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 § 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. Claim (s) 1 -9 , 14 -18 , and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenney et al (2019/0360766) in view of Davidkov et al (2021/0033358) . Kenney et al disclose a heat exchanger which may be used in a battery for an EV ([0004]), wherein the heat exchanger comprises a at least one fluid flow passage between a pair of spaced apart walls, between a fluid inlet and outlet. The heat exchanger further comprises a first plate 20 and second plate 22, facing each other. The are thermally conductive and have inner surfaces forming a fluid passage 14. In some embodiments, for example, the first plate 20 is substantially completely flat and planar, with the inner and outer surfaces both being flat and planar while the second plate 22 is shaped, for example by stamping or drawing or any other suitable method known in the art, such that it has a generally flat, planar central area 32 that serves as a base . Therefore, the first plate may be a flat plate, and the second plate a shaped plate as set forth by the instant claim 1. The reference fails to disclose the specific materials used for the plates, however, Davidkov et al disclose known materials useful for heat exchanger plates. The reference teaches that plates in devices similar to that of Kenney et al includes conventional brazed materials including a core and a surface layer (instant claim 1) , wherein known materials for the core are generally aluminum alloys and for the clad layer/ surface layer, also aluminum alloys. The core is typically a 3xxx-series, with the clad layer a 4xxx-series ([0003]). The reference further teaches that the core is preferably 6xxx-series alloy which includes zinc ([0011]) , with a n interliner layer on the core of a 1xxx or 3xxx alloy with zinc ([0031]), and a clad surface layer of a AA1050 or AA7072 alloy comprising zinc ([0028], [0029]) . The reference therefore teaches that the plates include an aluminum alloy core (instant claims 2, 4), brazed with an aluminum alloy (instant claim 6), wherein the core material is preferably 6xxx-series (instant claim 3), with a brazed clad layer of a 7072 or 1050 alloy (instant claims 8 and 9). The plates may further include an interliner coatin g on the core which is preferably a 3xxx-sries alloy with zinc ([ 0031]; instant claims 5, 7; the claims simply require that the coating is present on the core, and does not exclude additional layers). The plates of the reference would core a 6xxx-series core, a 3xxx-series interliner (which is not the outer coating and can be considered as a core / inner layer), and a AA7072 or AA1050 alloy outliner. With respect to the instant claims 1, the reference teaches that various alloys may be used, therefore one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention would have been motivated to use plates having different core materials alloys, through routine experimentation and optimization of the heat exchange properties and device cooling. Therefore, the resultant device and materials would have different plate materials and would have differing properties including strength, thus also meeting the limitations of the method of the instant claim 20 for preparing the plates by brazing. Given the teachings of the references, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant invention to prepare the device of Kenney et al, choosing as the plate materials, that as taught by Davidkov et al to achieve enhanced corrosion resistance, with the resultant device also meeting the limitations of the instant claims. Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is an intended use claim, and the use is not given patentable weight. However, the heat exchanger of the references is capable of being used in a battery pack of a vehicle. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-13 and 19 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. The cited references of record fails to fairly teach or suggest a layered heat exchange device, comprising a flat plate and shaped plate of core and coating materials, and differing core materials as claimed, wherein the device further comprises a support plate adjacent t o the channel / shaped plate, also made of a core and upper coating. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Documents cited on the PTO-892 includes similar device, including that of Schiehlen (2016/0282059) Schiehlen disclose a heat transfer device comprising multiple layers formed from cover and duct plates. The cover plates 12, 14, duct plates 18a, 18b plates may be made of aluminum ([0036]) , however the plate adjacent the duct plates 20, is an plastic layer, and also present between the cover plate and duct plate, and the second duct plate. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT AMANDA C WALKE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1337 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday to Thursday 5:30am to 4pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3433 . 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. /AMANDA C. WALKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722