Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 02/26/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/26/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 19, line 5, “the open free ends of adjacent U-shaped U-shaped depressions being interconnected” should read “the open free ends of adjacent U-shaped depressions being interconnected”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the first end surface of the manifold section" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this office action, the claim limitation is interpreted to read “a first end surface of the manifold section”.
Regarding claims 17, 19, and 20, the claim limitation “generally planar” in lines 17, 3, and 3, respectively, renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the difference in scope between “generally planar” and “planar” is supposed to be.
Claims 18-20 are similarly rejected as being dependent on claim 17.
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 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palanchon et al. (US 20130244077 A1).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Palanchon discloses a heat exchanger ([0005]) for thermal management (i.e. heating and cooling, [0052]) of a battery unit (i.e. between two battery modules, [0005]), comprising:
a rectangular main body portion (Fig. 8) having a first surface defining a planar, primary heat transfer surface, the first surface extending between a first width and a second width, as shown in Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8 below;
PNG
media_image1.png
694
853
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8
an inlet header region (Fig. 8, 146, [0057]) located near the first width of the rectangular main body portion (Fig. 8);
a first plurality of flow channels extending through the rectangular main body portion from the inlet header region to the second width of the rectangular main body portion;
a plurality of turn portions fluidly connected to each of the first plurality of flow channels located near the second width of the rectangular main body portion, as shown in Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8 below;
PNG
media_image2.png
696
913
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8
a second plurality of flow channels extending through the rectangular main body portion from the second width of the rectangular main body portion and ending at a closed outlet end, wherein each of the second plurality of flow channels is fluidly connected to one of the turn portions, as shown in Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8 below.
PNG
media_image3.png
694
913
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8
Palanchon further discloses wherein the turn portion is U-shaped (Fig. 8), as claimed in claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, Palanchon discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Palanchon further discloses wherein the second plurality of flow channels is longitudinally staggered with respect to the first plurality of flow channels, and wherein the turn portions turns a fluid travelling in the first plurality of channels 180 degrees and into the second plurality of flow channels, as shown in annotated Palanchon Fig. 8 below.
PNG
media_image4.png
694
915
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Palanchon Fig. 8
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 13, 16, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 20110281192 A1) in view of Garceau (US 20060134502 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Jones discloses a bipolar plate that has good thermal conductivity that allows for efficient removal of heat from the electrodes of fuel cell ([0005];[0012]). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in being capable of efficient heat removal within a fuel cell, Jones’ bipolar plate is capable of being a heat exchanger for thermal management of a battery unit.
Jones further discloses a rectangular main body portion have a first surface defining a planar heat transfer surface, the first surface extending between a first width and a second width, as shown in annotated Jones Fig. 2 below, and where planar is interpreted broadly as lying in a plane, absent of a special definition provided in the instant specification.
PNG
media_image5.png
626
1102
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 2
Jones further discloses an inlet header region located near the first width of the rectangular main body portion;
a first plurality of flow channels extending through the rectangular main body portion from the inlet header region to the second width of the rectangular main body portion;
a second plurality of flow channels extending through the rectangular main body portion from the second width of the rectangular main body portion and ending at a closed outlet end, as shown in annotated Jones Fig. 2 below.
PNG
media_image6.png
626
1102
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 2
Jones is silent regarding a plurality of turn portions fluidly connected to each of the first plurality of flow channels located near the second width of the rectangular main body portion, and wherein each of the second plurality of flow channels is fluidly connected to one of the turn portions.
Garceau teaches a similar bipolar plate ([0003]), including holes providing local feeds and exhausts for pairs of channels that extend in a sinuous configuration (i.e. plurality of turn portions, Fig. 1B, [0003]).
Garceau further teaches a plurality of turn portions fluidly connected to each of the first plurality of flow channels located near the second width of the rectangular main body portion, wherein each of the second plurality of flow channels is fluidly connected to one of the turn portions, as shown in annotated Garceau Fig. 1B below.
PNG
media_image7.png
686
885
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Annotated Garceau Fig. 1B
Garceau further teaches the sinuous configuration is to cover the entire active surface of the individual cell ([0003]). One of ordinary skill would recognize that in possessing sinuous configuration to cover a greater surface area for the active surface of an electrode in a fuel cell, a similar application is desired in increasing surface area for efficient heat transfer when only a cooling or heating fluid is contained within the heat exchanger.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have improved the heat exchanger of Jones with the sinuous configuration of Garceau such that there were a plurality of turn portions, with reasonable expectation of success in achieving a satisfactory heat exchanger, as well as for the benefit of increasing the surface area available for heat transfer.
Regarding claim 16, modified Jones discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Jones discloses a manifold section, the manifold section comprising:
a plurality of inlet and outlet channels formed within the manifold section each extending from a first open end disposed in the first end surface of the manifold section to a second end disposed within the manifold section, as shown in annotated Jones Fig. 3 below.
PNG
media_image8.png
645
1102
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 3
Modified Jones further an embodiment discloses a first manifold (Jones, Fig. 2, 36) comprising a row of spaced apart fluid flow openings (Jones, Fig. 2, 36) formed in an upper surface of the manifold section and extending into the manifold section (Jones, Fig. 2). Modified Jones further discloses the fluid flow openings (Jones, Fig. 2, 36) are in fluid communication with a second end of the plurality of outlet channels (Jones, Fig. 2, 36, 34).
Modified Jones further discloses a second manifold (Jones, Fig. 2, 42) comprising at least one fluid flow opening formed in the upper surface of the manifold section and extending into the manifold section (Jones, Fig. 2). Modified Jones further discloses fluid travels from the second manifold (i.e. manifold opening, Jones, Fig. 2, 42, [0067-0068]) and passed through flow field channels (i.e. inlet and outlet channels, Jones, 34), thus establishing fluid communication with the second end the plurality of inlet channels (Jones, Fig. 2, [0067-0068]).
Modified Jones further discloses wherein the row of spaced apart fluid flow openings (Jones, Fig. 2, 36) extends parallel to and is inwardly disposed with respect to at least one fluid flow opening of the second manifold (Jones, Fig. 2, 42), as shown in Annotated Jones Fig. 2 below.
PNG
media_image9.png
626
1102
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 2
Thus, modified Jones satisfies claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, Jones discloses a bipolar plate that has good thermal conductivity that allows for efficient removal of heat from the electrodes of fuel cell ([0005];[0012]). Jones further discloses fluid carried by the bipolar plate includes reactants and coolants ([0060-0061]). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in being capable of efficient heat removal within a fuel cell and transporting coolant, Jones’ bipolar plate is capable of being a heat exchanger for thermal management of a battery unit having a plurality of battery cell contains, each housing one or more battery cells, as claimed in claim 17.
Jones further discloses the bipolar plate comprising a base plate (i.e. fuel flow plate, Fig. 3); a plurality of planar first fluid flow passages formed within the base plate, each of the first fluid flow passages extending between spaced apart first and second ends;
a plurality of planar second fluid flow passages formed within the base plate, each of the second fluid flow passages extending between spaced apart first and second ends, as shown in annotated Jones Fig. 3 below.
PNG
media_image10.png
618
1054
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 3
Jones further discloses a cover plate (i.e. cooling fin separator plate, [0066], Fig. 4) arranged over top of (Fig. 1) and in sealing engagement (i.e. separator plate in intimate contact with fuel flow plate, Fig. 1, [0063]) with the base plate enclosing the plurality of first fluid passages (i.e. thereby sealing the channels, [0063]).
Jones further discloses the separator plate is capable of heat transfer ([0063]) and thus satisfies the claim limitation, “cover plate having a central, general planar portion defining a primary heat transfer surface” (Fig.3).
Jones is silent regarding wherein the plurality of first fluid flow passages and the plurality of second fluid flow passages are defined by U-shaped flow channels having a pair of elongate fluid branches that are interconnected at one end by a turn portion such that the second ends of the first fluid flow passages are connected to and in fluid communication with the first ends of the second fluid flow passages.
Garceau teaches a similar bipolar plate ([0003]). Garceau further discloses wherein the plurality of first fluid flow passages and the plurality of second fluid flow passages (i.e. pairs of channels, [0003]) are defined by U-shaped flow channels (i.e. sinuous configuration, [0003]) having a pair of elongate fluid branches that are interconnected at one end by a turn portion such that the second ends of the first fluid flow passages are connected to and in fluid communication with the first ends of the second fluid flow passages, as shown in Garceau Fig. 5 below.
PNG
media_image11.png
248
538
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Annotated Garceau Fig. 5
Garceau further teaches the sinuous configuration is to cover the entire active surface of the individual cell ([0003]). One of ordinary skill would recognize that in possessing sinuous configuration to cover a greater surface area for the active surface of an electrode in a fuel cell, a similar application is desired in increasing surface area for efficient heat transfer when only a cooling or heating fluid is contained within the heat exchanger.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have improved the heat exchanger of Jones with the sinuous configuration of Garceau such that there were U-shaped flow channels with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving a satisfactory heat exchanger, as well as for the benefit of increasing surface area available for heat transfer.
Regarding claim 18, modified Jones discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Jones further discloses at least on series of fluid flow openings at a first end of the cover plate (Jones, Fig. 4, 62).
Modified Jones further discloses an inlet manifold with a fluid opening (Jones, Fig. 3, 56, 88) in fluid communication with at least the first ends of the plurality of first fluid flow passages (Jones, Fig. 3, 7-8, 48, [0065];[0068]), as shown in Jones Fig. 3 below;
PNG
media_image12.png
618
1054
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 3
an outlet manifold with a fluid opening (Jones, Fig. 3, 58, 92) in fluid communication with at least the second ends of the second fluid flow passages (Jones, Fig.3, 7-8, [0068], Garceau, Fig. 5);
wherein the fluid flow openings are arranged inward from at least one of the inlet manifold fluid opening or the outlet manifold fuel opening, where inward is interpreted broadly to mean directed toward the inside, and as shown in Jones Fig. 3 below.
PNG
media_image13.png
614
1041
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 3
Modified Jones further discloses wherein one of the manifold and outlet manifold is offset with respect to the fluid flow openings, as shown in Jones Fig. 3 below.
PNG
media_image14.png
614
1041
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Annotated Jones Fig. 3
Regarding claim 20, modified Jones discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Jones further discloses wherein the U-shaped flow channels forming the first and second fluid flow passages are formed by a plurality of U-shaped embossments formed in the central, planar portion of the base plate, the U-shaped embossments having two elongate branches that are interconnected at one end thereof by an end portion, wherein each U-shaped embossment comprises one of the first fluid flow passages and one of the second fluid flow passages, as shown in annotated Garceau Fig. 5 below.
PNG
media_image15.png
329
526
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Annotated Garceau Fig. 3 below
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 20110281192 A1) in view of Garceau (US 20060134502 A1), as applied to claim 17 above, and in further view of Whiton et al. (US 20110244370 A1).
Regarding claim 19, modified Jones discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Jones further discloses wherein the U-shaped flow channels (Garceau Fig. 5) forming the first and second fluid flow passages are formed by a plurality of U-shaped depressions formed in the central, planar portion of the base plate (Garceau, Fig. 5).
Modified Jones further discloses wherein one of the elongate fluid branches of each U-shaped depression (Garceau, Fig. 5) terminates at an open free end, where open is interpreted broadly as being exposed or allowing passage, as shown in annotated Garceau Fig. 5 below.
PNG
media_image16.png
318
530
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Annotated Garceau Fig. 5
While modified Jones discloses the bipolar plate ensures good flow distribution and the manifold is critical to uniformly distribute fluids between each flow field plate (Jones, [0005]), modified Jones does not disclose the open free ends of adjacent U-shaped depressions being interconnected by an inlet header region formed in the base plate, the inlet header region being in fluid communication with the inlet manifold.
Whiton teaches a similar flow field plate ([0003]) where multiple channels are provided fluid from an inlet manifold formed in the base plate (Fig. 3, 20) through inlet passages (Fig. 3, 30) and a lateral inlet passage (Fig. 3, 32), thus creating an inlet header region that is in fluid communication with the inlet manifold ([0016}, Fig. 3)
Whiton further teaches such a design allows for even flow distribution across the flow field ([0005]) which addresses issues where some channels receive somewhat limited flow and result in undesired temperature gradients across the plate ([0003]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have improved the heat exchanger of modified Jones with an inlet header region formed in the base plate for the benefit of even flow distribution across the flow field, as taught by Whiton, and desired by modified Jones.
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 17-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-5, and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 10,263,301. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 10,263,301 is directed towards a heat exchanger with fluid flow passages, a cover plate, inlet and outlet manifolds, and an inlet header region also required by the instant application (Claims 17-18, and 20), where the fluid flow passages are defined by U-shaped channels (Claims 19-20).
Claims 13-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,342,609. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 11,342,609 is directed towards a heat exchanger with a rectangular main body, an inlet header region, plurality of flow channels (Claim 13 and 15), and U-shaped flow channels (Claim 14), also required by the instant application.
Claims 13 and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,843,102. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 11,843,102 is directed towards a heat exchanger with a rectangular main body with an inlet header region, plurality of fluid flow passages, turn portions (Claim 13), and a manifold section with a first and second manifold (Claim 16) also required by the instant application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESTHER J TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3479. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-4:30PM.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1292. 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.
/E.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights