DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A-2 and Species B-1 (i.e., claims 1, 3-5, 6 and 7) in the reply filed on 11/10/25 is acknowledged. Note that as per the species delineation set forth in the office action dated 09/12/25 Species A-2 reads on claims 4-5 but it does not read on claim 2; similarly, Species B-1 reads on claim 6 but it does not read on claim 7. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/29/24 and 03/23/23 was considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 03/23/23.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the publication JP 2019-023059 (heretofore JP’059) in view of Westhauser et al 2022/0258567.
As to claims 1, 3:
JP’059 discloses that it is known in the art to make coolant circuit (i.e., applicant’s temperature adjusting device) (Abstract; 0002-0003; 0006-0009; 0012-0013; 0018-0027; 0039-0045; see Claims 1-6 & 25; see Figures 1-2) including a first pump 61, a second pump 63, a first selector-switching valve 60 (see Claims 5-6) and a second selector/switching valve 62 (see Claims 5-6) being controlled by controller ECU 3 (applicant’s control device) to change/switch flow of a coolant in a first coolant passage/channel 101, a second coolant passage/channel 102, a third coolant passage/channel 201, a fourth coolant passage/channel 202, and a bypass passage 30 in response to an external temperature and a water temperature in the battery system installed in an electric vehicle (see Abstracts; 0002-0003; 0006-0009; 0012-0013; 0018-0027; 0039-0045; see Claims 1-6 & 25-27; see Figures 1-2). In JP’059, the coolant circuit including battery 51 is a part/component of or is connected to an electric vehicle (applicant’s heat generating instrument/device) (0002-0003; 0006-0009; 0012-0013; 0018-0027; see Claims 5 & 25). In this case, it is noted that the thermal capacity of the heat generating instrument/vehicle is inherently smaller/lower than that of the battery,
PNG
media_image1.png
420
604
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claims 6, 8:
In JP’059, the coolant circuit is a part/component of an electric vehicle configured to drive a motor (applicant’s heat generating instrument/device) (0002-0003; 0006-0009; 0012-0013; 0018-0027; see Claims 5 & 25).
JP’059 teaches a coolant circuit for an electric vehicle according to the foregoing description. However, the preceding reference does not expressly disclose the specific first/second temperature sensors configured to measure respective thermal medium and battery temperatures.
As to claim 1:
In the same field of applicant’s endeavor, Westhauser et al disclose that it is known in the art to make a coolant circuit for an electric vehicle (0002-0003; 0015) including, inter alia, a battery electric vehicle 12; coolant heat exchanger 13; cooling circuit 14, first temperature sensor 16 provided on the outlet side of the coolant heat exchanger 13 with which a coolant outlet temperature is determined; a second temperature sensor 17 for the determination of the coolant inlet temperature into the coolant heat exchanger 13, wherein the sensor data of the first/second temperature sensors are forwarded to a computing unit 18 of the motor vehicle; and sensors 21, 22 (Abstract; 0050-0052; 0046; 0062-0063; Figure 1). Thus, Westhauser et al readily envision using first and second temperature sensors for sensing temperatures related to coolant circuit associated with the battery-electric vehicle 12.
PNG
media_image2.png
604
738
media_image2.png
Greyscale
By compounding the above teachings, it would have been within the ambit of a skilled artisan prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the specific first/second temperature sensors of Westhauser et al to measure respective thermal medium and battery temperatures of the cooling circuit/electric vehicle of JP’059 because Westhauser et al teach that the specifically disclosed temperate sensors used in the battery-electric vehicle assist in determining/sensing specific coolant medium temperatures related to devices/components of the disclosed battery-electric vehicle during start-up process of the motor vehicle so that necessary defrosting process may be initiated. Further, all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is prima-facie obvious. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US- 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007). KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395; Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282, 189 USPQ 449, 453 (1976); Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 62-63, 163 USPQ 673, 675 (1969); Great Atl. & P. Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equip. Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 152, 87 USPQ 303, 306 (1950).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: a detailed search for the prior art failed to reveal or fairly suggest what is instantly claimed, in particular: the temperature adjusting device comprising all of the claimed components/elements satisfying the specific structural and functional interrelationship as recited in dependent claims 4.
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Note that claim 5 is also allowable by virtue of its dependency upon claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND ALEJANDRO whose telephone number is (571)272-1282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday (8:00 am-6:30 pm).
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/RAYMOND ALEJANDRO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1752