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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Rome’s first switching valve 225 is different from the technical solution. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “the three-way solenoid 225 in Rome. . . is different from the technical solution of pending claim 1 of the present application”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Here, the limitation in claim 1 is a first switching valve. There is no other requirement.
Applicant further argues that Wan’s self-sealing quick joint 13 is different from the Applicant’s check valve. However, Wan’s element 13 functions in the same manner as a check valve. Fluid is only allowed entrance when element 13 is in operation and where the fluid is only allowed to flow in one direction (Fig. 1).
In response to applicant's argument that “the technical solutions of Rome and Wan are two independent and complete operating systems,” the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Here, Wan’s purpose is to control fluid flow.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rome et al. (USPN RE38232 E) in view of Wan et al. (CN 107588328 A).
PNG
media_image1.png
526
1002
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 - Rome Annotated Fig. 2
Regarding Claim 1, Rome discloses a liquid replenishment and drainage device for a liquid-cooled energy storage system, comprising a pump (220), a switching power supply (where there must be a power supply or the system would cease to function), a first switching valve (225), a first pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2) which is configured to be connected with the liquid-cooled energy storage system (120), a second pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2), and a quick-connect connector (205); wherein the pump is arranged on the first pipeline (Fig. 2), and the pump is electrically connected with the switching power supply (where the electric pump would not work without a power supply that switches from on/off conditions); the first switching valve is arranged on the second pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2), two ends of the second pipeline are respectively in communication with the first pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2), communication positions on the first pipeline are respectively located at two ends of the pump (Fig. 2), wherein one end of the first pipeline is provided with the quick-connect connector (Fig. 2), and the quick-connect connector is configured to be connected with the liquid-cooled energy storage system (Col. 6, Lines 27–37), but does not disclose a check valve.
Wan teaches a check valve (13) between the entrance of the line and the pump (14) in order to prevent backflow to the upstream system
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first pipeline of Rome with a check valve as taught by Wan in order to prevent backflow to the upstream system.
Per the Rome–Wan combination, Wan’s check valve (13) is located upstream of Rome’s filter (210).
The Rome–Wan combination teaches and the check valve (Wan 13) is arranged on the first pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2) and is located between the pump (Rome 220) and one of the communication positions on the first pipeline (Rome Annotated Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 2–4, 6–7 and 9–10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rome et al. (USPN RE38232 E) in view of Wan et al. (CN 107588328 A), in further view of Shih et al. (US PGPub 20050077252 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, the Rome–Wan combination does not teach a pressure detection unit, wherein the pressure detection unit is arranged at an outlet of the pump.
Shih teaches a pressure detection unit (42), wherein the pressure detection unit is arranged at an outlet of the pump (Fig. 1) in order to ensure that the proper flow of fluid is in the system (Paras. 17 and 23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pipeline of the Rome–Wan combination with a pressure system detection unit as taught by Shih in order to indicate that the pressure in the system sufficient, ensuring that the system is in proper working condition.
Regarding Claim 3, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches the pressure detection unit comprises a pressure switch, and the pressure switch is electrically connected with the pump (Shih Para. 17).
Regarding Claim 4, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches the check valve is located at an inlet of the pump; or the check valve is located at the outlet of the pump and is located between the pressure detection unit and the pump (Shih Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 6, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches a second switching valve (Rome 215), wherein the second switching valve is arranged on the first pipeline and is arranged close to the quick-connect connector (Rome Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 7, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches at least one of the first switching valve and the second switching valve is an electric valve, and the electric valve is electrically connected with the switching power supply (Shih Para. 21 discusses the electrical connections).
Regarding Claim 9, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches a controller (Shih 64), wherein the controller is electrically connected with the pump, the switching power supply and the first switching valve (Shih Paras. 21–22).
Regarding Claim 10, the Rome–Wan–Shih combination teaches the liquid replenishment and drainage device for the liquid-cooled energy storage system according to claim 1 (Shih Para. 5).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rome et al. (USPN RE38232 E) in view of Wan et al. (CN 107588328 A), in further view of Wheeler (US PGPub 20060070661 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, the Rome–Wan combination does not explicitly teach the pump is a direct-current self-priming pump.
Wheeler teaches a pump is a direct-current self-priming pump Para. 17.
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to utilize a direct-current self-priming pump as disclosed by Wheeler in place of the generic pump of Rome–Wan, since a direct-current self-priming pump and the generic pump are known equivalents and the use of which would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Angelisa L. Hicks whose telephone number is 571-272-9552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30AM-5:00PM EST).
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/Angelisa L. Hicks/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753