Hussmann Corporation

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Sep 3, 2020

14599919 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Sep. 3, 2020)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
14/599,919 01/19/2015 Sean M. Hanlon 047177-9586-US00 8098
23409 7590 09/03/2020
MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP (Mke)
790 N WATER ST
SUITE 2500
MILWAUKEE, WI 53202
EXAMINER
ARANT, HARRY E
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3763
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/03/2020 ELECTRONIC
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.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
mkeipdocket@michaelbest.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte SEAN M. HANLON and TOBEY D. FOWLER
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919
Technology Center 3700
Before JILL D. HILL, LEE L. STEPINA, and ARTHUR M. PESLAK,
Administrative Patent Judges.
HILL, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the
Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1–4, 7–9, 15, 19, and 20.2 See Non-
Final Act. 1. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.

1 We use the word Appellant to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Hussmann
Corporation. Appeal Br. 2.
2 Claims 5, 6, and 16–18 are withdrawn from consideration. Non-Final Act.
1.
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

2
BACKGROUND
Appellant’s invention relates to a heat exchanger with heater insert.
Claim 1, reproduced below with certain limitations italicized, illustrates the
claimed subject matter:
1. A heat exchanger comprising:
fins spaced apart from each other, each of the fins
including one or more tube slots;
a coil coupled to the fins and including a tube section
extending through axially aligned tube slots; and
a heater insert extending through one or more of the
axially aligned tube slots adjacent an exterior of the tube section
to defrost the heat exchanger.
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner is:
Name Reference Date
Kobayashi US 4,369,350 Jan. 18, 1983
Beasley US 4,730,669 Mar. 15, 1988
Okabe US 2012/0017630 A1 Jan. 26, 2012
Usov3 RU 2 072 488 C1 Jan. 27, 1997
REJECTIONS
I. Claims 1, 3, 15, 19, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kobayashi.
II. Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Usov4 and Beasley.

3 The Examiner and Appellant rely on a machine translation of Usov that
was entered into the record by the Examiner on February 8, 2019,
accompanying a form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited).
4 In Rejection II, the Examiner refers to Usov as “RU94027753C1,” which is
the Application No. not the Publication No. We deem this a harmless error.
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

3
III. Claim 7 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Kobayashi and Okabe.
OPINION
Rejection I; Kobayashi
In rejecting claim 1 as anticipated by Kobayashi, the Examiner relies,
in part, on Kobayashi’s Figure 2, reproduced below. See Non-Final Act. 2.

Figure 2 of Kobayashi is a fragmentary sectional view of an
evaporator. Kobayashi, 2:45–48. Kobayashi’s Figure 2 depicts fins 1
having U-shaped notches 1c for inserting refrigerant tubing 2, and U-shaped
notches 1d for inserting heaters 3 which comprise heater tubes 3a and heater
wires 3b. Id. at 1:33–37. The Examiner considers that Kobayashi’s heater 3
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

4
meets the limitation “a heater . . . adjacent an exterior of the tube section to
defrost the heat exchanger,” because Kobayashi’s heater is used to defrost
the heat exchanger. Non-Final Act. 3 (citing Kobayashi, 1:17–24).
Appellant argues that the claims require the heater and coil extending
through “the same axially aligned tube slots,” which differs from
Kobayashi’s separate slots 1c, 1d for its coil and heater. Appeal Br. 7–8.
Appellant also argues that Kobayashi does not meet the heater being
“adjacent an exterior of the tube” limitation because Kobayashi’s heater is
separate and spaced from the tube and is in a different notch. Id.
The Examiner responds that the claims do not require the heater and
tube to extend through the same slot. Ans. 13. According to the Examiner,
the term “adjacent” is defined as “lying close,” and because Kobayashi’s
heater 3 “is interpreted as being close to the tube (2),” Kobayashi meets this
limitation. Id. at 14.
In reply, Appellant reiterates that the claims require the same slot,
because the claim recites “the axially aligned tube slots,” which refers back
to the previously recited slots in which the tubes also extend. Reply Br. 2.
Relying on Kobayashi’s Figure 2, reproduced above, Appellant asserts that
the Examiner’s interpretation of the term “adjacent” “cannot be reasonably
interpreted in this situation to encompass a heater that is in a slot different
from the slot for the refrigerant tube when considering Appellant’s
Application and claims as a whole.” Reply Br. 5 (“The Examiner’s
interpretation of ‘adjacent an exterior of the tube section’ is unreasonably
broad given Appellant’s Application as a whole and what is taught by
Kobayashi, and is therefore improper.”).
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

5
We agree with Appellant on at least the latter argument. The broadest
reasonable interpretation of the claim term “extending . . . adjacent an
exterior of the tube section,” consistent with the Specification, requires more
than just being “close” as the Examiner suggests. The Specification
discloses that when evaporator 75 is assembled, heater insert 120 can “be
guided through the axially-aligned slots 100 to engage one or both of the
tube section 85 and the fins 90.” Spec. ¶ 31. The Specification also
discloses that “heater insert 120 is engaged with the fins 90 via the slots 100
and extends generally parallel to the tube sections 85.” Id. ¶ 28; see also
¶ 36. The Specification further discloses that, in operation, “heater insert
120, 220 is in direct contact with one or both of at least a portion of one or
both of the tube sections 85 and the fins 90 to defrost the evaporator 75 by
conduction and convection.” Id. ¶ 40. Although contact is not required,
each of the disclosed embodiments depicts the heater insert extending
generally parallel to the tube section. We discern no disclosure of
“adjacent” that encompasses a tube section and heater that are spaced apart
and extend at different non-parallel levels of the fins as depicted by
Kobayashi. Rather, we understand the broadest reasonable interpretation of
the phrase “extending . . . adjacent an exterior of the tube section,” consistent
with the Specification, to require that the heater insert is not only close to the
tube section, but also extends in a manner that maintains the adjacent
relationship of the heater and the tube.
For these reasons, the Examiner’s interpretation of the limitation “a
heater . . . extending . . . adjacent an exterior of the tube section” as
including Kobayashi’s heater 3a and 3b that is spaced apart vertically and
horizontally from the tube section is unreasonably broad. Thus, the
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

6
Examiner’s finding is in error, and we do not sustain the rejection of
independent claims 1 and 15. Claims 3 and 20 depend from claim 1. Claim
19 depends from claim 15. We do not sustain Rejection I.
Rejection II; Usov and Beasley
The Examiner finds that Usov discloses a heat exchanger with fins, a
coil, and a heater insert, but that Usov’s fins do not include tube slots with
tube sections and a heater insert extending through the tube slots. Non-Final
Act. 6. The Examiner finds that Beasley discloses slots in the fins to allow
for a cross flow pattern of fluid distribution. Id. (citing Beasley, 8:60–68).
According to the Examiner, it would have been obvious to place tube slots in
Usov’s fins “to provide a cross flow pattern for the air distribution (allowing
air to enter the fins in vertical and horizontal directions), thus improving the
versatility of the system.” Id. at 7.
Appellant argues, inter alia, that Usov’s tubing 1 defines channels 5
that receive refrigerant, and that each channel is defined by inner walls of
tubing 1. Appeal Br. 10. Appellant asserts that Usov discloses that the
heater or “heat generating element” is inside the microchannel tubing. Id.
According to Appellant, because the Examiner relies on the individual walls
of the microchannel tubing 1 for the claimed tube sections, the Examiner not
only mischaracterizes the disclosure of Usov, but also ignores Appellant’s
claim language. Id.
In response, the Examiner states that the claim requires that “the coil
includes tube sections which are being interpreted as the partition walls.”
Ans. 16. According to the Examiner, based on this interpretation, Usov’s
heater 6 is adjacent an exterior of the partition wall. Id. at 17.
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

7
Appellant replies that the Examiner’s interpretation is unreasonably
broad because the Examiner’s reliance on “arbitrarily-selected partition
walls of Usov’s heat exchanger for teaching a ‘tube section’” has no
reasonable basis in Usov or in Appellant’s disclosure. Reply Br. 7.
Specifically, Appellant asserts that the Examiner’s position that Usov’s
partition walls meet the claimed tube sections “is unreasonable because it is
not consistent with what Appellant describes in the Specification or what
would be ‘consistent with the interpretation that those skilled in the art
would reach.’” Id. at 8.
Appellant has the better position. The Specification discloses that in
“Figs. 2 and 3, the illustrated evaporator 75 includes a serpentine coil
assembly that has two coils 80 with tube sections 85.” Spec. ¶ 24. We
reproduce below Figure 3.

Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

8
Figure 3 is an exploded perspective view of an evaporator illustrating
the coils, the fins, and the heater insert. Spec. ¶ 12. Figure 3 shows two
serpentine coils 80 that extend from the top of the figure to the bottom of the
figure. As depicted in Figure 3, the coils are divided along their lengths into
sections, or tube sections 85. We discern no disclosure of “tube section” that
encompasses a cross-section of a coil or tube with interior walls of the coil
as depicted by Usov. See Usov, 3:13–15 (“cross-section”). We understand
the broadest reasonable interpretation of the phrase “tube section,”
consistent with Appellant’s Specification to require that the tube section is a
longitudinally extending portion of the fully enclosed coil tube. In view of
this, as Appellant argues persuasively, Usov does not disclose a heater insert
“adjacent an exterior of the tube section.” Given that the Examiner does not
rely on Beasley for this feature, the Examiner has not established adequately
that the combined teachings of Usov and Beasley suggest a heater insert
extending through one or more of the axially aligned tube slots adjacent an
exterior of the tube section, as required by claim 1.
For these reasons, we do not sustain the rejection of claim 1. Claims
2, 4, 8, and 9 depend from claim 1. We do not sustain Rejection II.
Rejection III; Kobayashi and Okabe
Claim 7 depends from claim 1. The Examiner does not find that
Okabe cures the above-noted deficiency in Kobayashi set forth in Rejection
I. We, therefore, do not sustain Rejection III for the reason set forth above
regarding Rejection I.
CONCLUSION
The Examiner’s rejections are reversed.
More specifically,
Appeal 2020-001714
Application 14/599,919

9
DECISION SUMMARY
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1, 3, 15, 19, 20 102(a)(1) Kobayashi 1, 3, 15, 19,
20
1, 2, 4, 8, 9 103 Usov, Beasley 1, 2, 4, 8, 9
7 103 Kobayashi, Okabe 7
Overall
Outcome
1–4, 7–9,
15, 19, 20
REVERSED