Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species A in the reply filed on 2026 April 15 is acknowledged.
Claims 7 and 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species and/or invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Patent No.: US 11,149,862 B2 (herein “Kanzaki”).
Regarding claim 1.
Kanzaki discloses a coolant distributor valve (Fig. 3) for a vehicle cooling system, comprising:
a housing including a shaft support housing portion (41) providing a monolithic, unitary structure, the shaft support housing portion having a first side opposite a second side, the first and second sides respectively including first and second bores (shown in Fig. 3; bores in right and left side of 41 where shaft passes through);
a valve (33) arranged in the housing adjacent to the first side;
electronic components (shown in Fig. 4) arranged in the housing adjacent to the second side, the electronic components configured to move the valve between multiple positions;
first and second seals (Fig. 3; located in the bores of 41) respectively mounted in the first and second bores; and
a shaft (Fig. 3; central shaft extending between 32 to 61) extending through and engaging the seals, the shaft operatively connecting the electronic components to the valve.
Regarding claim 2.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 1, wherein the shaft support housing portion is provided as a single piece part (single piece 41).
It is noted that claim 2 contains a product by process limitation (i.e. molded, cast, and/or machined) and that the product by process limitation does not limit the claim to recite the step, just the structure obtained by performing the step. Further, in product-by-process claims, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference.” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 is proper because the “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 3.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 1, wherein the housing includes an electronics housing portion (43) secured to the shaft support housing portion to enclose the electronic components.
Regarding claim 4.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 3, wherein the shaft support housing portion provides a valve housing portion (32) receiving the valve, and the housing includes a cover (95) secured to the valve housing portion to enclose the valve.
Regarding claim 5.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 3, wherein a valve housing portion (32) is secured to the shaft support housing portion (shown in Fig. 3), the valve arranged in the valve housing portion.
Regarding claim 6.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 5, wherein the housing includes a cover (95) secured to the valve housing portion to enclose the valve.
Regarding claim 13.
Kanzaki discloses a vehicle cooling system (Fig. 1) including the coolant distributor valve of claim 1, comprising multiple cooling loops (shown in Fig. 1), the coolant distributor valve interconnecting at least two of the multiple cooling loops (Fig. 1; 17, 18, and 19 connected to valve 10), and the valve configured to move between multiple positions to direct a desired cooling flow through the at least two of the multiple cooling loops (col. 6, ln. 7-23).
Regarding claim 14.
Kanzaki discloses the vehicle cooling system of claim 13, wherein the cooling loops include a vehicle cabin (24) and a motor (11).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanzaki alone.
Regarding claim 8.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 3, comprising a printed circuit board (16), and an electrical actuator (44) electrically connected to the PCB and arranged in the electronics housing portion.
Kanzaki does not disclose that the printed circuit board is located in the electronic housing portion. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to locate the circuit board in the electronic housing to provide a compact singular device that simplifies assembly.
Regarding claim 9.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 8, wherein the electrical actuator is a motor (44), and a gear train (52, 53, 54) coupled between the motor and the valve.
Regarding claim 10.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 9, wherein the shaft is provided by first and second shafts coupled to one another (shown in Fig. 3; first shaft portion at 81 coupled to shaft portion at center of 54), the first shaft extends from the valve, and the second shaft extends from the gear train.
Regarding claim 11.
Kanzaki discloses the coolant distributor valve of claim 10, wherein the first and second shafts are nested relative to one another is splined relationship (shown in Fig. 3 to the left of 49).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jon T. Schermerhorn Jr. whose telephone number is (571)270-5283. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571) 272-1184. 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.
/JON T. SCHERMERHORN JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
