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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-15 and 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1 Jun 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7-8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572).
As to claim 1, Flahaut et al. discloses a heat transfer system comprising an electrochemical cell unit comprising a plurality of electrochemical cells (see e.g. battery 20, comprising a plurality of battery modules 2, [0023] and Fig. 1); a fluid circulation system (see e.g. cooling element 1, [0023] and Fig. 1) comprising a heat exchange section in thermal contact with the electrochemical cell unit (see e.g. para [0006], stating that the cooling element transmits heat from the object that is to be cooled, implying that cooling element 1 is in thermal contact with the battery modules 2 that comprise the electrochemical cell unit); a cooling medium disposed in the fluid circulation system (see e.g. refrigerant, which enters the fluid circulation system via inlet 3, [0023] and Fig. 1), wherein, within the heat exchange section of the fluid circulation system, the cooling medium includes a liquid component and a gas component (see e.g. para [0024], stating that the refrigerant, which reads on the cooling medium, comprises a liquid phase and a gas phase that read on the claimed liquid component and gas component, respectively).
Flahaut et al. does not explicitly state that the fluid circulation system is electrically isolated from the electrochemical cell unit.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the instantly-claimed invention would have recognized that putting the fluid circulation system in electrical contact with the electrochemical cell units could result in stray current paths and potentially a short circuit, which would impair the electrochemical cell units’ ability to provide electrical power to a load. As such, said artisan would have found it obvious to ensure that the fluid circulation system is electrically isolated from the electrochemical cell unit in Flahaut et al.’s electrochemical cell unit. Further, the prior art does not disclose an electrical connection between the fluid circulation system and the electrochemical cell unit and therefore none is presumed present as such are shown as separate components in the figures.
Further regarding claim 1, Flahaut et al. discloses a heat transfer system in which a cooling medium circulates, but discloses does not disclose a pump configured to circulate the cooling medium through the fluid circulation system.
Lee et al., also working in the field of battery cooling systems, teaches an analogous heat transfer system in which a pump pumps the cooling medium such that the medium circulates through the system (see e.g. Lee et al.: [0053]-[0054] and Fig. 1).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. by adding the pump taught by Lee et al.. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to allow the cooling medium to circulate through the system, as taught be Lee et al..
As to claim 3, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 1, wherein the heat exchange section of the fluid circulation system includes enclosed fluid conduits that extend through the electrochemical cell unit (see e.g. parallel lines 6, which extend through battery 20 and read on enclosed fluid conduits, Flahaut et al.: [0024] and Fig. 1).
As to claim 7, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 1, wherein the cooling medium includes the liquid component and the gas component throughout the fluid circulation system (see e.g. Flahaut et al.: [0008], the refrigerant that circulates throughout the distributor is a mixture of liquid and gaseous phases).
As to claim 8, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches heat transfer system according to claim 7, wherein the pump is configured to circulate the liquid component and gas component of the cooling medium as a mixture about the fluid circulation system (see e.g. Flahaut et al.: [0008], which states that the refrigerant is a mixture of liquid and gaseous phases, and Lee et al.: [0053]-[0054], teaching a pump that circulates the cooling medium. The heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. therefore comprises a pump that is configured to circulate the liquid component and gas component of the cooling medium as a mixture about the fluid circulation system).
As to claim 16, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 1, wherein, within the heat exchange section of the fluid circulation system, at least a portion of the liquid component and gas component of the cooling medium form a foam (see e.g. Flahaut et al. [0008] states that the refrigerant is a two-phase mixture of gaseous and liquid components which can reasonably be considered to be a foam).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xu et al. (Xu, Y., & Fang, X. (2014). Applied Thermal Engineering, 64(1-2), 242-251).
As to claim 2, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 1, wherein the cooling medium includes a liquid component and a gas component (see e.g. para [0024], stating that the refrigerant, which reads on the cooling medium, comprises a liquid phase and a gas phase that read on the claimed liquid component and gas component, respectively), but is silent as to the volume of the gas component, and does not teach a gas component that forms at least 50% by volume of the cooling medium.
Xu et al., also working in the field of cooling systems, teaches a cooling medium in which void fraction of the cooling media is 0.5 or greater, which means that 50% or more of the cooling medium by volume is a gas component (see e.g. Xu et al.: Fig. 1 and pg. 242, col. 1, para 1).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. by selecting the cooling medium such that gas component forms at least 50% by volume of the cooling medium. This is because Xu et al. teaches that this it is typical to select a cooling medium having a void fraction of 0.5 or greater in a cooling system, and the use of a cooling medium with a gas component that is 50% or more of the volume of the media would fail to produce any new benefit that would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Maxson et al. (Maxson, A., Watson, L., Karandikar, P., & Zakin, J. (2017). International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 109, 1044-105).
As to claim 4, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 1, including a cooling medium with a liquid component (see e.g. refrigerant, Flahaut et al.: [0008]), but does not teach a liquid component wherein the liquid component of the cooling medium includes at least one of a surfactant and a foam suppressant.
Maxson et al., also working in the field of liquid cooling media, teaches that adding surfactants to a liquid can reduce turbulence and drag and can thereby reduce the pumping energy requirements (Maxson et al.: Abstract and pg. 1044, paras 1-2).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. by adding a surfactant to the liquid component of the cooling medium. Said artisan would have been motivated to make this addition because Maxson et al. teaches that adding a surfactant to a liquid medium reduces the pumping energy requirements of the system.
Claim(s) 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kurazono et al. (JP 2019190777A, as read via machine translation).
As to claim 5, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according claim 1, wherein the fluid circulation system comprises:
a primary circuit including the heat exchange section, wherein the liquid component of the cooling medium is confined to the primary circuit (see e.g. cooling element 1, which comprises inlet 3, outlet 15, and parallel lines 6 that distribute a cooling medium and thereby reads on a primary circuit, Flahaut et al.: [0023] and Fig. 1). Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. does not disclose a gas inlet in the primary circuit that is upstream of the heat exchange section; and a gas outlet in the primary circuit that is downstream of the heat exchange section.
Kurazono et al., also working in the field of heat transfer systems, teaches that including microbubbles into a liquid improves the heat transfer coefficient of the liquid (Kurazono et al.: [0002]-[0004]). Additionally, Kurazono et al. teaches a gas inlet in the primary circuit (see e.g. bubble generator 70, comprising porous body 76, which reads on a gas inlet, and which is in a primary coolant circuit, Kurazono et al.: [0024], and Figs. 1-2) that is upstream of the heat exchange section (see e.g. Kurazono et al.: Fig. 1, bubble generator 70 is upstream from heat exchanger 10); and a gas outlet in the primary circuit that is downstream of the heat exchange section (see e.g. air discharge pipe 86, which is downstream from heat exchanger 10, Kurazono et al.: Figs. 1 and 3). Kurazono et al.’s gas inlet and gas outlet allow microbubbles to be added to the cooling medium (Kurazono et al.: [0026]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the instantly-claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. by adding a gas inlet in the primary circuit that is upstream of the heat exchange section and a gas outlet in the primary circuit that is downstream of the heat exchange section in the manner taught by Kurazono et al.. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such an addition because it allows for microbubbles to be added to the liquid component of the cooling medium, which improves the heat transfer coefficient of the medium, which is taught by Kurazono et al..
As to claim 6, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 5, wherein the gas inlet is one of a plurality of gas inlets disposed upstream of the heat exchange section (see e.g. Kurazono et al.: [0024] and Fig. 2, the porous body 76 comprises a plurality of pores that supply gas and as such can reasonably be considered to be a plurality of gas inlets).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Kurazono et al. (JP 2019190777A, as read via machine translation).
As to claim 9, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 7, but does not teach a heat transfer system that further comprises a mixer configured to promote bubble formation within the cooling medium.
Kurazono et al., also working in the field of heat transfer systems, teaches that including microbubbles into a liquid improves the heat transfer coefficient of the liquid (Kurazono et al.: [0002]-[0004]). Additionally, Kurazono et al. teaches a mixer in the primary circuit (see e.g. bubble generator 70, which reads on a mixer configured to promote bubble formation within the cooling medium, Kurazono et al.: [0024], and Figs. 1-2). Kurazono et al.’s mixer allows microbubbles to be added to the cooling medium (Kurazono et al.: [0026]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the instantly-claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. by adding a the mixer taught by Kurazono et al. in the primary circuit of the heat exchange section. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such an addition because it allows for microbubbles to be added to the liquid component of the cooling medium, which improves the heat transfer coefficient of the medium, which is taught by Kurazono et al..
Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flahaut et al. (US 2016/0285145) in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0384572) and Kurazono et al. (JP 2019190777A, as read via machine translation) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Miura et al. (WO 2019208726, as read via machine translation).
As to claim 17, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 5, but does not teach that the gas inlet is disposed under the electrochemical cell and the gas outlet is disposed above the electrochemical cell such that buoyancy of the gas component causes the gas component to rise through the electrochemical cell unit.
Miura et al., also working on an analogous heat transfer system using a two-phase gas-liquid cooling medium, teaches that the gas component of the cooling medium forms bubbles that rise upward due to its buoyancy and thereby pushes up the liquid component of the cooling medium (see e.g. Miura et al.: [0058]-[0060]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. by placing the gas inlet under the electrochemical cell and to place the gas outlet above the electrochemical cell such that the buoyancy of the gas component causes the gas component to rise through the electrochemical cell unit. This is because Miura et al. teaches the engineering principle that the buoyancy of the gas component pushes the cooling medium upward, and therefore placing the gas inlet beneath the electrochemical cell and by placing the gas outlet above the electrochemical cell, the system could take advantage of the tendency of the cooling medium to flow upward and thereby minimize the pumping needed to circulate the cooling medium.
As to claim 18, Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. teaches the heat transfer system according to claim 5, wherein the fluid circulation system further comprises a gas inlet and a gas outlet (see e.g. inlet pipe 74 and air discharge pipe 86, Kurazono et al.: [0024]-[0025]), such that the gas component can be said to flow in a secondary circuit extending from the gas outlet to the gas inlet. However, the gas in the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. is discharged to the outside, rather than recirculated about the fluid circulation system.
Miura et al., also working on an analogous heat transfer system using a two-phase gas-liquid cooling medium, teaches a system in which the gas component of the cooling medium is recirculated (see e.g. Miura et al.: [0270]-[0276], the gas component is returned to condenser 16 for recirculation). Additionally, Miura et al. teaches that this recirculation process allows for a controller to adjust the flow rate of the cooling medium such that the amount of liquid-phase coolant is adequate (see e.g. Miura et al.: [0281]-[0283]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat transfer system of Flahaut et al. in view of Lee et al. and Kurazono et al. such that the gas component is recirculated about the fluid circulation system in the manner taught by Miura et al.. This is because Miura et al. teaches that such an arrangement allows for a controller to adjust the relative amount of liquid-phase coolant in the cooling medium. Additionally, said artisan could have been motivated to make such a modification in order to avoid needing to discharge gas from the system.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/284855 (hereinafter ‘855) in view of Gale et al. (US 2016/0039309).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 1, the only material difference between claim 1 of the instant application and claim 1 of ‘855 is that the instant claim 1 recites “…a fluid circulation system electrically isolated from the electrochemical cell unit.” Claim 1 of ‘855 recites a fluid circulation system and an electrochemical cell unit, but does not specify that this fluid circulation system is electrically isolated from the electrochemical cell unit.
Gale et al., also working on the problem of cooling systems for electrochemical power systems, teaches an analogous fluid circulation system (see e.g. coolant loop, Gale: [0013]), and further teaches that the fluid circulation system is electrically isolated from the power source (see e.g. Gale et al., [0004], [0013]). Gale et al. teaches that isolating the fluid circulation system in this way allows for electrically-conductive coolants to be used without creating a potential electrical connection with the electrochemical power source (see e.g. Gale et al., [0004]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the ‘855 by electrically isolating the fluid circulation from the electrochemical cell unit, and said artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to safely allow for the use of conductive coolant materials, as taught by Gale et al.
Regarding claims 2-20, the claim language of each of claims 2-20 of the instant application is substantially identical to that of their respective claims in copending application ‘855.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Katehashi et al. (US 2015/0000327) also teaches a two-phase gas-liquid cooling medium for a heat exchanger.
Sato et al. (US 2012/0064426) teaches the use of an anti-foaming additive in a coolant in a heat exchanger.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT HILTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571)-272-3066. 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.
/A.M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 06/11/2026
Prosecution Insights