CTFR 18/326,525 CTFR 96586 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Status This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 02/16/2026. The previous objections to the drawings, specification, and claims have been withdrawn. Furthermore, the previous 35 USC 112 rejections have been partially withdrawn. Claims 1, 3-4, 6-14, and 16-20 remain pending for consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1, 3-4, 6-14, and 16-20 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. Claims 1 and 11 recite the limitation “the battery heat energy” in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the phrase “summing the battery heat energy” will be interpreted as -- summing a battery heat energy -- Claims 1 and 11 recite the limitation “the end of the Desired Time to Cool” in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the phrase “ the end of the Desired Time to Cool” will be interpreted as -- an end of the Desired Time to Cool -- Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “initiating an active cooling of the HV battery when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” which renders the claim indefinite. As recited, it is unclear what the disclosed “time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” is referring to. The term “remaining” seems to indicate that a portion of the “Desired Time to Cool” has been removed/subtracted. However, the claim does not clearly define how the “time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” is obtained. More clarity is requested. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “initiating an active cooling of the HV battery when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” which renders the claim indefinite. Referring to paragraph [0044] of the specification, Applicant discloses “At block 126, controller 20 determines if the HV battery cooling system 16 should begin cooling the HV battery 18. To make this determination, controller 20 first determines if the Predicted Time to Cool at Most Efficient is greater than or equal to the time remaining in the Desired Time to Cool (block 124). If yes, controller 20 begins cooling the HV battery 18. If no, controller 20 does not begin cooling the HV battery 18”. Thus, accordingly to the specification and drawings (see Fig. 2), “active cooling” is initiated when the predicted time is greater than or equal to the time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool not when it is less as disclosed by the claim. Therefore, the claimed operations are not supported by the specification nor the drawings. More clarity is requested. Regarding claim 4, the claim recites “determining how much generated battery heat energy must be dissipated during the Desired Time to Cool” which renders the claim indefinite. As recited, the claim is confusing because it is not entirely if the disclosed “generated battery heat energy” is referring to the previously disclosed “total battery heat energy”, the “additional heat energy”, or the “battery heat energy” of claim 1. More clarity is requested. Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “determining how much generated battery heat energy must be dissipated during the Desired Time to Cool” which renders the claim indefinite. As recited, the claim is confusing because it is not entirely if the disclosed “generated battery heat energy” is referring to the previously disclosed “total battery heat energy”, the “additional heat energy”, or the “battery heat energy” of claim 11. More clarity is requested. Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “initiating the active cooling when a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” which renders the claim indefinite. Referring to paragraph [0044] of the specification, Applicant discloses “At block 126, controller 20 determines if the HV battery cooling system 16 should begin cooling the HV battery 18. To make this determination, controller 20 first determines if the Predicted Time to Cool at Most Efficient is greater than or equal to the time remaining in the Desired Time to Cool (block 124). If yes, controller 20 begins cooling the HV battery 18. If no, controller 20 does not begin cooling the HV battery 18”. Thus, accordingly to the specification and drawings (see Fig. 2), “active cooling” is initiated when the predicted time is greater than or equal to the time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool not when it is less as disclosed by the claim. Therefore, the claimed operations are not supported by the specification nor the drawings. More clarity is requested. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 12 recites the limitation “ a predicted time to cool ” in lines 7-8 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the phrase “initiating the active cooling when a predicted time to cool the HV battery” will be interpreted as -- initiating the active cooling when the predicted time to cool the HV battery -- Claims 3, 6-10, 13-14, and 16-20 are also rejected due to dependency. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (US 20200259229 A1, herein after referred to as Wu) . Regarding claim 11, Wu teaches a method (paragraph [0006]) for adaptively cooling a high voltage (HV) battery (battery 6 Fig. 4) in an electric vehicle thermal system (the system illustrated in Fig. 4) that comprises: a battery system coolant loop (battery temperature adjustment module 5 Fig. 4) including a battery coolant pump (BCP) (pump 51 Fig. 4) configured to circulate a first coolant (disclosed “cooling liquid” in paragraph [0065]) for cooling the HV battery; an HVAC loop (Fig. 4) including a compressor (compressor 1 Fig. 4) and a chiller (heat exchanger 41 Fig. 4) thermally coupled to the battery system coolant loop (Fig. 4), the compressor configured to circulate a second coolant (disclosed “refrigerant” in paragraph [0063]) to the chiller to provide cooling to the battery system coolant loop (Fig. 4); and an HV battery cooling system (the system illustrated in Fig. 5) including a controller (battery management controller, vehicle-mounted air conditioner controller, and battery heat management controller Fig. 5), having one or more processors (Fig. 5 and paragraph [0158]), in signal communication with the BCP (Fig. 5), the compressor (Fig. 5), and a flow control valve of the chiller (second expansion valve 42 and second electronic valve 43 Figs. 4-5), the method comprising: determining, with controller, the HV battery has surpassed a predetermined maximum allowable battery temperature (disclosed “40^0C” in paragraph [0087]); determining, with the controller, a Desired Time to Cool the HV battery (disclosed “target time t” in paragraph [0084]) to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature (paragraph [0084]); determining how much additional heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, the term I^2 R is the rate at which additional heat is generated, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the additional heat energy generated during the target time is obtained) will be generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool (paragraph [0075]); summing a battery heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, the term ( 〖 ∆T 〗 _1 CM)/t is the power required to remove the battery heat energy, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the battery heat energy is obtained) and the additional heat energy to determine a total battery heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, P_1 is the amount of power needed to remove the total battery heat energy, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the total battery heat energy is obtained) generated by the HV battery (paragraph [0075]) that is required to be dissipated in order to cool the HV battery to the predetermined maximum allowable battery temperature by an end of the Desired Time to Cool (paragraph [0090]); and initiating, with the controller, an active cooling of the HV battery (disclosed “cooling mode” in paragraph [0087]) by opening the chiller flow control valve and operating the BCP or the compressor (paragraph [0087]) to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature within the Desired Time to Cool the HV battery (paragraph [0087]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Lim et al. (US 20230382269 A1, Lim) . Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches an electric vehicle thermal system (the system illustrated in Fig. 4) comprising: a battery system coolant loop (battery temperature adjustment module 5 Fig. 4) including a battery coolant pump (BCP) (pump 51 Fig. 4) configured to circulate a first coolant (disclosed “cooling liquid” in paragraph [0065]) for cooling a high voltage (HV) battery (battery 6 Fig. 4); an HVAC loop (Fig. 4) including a compressor (compressor 1 Fig. 4) and a chiller (heat exchanger 41 Fig. 4) thermally coupled to the battery system coolant loop (Fig. 4), the compressor configured to circulate a second coolant (disclosed “refrigerant” in paragraph [0063]) to the chiller to provide cooling to the battery system coolant loop (Fig. 4); and an HV battery cooling system (the system illustrated in Fig. 5) including a controller (battery management controller, vehicle-mounted air conditioner controller, and battery heat management controller Fig. 5) in signal communication with the BCP (Fig. 5), the compressor (Fig. 5), and a flow control valve of the chiller (second expansion valve 42 and second electronic valve 43 Figs. 4-5), wherein the controller includes one or more processors (Fig. 5 and paragraph [0158]) configured to execute an adaptive cooling strategy operation (disclosed “computer program” in paragraph [0158]) to proactively cool the HV battery (paragraph [0158]), comprising: determining the HV battery has surpassed a predetermined maximum allowable battery temperature (disclosed “40^0C” in paragraph [0087]); determining a Desired Time to Cool the HV battery (disclosed “target time t” in paragraph [0084]) to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature (paragraph [0084]); determining how much additional heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, the term I^2 R is the rate at which additional heat is generated, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the additional heat energy generated during the target time is obtained) will be generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool (paragraph [0075]); summing a battery heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, the term ( 〖 ∆T 〗 _1 CM)/t is the power required to remove the battery heat energy, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the battery heat energy is obtained) and the additional heat energy to determine a total battery heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, P_1 is the amount of power needed to remove the total battery heat energy, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the total battery heat energy is obtained) generated by the HV battery (paragraph [0075]) that is required to be dissipated in order to cool the HV battery to the predetermined maximum allowable battery temperature by an end of the Desired Time to Cool (paragraph [0090]); identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone of the BCP or the compressor (paragraph [0131] where the maximum efficiency is disclosed to be below a 100%) where the BCP or the compressor operates at a desired energy efficiency (paragraph [0083] where adjustments by the controller of the rotational speed of pump 51 and the output power of the compressor are done to achieve a desired operational energy efficiency for both component); and initiating an active cooling of the HV battery (disclosed “cooling mode” in paragraph [0087]), wherein the active cooling includes opening the chiller flow control valve and operating the BCP or the compressor (paragraph [0087]) in the identified predetermined power efficiency zone to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature within the Desired Time to Cool the HV battery (paragraph [0087]). Wu teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the adaptive cooling strategy operation comprising: determining a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone; and initiating the active cooling of the HV battery when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool”. However, Lim teaches an adaptive cooling strategy operation (the cooling operation illustrated in Figs. 2A-2B corresponds to the adaptive cooling strategy operation of Wu) comprising: determining a predicted time (disclosed “total estimated required time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 ) to cool an HV battery (the disclosed “battery” in paragraph [0041] corresponds to the HV battery of Wu) to or below a maximum allowable battery temperature (paragraph [0093] where the disclosed “26^0C corresponds to the maximum allowable battery temperature of Wu) while operating a BCP (the disclosed “electric water pump” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the BCP of Wu) or a compressor (the disclosed “electric compressor” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the compressor of Wu) in a predetermined power efficiency zone (the power at which the electric water pump and the electric compressor are operated by controller 20 during the cooling operation of the battery as described in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu); and initiating an active cooling of the HV battery (the disclosed “battery conditioning” in paragraph [0109] corresponds to the active cooling of the HV battery of Wu) when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of a Desired Time to Cool (the disclosed “required battery conditioning time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 corresponds to the Desired Time to Cool of Wu) to maximize the charging performance of the battery and shorten the charging time of the battery (paragraph [0002]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Wu to include “the adaptive cooling strategy operation comprising: determining a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone; and initiating the active cooling of the HV battery when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” in view of the teachings of Lim to maximize the charging performance of the battery and shorten the charging time of the battery. Regarding claim 12, Wu teaches identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone of the BCP or the compressor (paragraph [0131] where the maximum efficiency is disclosed to be below a 100%) where the BCP or the compressor operates at a desired energy efficiency (paragraph [0083] where adjustments by the controller of the rotational speed of pump 51 and the output power of the compressor are done to achieve a desired operational energy efficiency for both component). Wu teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the method further comprising: determining a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone; and initiating the active cooling when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool”. However, Lim teaches a method (the method illustrated in Figs. 2A-2B corresponds to the method of Wu) further comprising: determining a predicted time (disclosed “total estimated required time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 ) to cool an HV battery (the disclosed “battery” in paragraph [0041] corresponds to the HV battery of Wu) to or below a maximum allowable battery temperature (paragraph [0093] where the disclosed “26^0C corresponds to the maximum allowable battery temperature of Wu) while operating a BCP (the disclosed “electric water pump” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the BCP of Wu) or a compressor (the disclosed “electric compressor” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the compressor of Wu) in a predetermined power efficiency zone (the power at which the electric water pump and the electric compressor are operated by controller 20 during the cooling operation of the battery as described in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu); and initiating an active cooling (the disclosed “battery conditioning” in paragraph [0109] corresponds to the active cooling of the HV battery of Wu) when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of a Desired Time to Cool (the disclosed “required battery conditioning time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 corresponds to the Desired Time to Cool of Wu) to maximize the charging performance of the battery and shorten the charging time of the battery (paragraph [0002]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of Wu to include “the method further comprising: determining a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone; and initiating the active cooling when the predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone, is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” in view of the teachings of Lim to maximize the charging performance of the battery and shorten the charging time of the battery . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu and Lim as applied to claim s 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Warren (US 20160047578 A1) . Regarding claims 3 and 13, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the predetermined power efficiency zone is a most energy efficient operation of the BCP, based on a power curve thereof, and the compressor, based on a power curve thereof”. However, Warren teaches wherein a predetermined power efficiency zone (the optimized operating settings described in paragraph [0044] correspond to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu) is a most energy efficient operation of a BCP (paragraphs [0044] and [0135] where pump 2716 Fig. 8 corresponds to the BCP of Wu), based on a power curve thereof (disclosed “efficiency curve” in paragraphs [0044] and [0135]), and a compressor (paragraphs [0044] and [0135] where compressor 2714 Fig. 8 corresponds to the compressor of Wu), based on a power curve thereof (disclosed “efficiency curve” in paragraphs [0044] and [0135]) to optimize the total system energy (paragraph [0135]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus/method of the combined teachings to include “wherein the predetermined power efficiency zone is a most energy efficient operation of the BCP, based on a power curve thereof, and the compressor, based on a power curve thereof” in view of the teachings of Warren to optimize the total system energy . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu and Lim as applied to claim s 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Ogaki et al. (US 20240149747 A1, herein after referred to as Ogaki) and Tauber et al. (US 20200217568 A1, herein after referred to as Tauber) . Regarding claims 4 and 14, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the controller determines the predicted time to cool the HV battery by: determining how much generated battery heat energy must be dissipated during the Desired Time to Cool, and subsequently dividing by a most energy efficient operation of the BCP and compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone”. However, Ogaki teaches wherein a controller (controller 40 Fig. 3 corresponds to the controller of Wu) determines a predicted time (the sum of both cooling times for Q1 and Q2 as described in paragraph [0053] and Fig. 7 corresponds to the predicted time of Lim) to cool an HV battery (battery 13 Fig. 2 corresponds to the battery of Wu) by: determining how much generated battery heat energy (Q1 and Q2 Fig. 7 and paragraph [0053]) must be dissipated during a Desired Time to Cool (traveling end time t3 corresponds to the Desired Time to Cool of Wu), and subsequently dividing by a most energy efficient operation of a BCP and compressor (the sum of the battery cooling amount per unit time for both Q1 and Q2 Fig. 7 where compressor 311 and water pump 321 Fig. 2 correspond to the compressor and BCP of Wu respectively) in a predetermined power efficiency zone (referring to paragraph [0007], a person skilled in the art would recognize that the cooling rates of battery temperature control circuit 32 illustrated in Fig. 7 correspond to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu since the entire goal of the disclosed battery temperature controlled method of Ogaki is to improve energy efficiency) to provide a battery temperature control method and a battery temperature control system capable of reducing power consumption for battery temperature control (paragraph [0007]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus/method of the combined teachings to include “wherein the controller determines the predicted time to cool the HV battery by: determining how much generated battery heat energy must be dissipated during the Desired Time to Cool, and subsequently dividing by a most energy efficient operation of the BCP and compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone” in view of the teachings of Ogaki to provide a battery temperature control method and a battery temperature control system capable of reducing power consumption for battery temperature control. The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “where the predetermined power efficiency zone is an energy efficiency greater than 90%”. However, Tauber teaches where a predetermined power efficiency zone (the efficiency described in paragraph [0102] corresponds to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu) is an energy efficiency (disclosed “electrical efficiencies” in paragraph [0102]) greater than 90% (paragraph [0102]) to provide stable operating temperatures (paragraph [0102]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus/method of the combined teachings to include “where the predetermined power efficiency zone is an energy efficiency greater than 90%” in view of the teachings of Tauber to provide stable operating temperatures . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 02/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s arguments on pages 13-15 that the feature “wherein the controller initiates the active cooling when a predicted time to cool the HV battery is less than a time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool" recited in amended claims 1 and 12 is supported in paragraph [0057] and decision block 314 of Fig. 4, Examiner disagrees. Paragraph [0057] states “At step 314, controller 20 determines if the time to dissipate the total battery heat generated (step 312) is greater than the remaining time limit to cool since the maximum allowable battery temperature was surpassed and activates active cooling. If no, controller returns to step 314. If yes, controller 20 opens CRV 78 and operates BCP 32 and/or EAC 60 according to the following steps”. In other words, Applicant is disclosing that unless “the predicted time to cool the HV battery” is greater than “the time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool”, then the controller does not move to the next step of initiating “the active cooling” and remains at decision block 314. This is further substantiated in paragraph [0044] of the specification and Fig. 2 of the drawings where Applicant discloses that “At block 126, controller 20 determines if the HV battery cooling system 16 should begin cooling the HV battery 18. To make this determination, controller 20 first determines if the Predicted Time to Cool at Most Efficient is greater than or equal to the time remaining in the Desired Time to Cool (block 124). If yes, controller 20 begins cooling the HV battery 18. If no, controller 20 does not begin cooling the HV battery 18”. Furthermore, Applicant’s statements that “control activates cooling regardless of whether the time is greater than or less than the time remaining of the Desired Time to Cool” is not relevant to this discussion since here, the claims are specifically disclosing initiating the “active cooling” not just any cooling. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are maintained. Regarding Applicant’s arguments on page 17 that Wu makes no mention of “determining how much additional heat energy will be generated during the Desired Time to Cool, identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone, determining a predicted time to cool while operating in the power efficiency zone, and initiating an active cooling if the predicted time to cool is less than the Desired Time to Cool” as required by claim 1, Applicant is reminded that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). For clarity purposes, Wu teaches determining how much additional heat energy (in the formula given in paragraph [0075] when battery 6 is cooled, the term I^2 R is the rate at which additional heat is generated, when multiplied by the target time “t”, then the additional heat energy generated during the target time is obtained) will be generated during a Desired Time to Cool (paragraph [0075] where “target time t” corresponds to the Desired Time to cool), identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone (paragraph [0131] where the maximum efficiency is disclosed to be below a 100%). The system of Wu is modified by the teachings of Lim to include initiating an active cooling (the disclosed “battery conditioning” in paragraph [0109] corresponds to the active cooling) when a predicted time to cool (disclosed “total estimated required time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3) is less than a remaining of a Desired Time to Cool (the disclosed “required battery conditioning time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 corresponds to the Desired Time to Cool). Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are maintained. Regarding Applicant’s arguments on page 19 that Wu and Lim fail to describe or suggest “identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone of the BCP and/or the compressor where the BCP and/or the compressor operate at a desired energy efficiency; determining a predicted time to cool the HV battery to or below the maximum allowable battery temperature while operating the BCP and/or the compressor in the predetermined power efficiency zone" as recited by amended claim 12, Examiner disagrees. For clarity purposes, the above rejection of amended claim 12 is repeated: Wu teaches identifying a predetermined power efficiency zone of a BCP (pump 51 Fig. 4) or a compressor (compressor 1 Fig. 4 and paragraph [0131] where the maximum efficiency is disclosed to be below a 100%) where the BCP or the compressor operates at a desired energy efficiency (paragraph [0083] where adjustments by the controller of the rotational speed of pump 51 and the output power of the compressor are done to achieve a desired operational energy efficiency for both component). Lim teaches determining a predicted time (disclosed “total estimated required time” in paragraph [0109] and Fig. 3 ) to cool an HV battery (the disclosed “battery” in paragraph [0041] corresponds to the HV battery of Wu) to or below a maximum allowable battery temperature (paragraph [0093] where the disclosed “26^0C corresponds to the maximum allowable battery temperature of Wu) while operating a BCP (the disclosed “electric water pump” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the BCP of Wu) or a compressor (the disclosed “electric compressor” in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the compressor of Wu) in a predetermined power efficiency zone (the power at which the electric water pump and the electric compressor are operated by controller 20 during the cooling operation of the battery as described in paragraph [0118] corresponds to the predetermined power efficiency zone of Wu). Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are maintained . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 6-10 and 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Reasons for Indicating Allowable subject Matter 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 6 and 16, the prior art of record when consider as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious “wherein the controller determines the additional heat energy generated by the HV battery by the end of the Desired Time to Cool by: multiplying the Desired Time to Cool by a rolling average of additional battery heat energy that will be generated during the remaining Desired Time to Cool”. The closet prior art references, Wu (US 20200259229 A1) and Lim (US 20230382269 A1), teach “wherein the controller determines the additional heat energy generated by the HV battery by the end of the Desired Time to Cool”. However, the references fail to disclose, suggest or teach “wherein the controller determines the additional heat energy generated by the HV battery by the end of the Desired Time to Cool by: multiplying the Desired Time to Cool by a rolling average of additional battery heat energy that will be generated during the remaining Desired Time to Cool ”. Therefore, claims 6 and 16 with dependent claims therefrom ( claims 7 and 17 ) are considered allowable. Regarding claims 8 and 18, the prior art of record when consider as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious “wherein once the active cooling is initiated, the controller further executes the adaptive cooling strategy operation to proactively cool the HV battery by: determining any additional battery heat energy generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool due to a change in driving behavior; determining an additional battery cooling power needed to cool the additional battery heat energy generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool due to the change in driving behavior; determining a first operational speed of the BCP and a second operational speed of the compressor required to provide the determined additional battery cooling power needed; commanding the BCP to operate at the first operational speed; and commanding the compressor to operate at the second operational speed”. The closet prior art references, Wu (US 20200259229 A1) and Lim (US 20230382269 A1), teach “wherein once the active cooling is initiated, the controller further executes the adaptive cooling strategy operation to proactively cool the HV battery by: determining an additional battery cooling power needed to cool the additional battery heat energy generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool due to a change in driving behavior; determining a first operational speed of the BCP and a second operational speed of the compressor required to provide the determined additional battery cooling power needed; commanding the BCP to operate at the first operational speed; and commanding the compressor to operate at the second operational speed”. However, the references fail to disclose, suggest or teach “determining any additional battery heat energy generated by the HV battery during the Desired Time to Cool due to a change in driving behavior”. Therefore, claims 8 and 18 with dependent claims therefrom ( claims 9-10 and 19-20 ) are considered allowable . Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM. 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, Jerry -Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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. /SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 2 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 3 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 4 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 5 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 6 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 7 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 8 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 9 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 10 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 11 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 12 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 13 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 14 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 15 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 16 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 17 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 18 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 19 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 20 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 21 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 22 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/326,525 Page 23 Art Unit: 3763
Prosecution Insights