Appeal 2006-1708
Application 10/186,253
1 Specifically, the Appellants admit Haussmann recognizes the potential advantage
2 of improved performance produced by optimizing certain dimensional ratios,
3 ranges and interrelationships of corrugated fins i.e., crest pitch and tube spacing
4 (Br. 9). However, the Appellants contend that the references do not suggest a
5 motivation for optimizing (Br. 9-10).
6 The Examiner contends the cited references are concerned with thermal
7 performance characteristics of the corrugated fins and provide a motivation that
8 would be recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art (Answer 15-16).
9 The Appellants admit Haussmann recognizes the potential advantage of
10 improved performance produced by optimizing certain dimensional ratios, ranges,
11 and interrelationships of corrugated fins.
12 Specifically, we find that Haussmann teaches optimizing crest pitch (T) and
13 tube spacing (LH) in heat exchangers in order to maximize airside heat transfer
14 efficiency. Haussmann’s reason for optimizing the dimensional ratios is for a
15 different purpose and to solve a different problem than that of the claimed
16 invention. Haussmann suggests optimizing the dimensional ratios to maximize the
17 heat transfer efficiency. It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the
18 combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant.
19 Kahn, 441 F.3d at 987, 78 USPQ2d at 1336. It reasonably appears that
20 Haussmann’s disclosure of optimizing crest pitch (T) and tube spacing (LH) in
21 heat exchangers in order to maximize airside heat transfer efficiency would have
22 fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in art, using the fin dimensions in
23 Beamer’s heat exchange to obtain that benefit.
24 There is adequate motivation found in the references to optimize the
25 dimensional ratios of the fins in order to maximize airside heat transfer efficiency.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013