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 .
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 1-21 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the second fluid connector" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In this instance, it is suggested to replace "the second fluid connector" with "the at least one second fluid connector" to obtain proper antecedent basis with "at least one second fluid connector" in the 4th line of claim 1.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brauning et al. (US 2020/0395644).
Regarding independent claim 1, US ‘644 discloses a fluid distribution system for a battery module arrangement having a number of battery modules, in which the battery modules each have at least one first fluid connector and each have at least one second fluid connector (abstract; paragraphs [0029]-[0046]; and Figures 1-9), in which the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) comprises the following structural features:
a first main line element (inlet coolant chamber (31) of coolant manifold (3)) from which at least one first branch line portion (coolant inlet (21)) branches from (see Figures 1, 3, and 4);
a second main line element (outlet coolant chamber (32) of coolant manifold (3)) from which at least one second branch line portion (coolant outlet (22)) branches from (see Figures 1, 3, and 4);
a first connection element (plastic connector (5)) connectable to the at least one first branch line portion (21) of the first main line element (31), in which the first connection element (5) has a first curvature that matches a routing direction of the first branch line portion (21) to a routing direction of the first fluid connector (see Figures 1 and 4); and
a second connection element (another plastic connector (5)) connectable to the at least one second branch line portion (22) of the second main line element (32), in which the second connection element (5) has a second curvature that matches a routing direction of the second branch line portion (22) to a routing direction of the second fluid connector (see Figures 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 2, each of the first and second main line elements (31,32) of coolant manifold (3) comprises a flexible line portion in the form of hoses (6) that are detachably connected to respective first and second connection elements (5) or to respective first and second branch line portions (21,22) – see paragraph [0046] and Figures 1, 4, 7, and 8.
Regarding claim 3, each of the first and second main line elements (31,32) of coolant manifold (3) has, at ends thereof, connector structures (any one of end caps (71,72), plastic connectors (5), or other known types of coupling mechanisms – see paragraphs [0032], [0033], and [0046]) that are configured for detachable connection to, respectively, a further main line element (including via coolant inlet and outlet ports (73,74) – see paragraph [0033] and Figure 4.
Regarding claim 4, each of the first and second main line elements (31,32), together with respective branch line portion(s), are made of metal (aluminum) of the respective coolant chambers (31,32) – see paragraph [0031] and Figures 2-9.
Regarding claim 5, the first and second connection elements (5) are made of plastic (see paragraphs [0034]-[0039]).
Regarding claims 6 and 10, the first main line element (31) has at least two first branch line portions (first branch line portion (21) and hose (6) connected thereto), and the second main line element (32) has at least two second branch line portions (second branch line portion (22) and hose (6) connected thereto), wherein each of the at least two first branch line portions (21,6) is connected to a respective first connection element (5), and each of the at least two second branch line portions (22,6) is connected to a respective second connection element (5) – see paragraphs [0034]-[0040], [0045], and [0046]; and Figures 1 and 4.
Regarding claim 7, at least one of the two first branch line portions (21,6) or the two second branch line portions (22,6) are parallel to each other (see Figures 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 8, the two first branch line portions (21,6) are of a different length than the two second branch line portions (22,6) – see Figure 4.
Regarding claim 9, a flexible line portion (each end of respective hoses (6)) of a respective main line element (31,32) is arranged between a respective branch of at least one of the two first branch line portions (21,6) or the two second branch line portions (22,6) – see Figures 1 and 4.
Regarding claim 15, at least one of the two first connection elements (5) and one of the two second connection elements would be formed as identical parts (see Figures 1, 4, and 7-9).
Regarding claim 16, at least one flexible line element is configured for detachably connecting second ones of the first or second main line elements (31,32) of the coolant manifold (3) via plastic connectors (5), flexible hoses, or other known types of coupling mechanisms (see paragraph [0046]; and Figures 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 17, US ‘644 discloses a battery module arrangement that comprises a number of battery modules (in the form of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1), each having at least one first fluid connector and at least one second fluid connector, and the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) with all structural features of independent claim 1 above, wherein respective first fluid connectors are connected to the first main line element (31) and respective second fluid connectors are connected to the second main line element (32), as shown in Figures 1, 3, and 4.
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.
Claims 11-14 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brauning et al. (US 2020/0395644).
Regarding claim 11, although US ‘644 discloses the structural features of claims 1, 6, and 10 above, as well as that one of the first connection elements (5) is configured to connect a first fluid connector of a first battery module (one of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1), and that one of the second connection elements (5) is configured to connect to a second fluid connector of the first battery module (one of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1), US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that another of the first connection elements (5) is configured to connect to a first fluid connector of a second battery module, and that another of the second connection elements (5) is configured to connect to a second fluid connector of the second battery module. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a desired number of first and second fluid connectors would be readily supplied in a detachably connectable manner (if needed), for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract). Moreover, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 12, and in referring to the above discussion of claim 11, although US ‘644 discloses the structural features of claims 1, 6, and 10 above, as well as that one and the other (first and second) connection elements (5) would have a connector structure at one end thereof for attachment to a battery module (one of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1), US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that the (first and second) connector structures would be arranged at first and second height levels (H3) and (H4) that are different. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a desired number of first and second fluid connectors would be readily supplied in a detachably connectable manner (if needed), for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract). In addition, adjustments of the relative positions (height levels) of one or more of the fluid connectors would have been subject to routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Regarding claim 13, and in referring to the above discussion of claims 11 and 12, although US ‘644 discloses the structural features of claims 1, 6, and 10 above, as well as that one of the first connection elements (5) has a branch line connector structure at one end for the first branch line portion (21), and that one of the second connection elements (5) has a branch line connector structure at one end for the second branch line portion (22), US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that the (first and second) connector structures would be arranged at third and fourth height levels (H2) and (H1) that are different. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a desired number of first and second fluid connectors would be readily supplied in a detachably connectable manner (if needed), for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract). In addition, adjustments of the relative positions (height levels) of one or more of the fluid connectors would have been subject to routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Regarding claim 14, although US ‘644 discloses the structural features of claims 1, 6, and 10 above, as well as that one of the first connection elements (5) and one of the second connection elements (5) are operable to be connectable, US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that the one of the first connection elements (5) and one of the second connection elements (5) are configured to be connectable to each other to form a jointly manipulatable unit. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a desired number of connection elements would be readily supplied in a detachably connectable manner to each other (if needed) with a reasonable expectation of success to provide additional flexibility with respect to increased range and degree of freedom of a jointly manipulatable unit, thus enabling removal of additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Regarding claim 18, US ‘644 discloses a battery module arrangement that comprises a plurality of battery modules (in the form of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1) that are arranged opposite each other in pairs, each of the battery modules having at least one first fluid connector and at least one second fluid connector respectively facing each other, and the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) with all structural features of claim 11 above (which further includes all structural features of claims 1, 6, and 10 in the above 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection), wherein one pair of oppositely arranged battery modules would comprise the first battery module and the second battery module, and further wherein respective first fluid connectors are connected to the first main line element (31) and respective second fluid connectors are connected to the second main line element (32), as shown in Figures 1, 3, and 4.
Regarding claim 19, and in referring to the above discussion of claim 18, although US ‘644 discloses that the battery modules are arranged in one plane, and an offset between the respective first and second main line elements (31,32) is compensated by flexible line elements that are configured for detachably connecting one or more of the first or second main line elements (31,32) of the coolant manifold (3) via plastic connectors (5), flexible hoses, or other known types of coupling mechanisms (see paragraph [0046]; and Figures 1 and 4), US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that at least some of the battery modules have different dimensions in a direction that is at least one of parallel to the plane or perpendicular to the plane. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that at least some of the battery modules would be provided to have different dimensions in a direction that is at least one of parallel to the plane or perpendicular to the plane, since such an arrangement of battery modules having different dimensions (in correlation with the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) of US ‘644) would have been subject to routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Regarding claim 20, US ‘644 discloses a method for connecting battery modules in a fluidically conducting manner in the battery module arrangement of claim 17, which includes all structural features of the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) of independent claim 1 (as set forth in the above 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection), in which the method comprises the following steps:
arranging the battery modules (multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1) in a receiving structure (housing) provided therefor and electrically connecting the battery modules to each other;
connecting the fluid connectors of the battery modules to the respective first and second connection elements (5) – see Figures 1 and 4;
connecting the main line elements (31,32) to the respective connection elements (5) via the respective at least one first and at least one second branch line portions (21,22) – see Figures 1 and 4; and
connecting the main line elements (31,32) to each other (see Figures 1 and 4).
Although the above process steps in the method would necessarily occur to obtain a final arrangement of battery modules (multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1) in a receiving structure (housing), the sequence of process steps is not explicitly disclosed by US ‘644. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that selection of a sequence of process steps to assemble an arrangement of battery modules, inclusive of the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) of independent claim 1, would have been obvious to try via routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of increasing efficiency in terms of cost and time savings. Moreover, increasing efficiency of the fluid distribution system (battery cooling system (1)) for the arrangement of battery modules would be further advantageous by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Regarding claim 21, and in referring to the above discussion of claims 18 and 19 above, although US ‘644 discloses that the battery modules (in the form of multiple battery cooling plates (24) to which electrical batteries (not shown) can be mounted – see paragraph [0029]; and Figure 1) are arranged opposite each other in pairs in one plane, each of the battery modules having at least one first fluid connector and at least one second fluid connector respectively facing each other, US ‘644 does not explicitly disclose that at least one of the connection elements (5) or the main line elements (31,32) are introduced, perpendicularly to the plane, into a region between mutually opposite battery modules. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that at least one of the connection elements (5) or the main line elements (31,32) would be selectively arranged perpendicular to the plane, since such an arrangement would have been subject to routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of removing additional heat from the battery modules by increasing heat exchange (see abstract).
Response to Arguments
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s amendment/response received by the USPTO on March 6, 2026. The amendment overcomes the prior objections to the specification and claims, as well as all except one of the 35 USC 112(b) rejections that was not addressed (see above section 2). Claims 1-21 remain under consideration in the application.
Applicant's arguments filed March 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the applicant’s remarks/arguments on pages 10-14 of the amendment/response, the applicant states the limitations of the fluid distribution system in independent claim 1 (on page 10 of the REMARKS section). In the paragraph bridging pages 10 and 11 of the REMARKS section, the applicant argues that the examiner equates the main line elements of claim 1 with the coolant chambers (31,32) of Brauning, as well as stating that the prior art is based on a misinterpretation of the claimed “connection elements” and “curvature” while directing attention to applicant’s Figures 3 and 4 (in the last paragraph on page 11 to the top of page 12 of the REMARKS section). The examiner respectfully disagrees, as although applicant’s claim 1 discloses that the connection elements (8.1,8.2) are curved fittings (of which the examiner agrees), Brauning discloses first and second connection elements (5,5) that define respective curvatures that are oriented in predetermined angles to match a routing direction of each of first and second branch line portions (21,22), respectively (see Figures 1 and 4 of Brauning), as described in more detail in the next paragraph.
In the paragraph at the bottom of page 12 of the REMARKS section, the applicant argues that Brauning discloses a “different technical concept” by using block-like plastic adapters (“plastic connectors” 5) that “do not have any curvature” to be used in combination with “separate, flexible hoses (“hoses 6”) that are connected to the adapters”, and thus cannot be “equivalent to the curved connecting element” recited in claim 1 (while referring to Figure 4 of Brauning at the top of page 13 of the REMARKS section). The applicant then states (in referring to applicant’s claim 2 in the last paragraph on page 13 of the REMARKS section) that Brauning “lacks any flexible line section”. The examiner respectfully disagrees, as the “flexible line portion” in the form of hoses (6), which are implicitly flexible, would further define a curvature from the first and second connection elements (5,5). Although the examiner believes that the connection elements (“plastic connectors 5”) would define predetermined angles that would define a “curvature” from one end to another on their own (with regard to displacement in each of the x, y, and z axes), the combination of “plastic connectors (5)” and flexible “hoses (6)” would certainly define a curvature (or range of curvatures) due to implicit flexibility of hoses.
When taken in view of the applicant’s remarks/arguments applied to both claims 1 and 2, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the statement “A straight block to which a separate hose is connected does not meet this requirement” (the requirement being that “the connecting element itself has a curvature in order to adapt to the pipe routes”). A lack of distinction in claim 1 itself exists since the connection elements (8.1,8.2) themselves are argued by applicant as including curvatures, but it would be subject to interpretation as to if any “sub-structure” of the connection elements (8.1,8.2) would impart the claimed “curvature” (given that claim 2 recites that the first and second main line elements (6,6’) branch off as a “flexible line portion (6a,6a’) and is further limiting to the features of applicant’s claim 1), thus also imparting flexibility to provide curvature. In addition, Brauning describes “connector structures (71,72) or other plastic connectors (5)” in addressing the applicant’s argument pertaining to claim 3 (in the 1st paragraph on page 14 of the REMARKS section) that Brauning allegedly fails to suggest that at least one of the first and second main line elements have “connector structures” (see Figure 4 of Brauning, and in referring to paragraph [0033] thereof).
In order to define over the teachings of Brauning addressed above, the applicant is kindly suggested to amend independent claim 1 to distinctly set forth additional structural detail to further clarify the claimed features of (at least) “curvature” and “matches a routing direction”.
In view of the 35 USC 112(b), 35 USC 102(a)(1), and 35 USC 103 rejections, as well as for these additional reasons, claims 1-21 remain rejected.
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 KEVIN P KERNS whose telephone number is (571)272-1178. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN P KERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735 April 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights