato 2) Ba information Disclosure Statements) (PTOISEIC8) 5)[7] Notice of ntrmal Patent Applicaton Paper No(s)/Mail Date 11/20/2007, 6) Lotter: PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06) Office Aetion Summary Part of Paper No Mall Date 20080814Application/Control Number: 11/483,789 Page 2 Art Unit: 3744 DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions 1, Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Species 1 in the reply filed on 3/2008 is acknowledged. 2. Claims 1-7 and 17-22 are withdrawn from further con ideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group/Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/23/2008. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (2) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or deseribed as set fort in section 102 ofthis title, ithe differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as @ whole would have been obvious atthe time the invention was made to-a person. having ordinary skill in the art to which said sult matter pertains, Patentability shall not be negatived by the ‘manner in which the invention was made 4, This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), 5. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:Application/Control Number: 11/483,789 Page 3 Art Unit: 3744 Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness, 6. Claims 8-10, 12-14, 16, 23-25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daffron (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0137855 A1) in view of Fleury (U.S. Patent No, 4,391,027), Daffron disclos: Regarding claims 8, 13, 14, and 2: in Figures | and 2, all the claimed. limitations including a heat exchanger (1) comprising a core with tubes (3) including a first (area above opening/window), second (area below opening/window), third (area left of opening/window), and fourth (area right of opening/window) core sections, a pair of primary headers (4), connected to opposite tube ends of the core, an opening (i.c. window) (5), passing through the core, the opening bounded on a first side by a first header/tank assembly (6) connected to an end of the first core section opposite from one of the primary headers,, on a second ide opposite the first side by a second header/tank assembly (11)connected to an end of the second section opposite from the other of the primary headers, on a third side extending between the first and second sides by a side piece (i.e. tube adjacent to the box) of the third core section, and one a fourth side, opposite the third side by a side piece (i.e. tube adjacent to the box) of the fourth core section, the side pieces extending from one of the primary headers to the other primary header, the first and second core sections being located in between and at least one fluid conduit (9) extending between the tanks of the first and second tank assemblies, assemblies having a mechanical connection to the tanks and is then the connection is brazed (Paragraphs [0021}-[0032]). Furthermore, Daffron discloses a first and second header/tank assemblyApplication/Control Number: 11/483,789 Page 4 Art Unit: 3744 comprising a tube header (7) receiving the ends of the tube and a tank (i.e. pan) (8) connected to the header (Paragraphs [0026]-[0027)). It is noted the tubes structural can function the same as a side plate in secur ig the opening. Daffion does not disclose fins in the core, However, Fleury discloses in Figure 8, fins (22) placed in the core between tubes (16) (Column 3, lines 1-10). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify the teachings of Daftion with the fins of Fleury because it is well known that the addition of fins increases the overall structure of the core, as well as maintaining spacing between tubes, and increasing the overall amount of heat transfer Regarding claims 9, 24, and 27, Daffron discloses in Figure 1, a first and second header/tank assembly comprising a tube header (7) receiving the ends of the tube and a tank (ic. pan) (8) connected to the header (Paragraphs [0026]-[0027). Regarding claims 10 and 25, Dafiron discloses in Figure 2, a fluid conduit (9) extending between the tanks of the first and second header/tank assemblies having a mechanical connection to the tanks and is then the connection is brazed (Paragraph [0032]). Regarding claims 12 and 16, Fleury discloses in Figures 8 and 9, a plurality of fins (22) placed in the core between a plurality of parallel flattened tubes (16) (Column 3, lines 1-10). 7. Claims 11, 15, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Daffron (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0137855 A1) in view of Fleury (U.S. Patent No. 4,391,027) in further view of Kalbacher (U.S. Patent No. 6,543,525 B2) Regarding claims 11, 15, and 26 the combined teachings of Daffron and Fleury disclose all the claimed limitations except the side pieces including a pair of stops utilized to secure the first and second header/tank assemblies. However, Kalbacher discloses in Figure 8, the conceptApplication/Control Number: 11/483,789 Page 5 Art Unit: 3744 of utilizing a stop (74) to restrict movement of two objects connected together (Column 3, lines 34-62), Hence, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, atthe time the invention was made, to modify the combined teachings of Daffron and Fleury with the concept of adding stops as taught by Kalbacher, because the stops would help to brace the core window before brazing. It is noted that based on the concept as taught by Kalbacher, one of ordinary skill would be capable to add as many stops as needed in order to ensure a good connection between the opening and the core depending on the stability needed before brazing Conclusion 8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Alexander (U.S. Patent No, 1,109,384) discusses a heat exchanger with a window. Gargiulo et al. (U.S. Patent No. 1,664,812) discusses a radiator with a window. Askin (U.S. Patent No. 1,907,032) discusses a heat with a window 9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M. ROSATI whose telephone number is (571)270- 3536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00am- 4:30pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiners supervisor, Cheryl Tyler or Frantz Jules can be reached on (571) 272-4834 or (571) 272-6681 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Application/Control Number: 11/483,789 Page 6 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 571-2 2-100. BMR 5/14/2008 /Prantz, F. Jules! Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3744