DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 02/26/2026 has been entered. Claims 21, 26-29 & 31-34 are pending in the application. Claims 1-20, 22-25, 30 & 35-38 are cancelled.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) and/or PCT Article 7, Paragraph (1). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, when they are necessary for the understanding of the invention. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
the battery, as claimed in Claim 21; it is not clear how the electric pump is capable of affecting the temperature of the battery; Examiner suggests removing the portion of the preamble referring to the battery to overcome this objection
No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 8112.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 21, 26-29 & 31-34 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Claim 21 should read -- An electric pump for a power battery thermal management system, comprising:
a pump body;
a motor (2023) mounted in the pump body;
an impeller (220) mounted in the pump body and driven by the motor (2023); and
a heating assembly (8100) mounted in the pump body and configured to heat a flowing liquid sucked from a suction inlet (511) and discharged from a discharge outlet (512) by the impeller (220);
wherein the heating assembly (8100) comprises:
an inner heating flow channel sleeve (8110) sleeved on an outer side of a motor stator assembly (300) and provided with an inner heating flow channel space (610) extending toward a tubular heating element (8120) for the flowing liquid to flow through[[ ]];
an outer heating flow channel sleeve (8130) arranged side by side with the inner heating flow channel sleeve (8110) and located outside the inner heating flow channel sleeve (8110) and provided with an outer heating flow channel space (630) for the flowing liquid to flow through; and
the tubular heating element (8120) mounted between the inner heating flow channel sleeve (8110) and the outer heating flow channel sleeve (8130) so that the tubular heating element (8120) directly heats the flowing liquid in the inner heating flow channel space (610) and the outer heating flow channel space (630) from two different directions, respectively;
wherein the inner heating flow channel sleeve comprises an outer wall (8111), an inner side of the outer wall is sleeved on the stator assembly (300); and a plurality of inner spiral partition plates (8114) are disposed on an outer side of the outer wall (8111).—
Claim 28 should read --The electric pump of claim 27, wherein the outer heating flow channel sleeve (8130) comprises:
an outer wall (8131); and
a plurality of outer spiral partition plates (8134) disposed on an outer wall (8131);
wherein the outer heating flow channel space (630) allowing the flowing liquid to flow through is formed between the outer heating flow channel sleeve outer wall (8131) and an inner surface of the outer pump mantle, and the outer heating flow channel space (630) is provided with a plurality of outer spiral heating flow channels (631; 632; 633) partitioned by the plurality of outer spiral partition plates (8134); and
spiral directions of the plurality of outer spiral heating flow channels (631;632; 633) are opposite to spiral directions of the plurality of inner spiral heating flow channels (611; 612; 613).—
Claim 29 should read --The electric pump of claim 27, wherein the tubular heating element (8120) comprises:
an inner wall (1202) serving as an inner side of the tubular heating element (8120)
an electric heating film (121) attached to an outer surface (1201) of the tubular heating element (9120), the electric heating film (121)
Claim 31 should read --The electric pump of claim 28, further comprising:
a first reversing-communicating component [[is ]]disposed in a pump cover (8510) and [[is ]]configured to communicate a first end of a first inner spiral heating flow channel (611) of the plurality of inner spiral heating flow channels (611; 612; 613) to the suction inlet (511), communicate a first end of a last outer spiral heating flow channel (633) of the plurality of of the plurality of inner spiral heating flow channels (611; 612; 613) to first ends of other outer spiral heating flow channels (631; 632) of the plurality of the outer spiral heating flow channels (631; 632; 633) in a staggered way; and
a second reversing-communicating component disposed on a lower pump body (8530) and configured to connect a second end of each of the plurality of channels (611; 612; 613) to a second end of each of the plurality of
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are as follows.
“first reversing communicating component” in Claims 31-32, where the generic placeholder is “component”, the functional language is “reversing communicating”, and sufficient modifying structure is not provided; instant application Page 16, Lines 14-23 describes the first reversing communicating component as including: a heating flow channel inlet groove 514 configured to communicate the first end of the first segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 611 to the suction inlet 511 of the pump; a first reversing groove 691 configured to connect a first end of the second segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 612 to a first end of the first segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 631; a second reversing groove 692 configured to connect a first end of the third segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 613 to a first end of the second segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 632; and a heating flow channel outlet groove 515 configured to communicate a first end of the third segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 633 to the discharge outlet 512 of the pump, providing sufficient modifying structure
“second reversing communicating component” in Claims 31 & 34, where the generic placeholder is “component”, the functional language is “reversing communicating”, and sufficient modifying structure is not provided; instant application Page 16, Line 31, to Page 17, Line 4, describes the second reversing communicating component as including: a third reversing groove 681 configured to communicate a second end of the first segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 611 to a second end of the first segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 631; a fourth reversing groove 682 configured to communicate a second end of the second segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 612 to a second end of the second segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 632; and a fifth reversing groove 683 configured to communicate a second end of the third segment of inner spiral heating flow channel 613 to a second end of the third segment of outer spiral heating flow channel 632
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 27-29 & 31-34 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only.
Some examples of indefinite language in the claims are discussed below. It should be noted due to the extent of indefinite language in the claims, this is not an exhaustive list, and Applicant should be careful to address all indefinite language in any amended claims.
As to Claim 27, the limitation “the inner heating flow channel sleeve comprises; a first tubular matrix (8112); and a plurality of inner spiral partition plates (8114) disposed on an outer wall (8111) of the first tubular matrix (8112)”, in Lines 1-5, is indefinite. When referencing instant application Figures 34/37, it appears the inner heating flow channel sleeve 8110 is comprised of inner/outer wall 8111 and spiral partition plates 8114. No other structure is described. As such, in light of the specification, it is not clear what differentiates the outer wall from the first tubular matrix, rendering the claim indefinite. Examiner suggests removing any reference to any matrices in the claims, since the matrices only make the claim language confusing, and do not appear to add any additional structure to any of the claims.
Additionally, an outer wall was defined in Claim 21. As such, it is not clear if the outer wall defined in Claim 27 is the same outer wall defined in Claim 21, or if the respective outer walls are the same outer wall. For the purpose of examination, the respective outer walls will be interpreted as the same outer wall.
Similarly, a plurality of inner spiral partition plates was defined in Claim 21. As such, it is not clear if the plurality of inner spiral partition plates defined in Claim 27 is the same plurality of inner spiral partition plates defined in Claim 21, or if the respective plurality of inner spiral partition plates are the same plurality of inner spiral partition plates. For the purpose of examination, the respective plurality of inner spiral partition plates will be interpreted as the same plurality of inner spiral partition plates.
The term “an outer side”, in Line7, is indefinite. An outer side was defined in Claim 21. As such, it is not clear if the outer side defined in Claim 27 is the same outer side defined in Claim 21, or if the respective outer sides are the same outer side. For the purpose of examination, the respective outer sides will be interpreted as different from each other.
The limitation “outer ends of the plurality of inner spiral partition plates (8114) serve as an outer side of the inner heating flow channel sleeve to be in contact with an inner wall (1202) of the tubular heating element (8120)”, in Lines 6-7, should read --outer ends of the plurality of inner spiral partition plates (8114)
As to Claim 32, it is not clear how to interpret the claim.
For example, the terms, “the other inner spiral heating flow channels”, “the other outer spiral heating flow channels” lack antecedent basis. Since the terms are written in a manner which is commonly used to indicate the term has been previously defined or claimed, it is not clear if Applicant intended for Claim 32 to be dependent on Claim 28, as written, or on Claim 31, which positively claims other inner spiral heating flow channels.
Conversely, the term “a first reversing-communicating component” is introduced, even though the term was introduced in Claim 31.
In light of the above, it is not clear if the dependency of Claim 32 is correct or incorrect, preventing one of ordinary skill in the art in being able to determine if the terms used in the Claim 32 have proper antecedent basis, or not.
Applicant should carefully review the entire claim, and make any necessary amendments to ensure proper antecedent basis in the claim.
As to Claim 34, it is not clear how to interpret the claim.
The claim has similar problems as Claim 32. For example, the term, “the lower pump body” lacks antecedent basis. Since the terms are written in a manner which is commonly used to indicate the term has been previously defined or claimed, it is not clear if Applicant intended for Claim 34 to be dependent on Claim 32, as written, or on Claims 26 or 31, which each positively claim a lower pump body.
Again, Applicant should carefully review the entire claim, and make any necessary amendments to ensure proper antecedent basis in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
As to Claim 21, the prior art of record teaches each of the limitations of Claim 21 but does not teach “a plurality of inner spiral partition plates (8114) are disposed on an outer side of the outer wall (8111).” Therefore, the prior art of record fails to disclose each of the limitations of Claim 21. The closest art of record is Hoffman (2019/0093671). However, Hoffman describes the outer wall being outside of the fluid flow, so does not have any spiral partition plates. It would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Hoffman without significant structural modification and without the benefit of hindsight. Therefore, this limitation, as claimed in Claim 11, is neither anticipated nor made obvious by the prior art of record.
Claim 26, 28-29, 31 & 33 depend on Claim 21, so would also be allowed.
Claims 27, 32 & 34 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, since Claims 27, 32 & 34 also depend on Claim 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the drawing objections, Applicant states the claimed invention is for a pump intended to be used with a battery, so does not need to include the battery in the figures. Examiner disagrees. Applicant has positively claimed the battery is used with the claimed electric pump in Claim 21. As such, it must be clear to one of ordinary skill in the art how to use the claimed pump with a battery. It is not clear from the original disclosure how the claimed pump is capable of being used with a battery thermal management system. Examiner advises Applicant delete all references to the battery in the claims, which would make the objection moot.
Note - Examiner did not enter the drawings submitted on 02/26/2026. The only change Examiner sees in the 02/26/2026 drawings is changing Element 811 to Element 8114. However, this was already done in the 01/07/2025 drawings, which were entered. Additionally, there is no reason to cancel Figure 50, since the figure was never entered. If there are other changes to the drawings, Examiner asks Applicant to specifically point out those changes.
Regarding the Claim Objections, the amendments to the claims required new objections, as described above.
Regarding the 112(f) interpretations, Examiner does not understand Applicant’s remarks, so is unable to respond.
Regarding the 112(b) rejections, although Applicant overcame most of the rejections, Applicant did not overcome all of the rejections. Additionally, the amendments require new rejections.
Regarding the 112(b) rejection for Claim 27, Applicant argues the first tubular matrix is shown as Element 8111 in instant application Figure 37. Applicant then proceeds to state Element 8111 is the outer wall. This is the problem with the claim. The original disclosure does not state the outer wall 8111 is part of the first tubular matrix 8112, and it is not clear what differentiates the two structures. Claim 27 is still indefinite, as described above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID BRANDT whose telephone number is (303)297-4776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10-6, MT.
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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at (571) 272-3383. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID N BRANDT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783