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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it includes phrases which can be implied, i.e., “The invention relates to”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 6-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 6, line 10, there is no antecedent basis for “the operative connection”.
In claim 7, line 2, the recitation “the base assembly is configured to be capable of” may potentially be rejected as being indefinite, since it is not clear if the base assembly is configured to be set up above ground, or if it is merely capable of being set up above ground.
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 6-11 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.
Regarding claim 6, the phrase "in particular" in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 7-11 are dependent from claim 6 and are therefore rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "in particular" in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "in particular" in lines 4-5 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE (Pub. No.: US 2022/0111746; cited on IDS with date 5/7/2024) in view of WANG (CN115372734A: English machine translation is included with office action).
Regarding claim 1, HEYNE discloses a cooling tank assembly (comprising cooling tank 12 and thermal insulation 18, Fig. 1; ¶ 0025: the cooling tank installation 10 may have a reservoir 12, which can for example store between 220 liters and 1000 liters of a cooling medium…reservoirs 12, 14 and/or the retention vessel 16 may be surrounded by an insulating material 18 for thermal insulation and/or liquid-tight sealing) for a liquid cooling of a charging station for electrically powered motor vehicles (¶ 0006: One embodiment concerns a cooling tank installation for a liquid cooling of a charging station for electrically powered motor vehicles), comprising a cooling tank (12; ¶ 0025: the cooling tank installation 10 may have a reservoir 12, which can for example store between 220 liters and 1000 liters of a cooling medium) and a thermal insulation (18), which encompasses the cooling tank at least in some sections (¶ 0025: reservoirs 12, 14 and/or the retention vessel 16 may be surrounded by an insulating material 18 for thermal insulation and/or liquid-tight sealing), [wherein the thermal insulation limits] a receiving space, in which the cooling tank is arranged (¶ 0025: see above).
HEYNE fails to disclose the insulation has a flat bottom surface and a top surface, which is at least essentially parallel thereto, as well as a wall connecting the bottom surface to the top surface, whereby the top surface, the bottom surface, and the wall limit a receiving space, in which the cooling tank is arranged.
WANG discloses the insulation has a flat bottom surface and a top surface, which is at least essentially parallel thereto, as well as a wall connecting the bottom surface to the top surface, whereby the top surface, the bottom surface, and the wall limit a receiving space, in which the cooling tank is arranged (¶ 0023: 1. Insulation box; 2. Coolant tank; 3. Coolant; ¶ 0025: an insulated box 1, which contains a coolant tank 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the insulation has a flat bottom surface, a top surface, and a wall connecting the bottom surface to the top surface in order to stop heat transfer and keep the cooling medium cold, thus saving energy.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of RICHARDSON (Pub. No.: US 2016/0123626).
Regarding claim 2, HEYNE as modified by WANG teaches the cooling tank assembly as applied to claim 1, but fails to teach the insulation has two half shells, which encompass the receiving space.
RICHARDSON discloses the insulation has two half shells, which encompass the receiving space (¶ 0013).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the insulation has two half shells in order to allow a person to work on a tank while facilitating removal of the insulation and inspection the tank for leaks or other structural damage (RICHARDSON, ¶ 0004).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of BRANHAM (Patent Number: US 5,564,749).
Regarding claim 3, HEYNE as modified by WANG teaches the cooling tank assembly as applied to claim 1, but HEYNE fails to disclose the cooling tank is seamlessly produced using the rotating plastic injection molding process.
BRANHAM discloses the cooling tank is seamlessly produced using the rotating plastic injection molding process (col 5, ll. 39-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the cooling tank seamlessly produced using a rotating plastic injection molding process in order to create an even, stress-free, and highly durable one-piece structure.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of RAAB (DE102020122797 (A1); English machine translation is included with office action).
Regarding claim 4, HEYNE as modified by WANG teaches the cooling tank assembly as applied to claim 1, but HEYNE fails to disclose a ventilation hose is arranged on the cooling tank, which ventilation hose is fluidically connected to an interior of the cooling tank on the one hand and to a surrounding area of the cooling tank on the other hand and which runs along at least one winding—which rises geodetically in particular starting at the cooling tank.
RAAB discloses a ventilation hose is arranged on the cooling tank, which ventilation hose is fluidically connected to an interior of the cooling tank on the one hand and to a surrounding area of the cooling tank on the other hand and which runs along at least one winding—which rises geodetically in particular starting at the cooling tank (¶ 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the ventilation hose in order to release pressure and therefore prevent damage.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of SPINDELBOECK (Patent Number: US 4,723,596).
Regarding claim 5, HEYNE as modified by WANG teaches the cooling tank assembly as applied to claim 1, but HEYNE fails to disclose a filling nozzle is arranged on the cooling tank, which filling nozzle is fluidically connected to an interior of the cooling tank and which leads into the interior of the cooling tank in a geodetically lower region and which, starting from there, rises in the direction of a filling opening of the filling nozzle, whereby the filling opening is arranged below a predetermined fill level height of the cooling tank.
SPINDELBOECK discloses a filling nozzle (6, Figs. 1 & 3) is arranged on the cooling tank, which filling nozzle is fluidically connected to an interior of the cooling tank and which leads into the interior of the cooling tank in a geodetically lower region (2) and which, starting from there, rises in the direction of a filling opening of the filling nozzle (7), whereby the filling opening is arranged below a predetermined fill level height of the cooling tank (col 3, ll. 1-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the filling nozzle in order to facilitate the replacement of coolant.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of NITTA (Pub. No.: US 2010/0142148) and HEYNE (Pub. No.: US 2019/0255961 A1; hereinafter referred to as HEYNE ‘961).
Regarding claim 6, HEYNE discloses a base assembly (10, Fig. 1) for a charging station for electrically powered motor vehicles (¶ 0025: cooling tank installation 10 represented in FIG. 1 can store a considerable quantity of a cooling medium to achieve a desired operating temperature of components in a charging station intended for charging electrically powered motor vehicles), comprising a support frame (20, Fig. 1; ¶ 0026: retention vessel 16 may be inserted, in particular completely, together with the inserted reservoirs 12, 14 in an outer vessel 20 produced from a steel), on or in which a cooling tank (12) for receiving coolant (¶ 0025: a reservoir 12, which can for example store between 220 liters and 1000 liters of a cooling medium), in particular a cooling tank assembly as applied to claim 1 (HEYNE as modified by WANG teaches the cooling tank assembly as described above), first fluid connections for the fluidic connection of the cooling tank to coolant lines of the charging station (¶ 0027: the outer vessel 20 and/or the retention vessel 16 have a passage 28 for leading through a double-walled media-carrying pipe that is connected, for example, to a reservoir 12, 14 and leads underground to a further charging station or parts and/or components of the charging station. The pipe may be sealed off by way of annular-space seals with rubber pressing seals provided in the passages 28), and first electrical connections for the operative connection to a control device (30, Fig. 1; ¶ 0026: moisture accumulated in the absorption body 24 can be detected by a moisture sensor 25 and evaluated in an evaluation unit 30) and/or a power supply of the charging station (a power supply is implied for power the evaluation unit 30 as disclosed in paragraph 0026).
HEYNE fails to disclose a conveying device for conveying the coolant [is] arranged [in the support frame], whereby the conveying device is fluidically connected to the cooling tank; and first fluid connections for the fluidic connection of the conveying device.
NITTA discloses a conveying device (39, Figs. 3 & 4) for conveying the coolant [is] arranged [in the support frame] (comprising 19, 12a, Figs. 4 & 5), whereby the conveying device is fluidically connected to the cooling tank (38, Fig. 3; ¶ 0035-0040, 0044), and first fluid connections for the fluidic connection of the conveying device (41, 42, Figs. 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the conveying device in order to provide continuous flow of the cooling fluid as known in the art.
HEYNE fails to disclose the base assembly has at least a first connecting element for the mechanical connection to a housing of a charging station.
HEYNE ‘961 discloses the base assembly (the underground arrangement / lower region as shown in Fig. 2, and disclosed in paragraphs 0026 and 0029) has at least a first connecting element for the mechanical connection to a housing (the above ground arrangement / overground part) of a charging station (a “first connecting element” is implied in paragraphs 0015 and 0026-0029 and Figure 2, in order to allow the underground arrangement to interface with the above ground arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the first connecting element in order to provide a compact construction (HEYNE ‘961, ¶ 0013).
Regarding claim 7, HEYNE discloses the base assembly is configured to be capable of being set up above ground (¶ 0011, 0026: the base assembly is at least partially above ground).
Regarding claim 8, HEYNE as modified by WANG, NITTA, and HEYNE ‘961 teaches the base assembly as applied to claim 6, but fails to teach the conveying device is mounted in a vibration-damped manner and so as to be insulated against structure-borne noises in the support frame.
NITTA further discloses the conveying device is mounted in a vibration-damped manner and so as to be insulated against structure-borne noises in the support frame (¶ 0039-0040).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the conveying device mounted in a vibration-damped manner in order to protect the base assembly from damage and/or reduce noise.
Regarding claim 10, HEYNE discloses the support frame has or forms a collecting tray for collecting at least a portion of the coolant arranged in the cooling tank, whereby the base assembly in particular has at least one sensor for detecting at least one event, selected from liquid, which reaches into the collecting tray and a coolant leakage (¶ 0026).
Regarding claim 11, HEYNE as modified by WANG, NITTA, and HEYNE ‘961 teaches a charging station comprising a housing and a base assembly as applied to claim 6, whereby the housing is configured to be arranged above the base assembly and has at least one second connecting element for the mechanical connection to the base assembly, in particular to the at least one first connecting element (HEYNE ‘961, a housing for the charging station is disclosed in paragraphs 0009 and 0026, and a corresponding “second connecting element” is implied in paragraphs 0015 and 0026-0029 and Figure 2, in order to allow the underground “base assembly” to interface with the above ground “housing”).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HEYNE in view of WANG, NITTA, and HEYNE ‘961 as applied to claims 6-8 and 10-11 above, and further in view of HE (CN208324950U; English machine translation is included with office action).
Regarding claim 9, HEYNE as modified by WANG, NITTA, and HEYNE ‘961 teaches the base assembly as applied to claim 6, but HEYNE fails to disclose the support frame has handling engagements on both sides, in particular forklift engagements for the engagement of a forklift fork of a forklift.
HE discloses the support frame has handling engagements on both sides, in particular forklift engagements for the engagement of a forklift fork of a forklift (¶ 0030).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the forklift engagements in order to facilitate the moving/placing of the base assembly.
HEYNE as modified by WANG, NITTA, HEYNE ‘961, and HE fails to teach the base assembly preferably additionally has at least one cladding element, which can be arranged on the support frame, for covering the handling engagements.
Official notice is taken that cladding elements were an old and known expedient in the art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the at least one cladding element in order to improve the appearance of the base assembly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9a-5p ET.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-2312. 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.
/Manuel Hernandez/Examiner, Art Unit 2859 8/30/2026
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights