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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of invention II claim 20 in the reply filed on 1/26/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no undue search burden. This is found persuasive because the claim language of claim 20 is broader than that of claim 1, therefore, claim 1 anticipates claim 20. The restriction of 12/10/2025 is hereby withdrawn and invention II, claim 20, is examined herein.
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:
“heater control module” in claims 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 is being interpreted as item heater control module 124 which are per par. 67 is a memory circuit.
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.
Regarding claim 13, the recitation of “condition is low coolant flow” is unclear as to what “condition is low coolant flow”, the examiner interprets low coolant flow to identifying an increase in temperature greater than normal.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
wherein the temperature sensor does not directly contact coolant within the housing
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The recitation of “wherein the temperature sensor does not directly contact coolant within the housing” is not disclosed in the claims nor specification the specific type of sensing means the applicant had at the time of filing that was capable of accurately measuring the temperature of the coolant when not in direct contact with the coolant. The applicant has support for thermistors. The applicant has support for thermistors which are known in the art to be contact temperature sensors, i.e. they have to be in contact with the coolant as disclosed in claim 5.
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 1-19 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.
Regarding claims 1, 9, 13, 17, and 20, the recitation of “to selectively detect” is unclear as to what “to selectively detect” is meant to be as it is not disclosed in the claims. One skilled in the art would not be apprised of what specific structure meets the claimed structure/elements.
Claims 2-19 are also rejected due to their dependence to one or more of the above rejected independent claims.
Regarding claim 12, the recitation of “wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when the rate of increase of the temperature is greater than a predetermined rate of temperature increase” is inherent in the disclosure of claim 11 of which claim 12 depends since it has to be based on the increase in claim 11 which means it already has to be greater than a known rate of increase.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3,5 , 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US20240167727A1 Cardoso.
Regarding claim 1,
Cardoso teaches,
A coolant heating system (tankless hot water heater 100, water is known in the art to be a coolant) for an engine (the inlets 115 and outlets 120 are threaded and therefore the tankless hot water heater 100 is capable of being used to receive a coolant from an engine and working with anything capable of being threaded into the tankless hot water heater 100), comprising:
a coolant heater including:
a housing (outer case 105) including:
an inlet (115) configured to receive coolant (115 receives cold water per par. 21) from the engine (the inlets 115 and outlets 120 are threaded and therefore the tankless hot water heater 100 is capable of being used to receive a coolant from an engine and working with anything capable of being threaded into the tankless hot water heater 100);
and an outlet (120) configured to output coolant (serves as a hot water outlet) to the engine (the inlets 115 and outlets 120 are threaded and therefore the tankless hot water heater 100 is capable of being used to receive a coolant from an engine and working with anything capable of being threaded into the tankless hot water heater 100);
an electrically resistive heating element (first, second, third, and fourth heating elements 30 or 130, 25 or 131, 20 or 132, and 15 or 133 respectively) that is disposed within the housing (fig. 1) and that is configured to generate heat when power is applied to the heating element (par. 6 and 7);
and a temperature sensor (inlet thermistor 50 or 135 and outlet thermistor 45 or 140) configured to measure a temperature of coolant within the housing (par. 6 and 21);
and a heater control module (controller 40) configured to:
receive the temperature from the temperature sensor (par. 6 and 21);
selectively control application of power to the heating element based on maintaining the temperature at or above a predetermined temperature (par. 6, claims 1 and 17, algorithm for a method 200 for figs. 28 and 29 per par. 50);
selectively detect the presence of a condition based on the temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%);
and when the presence of the condition is detected, disconnect the heating element from power (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%)
Regarding claim 2,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches, wherein the temperature sensor is a thermistor (inlet thermistor 50 or 135 and outlet thermistor 45 or 140).
Regarding claim 3,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches a water heater with a housing (as discussed above) with one or more mounting openings 157 (par. 21) to provide convenient mounting to a surface (par. 21) and is therefore configured to be located vertically below a vertically lowest point of a coolant loop of the engine, and no pump is used to pump coolant between the coolant heater and the engine (Cardoso does not include a pump in the invention, further, It is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). The manner or method in which a machine is to be utilized is not germane to the issue of patentability of the machine itself, In re Casey 152 USPQ 235).
Regarding claim 5,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein the temperature sensor extends through the housing and is configured to directly contact coolant within the housing (par. 21 teaches the inlet thermistor 135 and outlet thermistor 140 measuring the temperature of the water exiting the heater 100, it is therefore obvious that they are in contact with the water/coolant when performing temperature measurements).
Regarding claim 7,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches,
further comprising a second temperature sensor configured to measure a second temperature of coolant within the housing (outlet thermistor 45 or 140) wherein the heater control module is configured to receive the second temperature from the second temperature sensor (par. 6 and 21).
Regarding claim 8,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 7 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein:
the temperature sensor is configured to measure the temperature of coolant within the inlet (par. 6 and 21 also as discussed above);
and the second temperature sensor is configured to measure the second temperature of coolant within the outlet (par. 6 and 21 also as discussed above).
Regarding claim 9,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein:
the condition is at least a portion of the heating element not being submerged in coolant (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0% where presence of air or air bubbles is a state of not being submerged in coolant/water);
and the heater control module is configured to selectively detect the presence of the condition based on the temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Regarding claim 10,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 9 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when the temperature is greater than a second predetermined temperature that is greater than the predetermined temperature (par. 50 and 51).
Regarding claim 13,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein:
the condition is low coolant flow (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%);
and the heater control module is configured to selectively detect the presence of the condition based on the temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Regarding claim 14,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 13 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
further comprising:
a second temperature sensor (outlet thermistor 45 or 140) configured to measure a second temperature of coolant within the housing, wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition further based on the second temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Regarding claim 15,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 14 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition based on a difference between the temperature and the second temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Regarding claim 16,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 15 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when the difference is greater than a predetermined temperature difference (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0% and comparing this to a desired temperature).
Regarding claim 20,
Cardoso teaches,
A method, comprising:
receiving a temperature from a temperature sensor (inlet thermistor 50 or 135 and outlet thermistor 45 or 140, par. 6 and 21), the temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of coolant within a housing of a coolant heater (par. 6 and 21), the coolant heater including:
the housing (outer case 105) including:
an inlet (115) configured to receive coolant (115 receives cold water per par. 21) from an engine (the inlets 115 and outlets 120 are threaded and therefore the tankless hot water heater 100 is capable of being used to receive a coolant from an engine and working with anything capable of being threaded into the tankless hot water heater 100);
and an outlet (120) configured to output coolant (serves as a hot water outlet) to the engine (the inlets 115 and outlets 120 are threaded and therefore the tankless hot water heater 100 is capable of being used to receive a coolant from an engine and working with anything capable of being threaded into the tankless hot water heater 100);
an electrically resistive heating element (first, second, third, and fourth heating elements 30 or 130, 25 or 131, 20 or 132, and 15 or 133 respectively) that is disposed within the housing (fig. 1) and that is configured to generate heat when power is applied to the heating element (par. 6 and 7);
selectively controlling application of power to the heating element based on maintaining the temperature at or above a predetermined temperature (par. 6, claims 1 and 17, algorithm for a method 200 for figs. 28 and 29 per par. 50);
selectively detecting the presence of a condition based on the temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%);
and when the presence of the condition is detected, disconnecting the heating element from power (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20240167727A1 Cardoso in view of US 6246831 B1 Seitz.
Regarding claim 11,
Cardoso teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 9 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Cardoso does not teach: wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition based on a rate of increase of the temperature.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Seitz teaches A coolant heating system (claim 1 fig. 1) for an engine, comprising:
a coolant heater including:
a housing (claim 1 fig. 1) including:
an inlet (claim 1 fig. 1 inlet pipe 2) configured to receive coolant from the engine (column 6 lines 46 to 49 teaches that the invention of Seitz is using components capable of being used to monitor water temperatures in an engine block and therefore, the invention of Seitz is equipped to receive coolant water from an engine);
and an outlet (outlet pipe 6) configured to output coolant to the engine (column 6 lines 46 to 49 teaches that the invention of Seitz is using components capable of being used to monitor water temperatures in an engine block and therefore, the invention of Seitz is equipped to receive coolant water from an engine and therefore it is capable to output water from an engine);
an electrically resistive heating element ( U-shaped heating elements 5 a-5 d) that is disposed within the housing (fig. 1) and that is configured to generate heat when power is applied to the heating element (claim 1)
Seitz further teaches wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition based on a rate of increase of the temperature (fig. 32 and column 60 lines 61 to 67 and column 61 lines 1 to 67 and column 62 lines 1 to 44 looking at a delta t avg over time which a rate of increase “An average of the temperature differences between t1 and t2 may be stored and a mean value may be used to smooth the computation over time” where the stored averages are examined for a rate of increase over time and compared to a control band placed on T1).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Cardoso with the teachings of Seitz for the purpose to detect flow rate and faults/failures in a fluid heater using temperature and power data only (Seitz column 60 lines 61 to 67).
Regarding claim 12,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 11 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Cardoso does not teach: wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when the rate of increase of the temperature is greater than a predetermined rate of temperature increase.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Seitz teaches wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when the rate of increase of the temperature is greater than a predetermined rate of temperature increase (fig. 32 and column 60 lines 61 to 67 and column 61 lines 1 to 67 and column 62 lines 1 to 44 and to provide a quick response “a two prioritized control bands were added to the control strategy and were established based on the outlet temperature measurement (T4) which has the highest priority and a secondary priority band placed on T1” which is a predetermined rate of temperature increase).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Cardoso with the teachings of Seitz for the purpose to detect flow rate and faults/failures in a fluid heater using temperature and power data only (Seitz column 60 lines 61 to 67).
Claim(s) 4, 17, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20240167727A1 Cardoso in view of US 6246831 B1 Seitz in view of US20100205958A1 Ishii.
Regarding claim 4,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Cardoso does not teach: further comprising a pump configured to pump coolant between the coolant heater and the engine.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Ishii teaches a coolant heater (surplus power heater 34 par. 49) in a fluid communication with a coolant circulation system (engine cooling circuit 14) and further teaches a pump (44) configured to pump coolant between the coolant heater and the engine (par. 52-54).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Cardoso with the teachings of Ishii for the purpose for forcibly circulating the heat medium 18 in the engine cooling circuit 14 such that the heat medium 18 circulates in the heat exchanging unit 46, the temperature sensors 48 and 50 (Ishii par. 54).
Regarding claim 17,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
Cardoso teaches,
wherein the condition is a fault of the pump (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0% and comparing this to a desired temperature).
and the heater control module is configured to selectively detect the presence of the condition based on the temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0% and comparing this to a desired temperature).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Cardoso does not teach: further comprising a pump configured to pump coolant between the coolant heater and the engine.
Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Further, there were design incentives for implementing the claimed variation. Specifically, Ishii teaches further comprising a pump (44) configured to pump coolant between the coolant heater and the engine (par. 52-54).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Cardoso with the teachings of Ishii for the purpose for forcibly circulating the heat medium 18 in the engine cooling circuit 14 such that the heat medium 18 circulates in the heat exchanging unit 46, the temperature sensors 48 and 50 (Ishii par. 54).
Regarding claim 18,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 17 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
further comprising:
a second temperature sensor (outlet thermistor 45 or 140) configured to measure a second temperature of coolant within the housing, wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition further based on the second temperature (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0%).
Regarding claim 19,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 18 (as discussed above).
Cardoso further teaches,
wherein the heater control module is configured to detect the presence of the condition when a difference between the temperature and the second temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature difference (par. 50 and 51 teaches algorithm 200 and steps 205, 210, and 215 capable of detecting air or frozen water in the system by measuring a comparative temperature between the inlet and outlet thermistors and turning off power to the heating elements by setting heat% to 0% and comparing this to a desired temperature).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20240167727A1 Cardoso in view of US 6246831 B1 Seitz in view of US 20110308638 A1 Hyland.
Regarding claim 6,
The primary combination teaches, The coolant heating system of claim 1 (as discussed above)
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Cardoso does not teach: wherein the temperature sensor does not directly contact coolant within the housing.
Hyland teaches an infrastructure monitoring system and method (abstract) which includes at least one noncontact temperature sensor 215 such as “radiation thermometers, thermal imagers, ratio thermometers, optical pyrometers, and fiber optic thermometers” (Hyland par. 57).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art to solve the problem of monitoring temperatures via contact and noncontact methods.
Since, there were a finite number of identified and predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem evidenced by Hyland teaching that temperature sensor 215 of Hyland can be substituted for either a contact or noncontact temperature sensor as taught in par. 57 it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try a noncontact temperature sensor.
The results would have been predictable, since Hyland teaches that temperature sensor 215 can either be a noncontact temperature sensor such as radiation thermometers, thermal imagers, ratio thermometers, optical pyrometers, and fiber optic thermometers or a contact temperature sensor such as thermocouples, thermistors, liquid-in-glass thermometers, resistance temperature detectors, filled system thermometers, bimetallic thermometers, semiconductor temperature sensors, and phase change indicators (Hyland par. 57).
Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the inlet and outlet thermistors of Cardoso with noncontact temperature sensors as taught by Hyland such that the temperature sensor does not directly contact coolant within the housing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM M ECKARDT whose telephone number is (313)446-6609. The examiner can normally be reached 6 a.m to 2:00 p.m EST Monday to Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
ADAM MICHAEL. ECKARDT
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 3761
/ADAM M ECKARDT/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761