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 . If status of the application as subject to 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 a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2 & 4-21 are pending in the application and are presently examined. Claims 1-11 were rejected in the 4/30/2026 office action. Applicant cancelled claim 2. Applicant added new claims 12-21.
Response to Amendment / Arguments
The 7/28/2026 amendment, in response to the 4/30/2026 office action, has been entered.
Applicant’s claim amendments overcame the claim 10 objections. Applicant didn’t amend claim 1 to overcome the claim 1 objection. The claim 1 objection is repeated below.
Applicant’s claim amendments overcame the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 3, 8, & 11. Applicant’s claim 7 amendment failed to overcame the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 7.
Applicant's claim amendments overcame the 35 U.S.C. 102 & 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections; nevertheless, the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 & 35 U.S.C. 103 based on a different arrangement and interpretation of the previously-cited prior art.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 & 8 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Claim 1 states “a fluid distribution plate… the fluid distribution plates”. This should be amended for consistency of singular plate or plural plates.
Regarding claim 8 Examiner suggests the following amendment for improved clarity and grammar: “at least one sealing sheet is arranged between the at least one rigid support part and
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.
Claims 1-2 & 4-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor(s) regard as the invention.
Claim 1 recites:
“the at least one rigid support part includes… at least one channel…
“the at least one rigid support part includes a plurality of channels”
It is unclear whether “at least one channel” is the same as, or different from, “a plurality of channels”.
Claims 2, 4-9, & 11-21 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Claim 7 states “the at least one rigid support plate”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in this claim. For present examination, Examiner presumes that “the at least one rigid support plate” of claim 7 is the same as the “at least one rigid support part” of claim 1.
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.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 10-15, and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US20210226280A1 (Dieckmann).
Dieckmann teaches the following claim 1 limitations:
A heat management device for at least one electrical and/or electronic component (abstract: “thermal management device for an energy storage device”), comprising
at least one rigid support part, a fluid recovery plate and a fluid distribution plate (Figures A-C below),
with the fluid recovery plate and the fluid distribution plates being arranged on either side of the at least one rigid support part in a vertical direction of said at least one rigid support part (Figures A-C),
wherein the at least one rigid support part includes at least one receiving cavity (Figures A-B) for receiving the at least one electrical and/or electronic component (paragraph 16; figure 1: array of cells 22) and
at least one channel (Figures A-C) formed parallel with the at least one receiving cavity (Figures A-B) in the vertical direction (Figures A-C) and participating in forming a thermal regulation component (paragraphs 14-16: thermal management device); and
wherein the at least one rigid support part includes a plurality of channels formed in the at least one rigid support part and in which at least two channels of the plurality of channels are located between at least two receiving cavities (Figures A-B)
Figure A: Annotated Dieckmann Figure 3
PNG
media_image1.png
732
832
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. B: Annotated Dieckmann Fig. 4 Fig. C: Annotated Dieckmann Fig. 2A
PNG
media_image2.png
720
603
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
603
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitations of claim 2:
the at least one receiving cavity and the at least one channel of the at least one rigid support part open on either side of said at least one rigid support part in the vertical direction
The receiving cavity opens at the top of figures A & B above. The channels open at the bottom of figure C above.
With regard to claim 7, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitations of claim 7:
the fluid recovery plate is tub-shaped (Figure B above),
at least one closing plate (Figures B-C above) being arranged between the at least one rigid support plate and the fluid recovery plate,
said at least one closing plate being configured to form a wall closing the at least one receiving cavity and to include at least one perforation arranged opposite the at least one channel (Figures B-C above)
With regard to claims 8 & 11, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitations of claims 8 & 11 (Figure D below):
Claim 8
at least one sealing sheet is arranged between the at least one rigid support part and the one and the fluid recovery plate, the at least one sealing sheet being locally pierced to form orifices opposite the at least one channel
Claim 11
at least one sealing sheet is arranged between the at least one rigid support part and the one or the other of the fluid distribution plate and the fluid recovery plate, the at least one sealing sheet being locally pierced to form orifices opposite the at least one channel
Figure D: Annotated Dieckmann Figure 2A
PNG
media_image4.png
570
466
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Dieckmann teaches the following claim 10 limitations:
An electronic system… comprising a heat management device for at least one electrical and/or electronic component (abstract: “thermal management device for an energy storage device”), including
at least one rigid support part, a fluid recovery plate and a fluid distribution plate (Figures E-G below),
with the fluid recovery plate and the fluid distribution plate being arranged on either side of the at least one rigid support part in a vertical direction of said at least one rigid support part (Figures E-G),
wherein the at least one rigid support part includes at least one receiving cavity (Figures E-F) for receiving the at least one electrical and/or electronic component (paragraph 16; figure 1: array of cells 22) and
at least one channel (Figures E-G) formed parallel with the at least one receiving cavity (Figures E-F) in the vertical direction (Figures E-G) and participating in forming a thermal regulation component (paragraphs 14-16: thermal management device); and
an outlet hole (Figures E-F) with an opening at both ends of the rigid support part;
the electronic system… further comprising the at least one electrical and/or electronic component mounted in the at least one receiving cavity of the heat management device (paragraph 16; figure 1: array of cells 22)
Figure E: Annotated Dieckmann Figure 3
PNG
media_image5.png
732
832
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. F: Annotated Dieckmann Fig. 4 Fig. G: Annotated Dieckmann Fig. 2A
PNG
media_image6.png
720
603
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
603
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 10 also states the “electronic system of a vehicle”. Claim 10 doesn’t claim the vehicle, so this is interpreted as an intended use. MPEP 2114(II) provides the law for this claim limitation:
“‘[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.’ Hewlett-Packard Co.v.Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a ‘recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus’ if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)”
The claim 10 limitation that the “electronic system” is “of a vehicle” is an intended use and does not limit the scope of the claim for patent examination.
With regard to claim 12, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 10, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitations of claim 12:
the at least one rigid support part includes a plurality of channels formed in the at least one rigid support part and in which at least two channels each of the plurality of channels are located between at least two receiving cavities (Figures E & F above)
With regard to claim 13, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 10, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 13:
the outlet hole is oblong (Figures E & F above)
Dieckmann teaches the following claim 14 limitations:
A heat management device for at least one electrical and/or electronic component (abstract: “thermal management device for an energy storage device”), comprising
at least one rigid support part including at least two receiving cavities, a fluid recovery plate and a fluid distribution plate (Figures E-G above),
wherein the fluid recovery plate and the fluid distribution plate are arranged on either side of the at least one rigid support part in a vertical direction of the at least one rigid support part (Figures E-G above);
wherein the at least one rigid support part includes a plurality of channels formed in the at least one rigid support part and in which at least two channels of the plurality of channels are located between the at least two receiving cavities (Figures E-F above)
With regard to claim 15, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 14, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 15:
an outlet hole with an opening at both ends of the at least one rigid support part (Figures E & F above)
With regard to claim 17, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 14, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 17:
at least one receiving cavity of the at least two receiving cavities is configured to receive the least one electrical and/or electronic component (paragraph 16; figure 1: array of cells 22)
With regard to claim 18, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 14, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 18:
at least one receiving cavity of the at least two receiving cavities and the at least one channel of the plurality of channels open on either side of the at least one rigid support part in the vertical direction
The receiving cavity opens at the top of figures E & F above. The channels open at the bottom of figure G above.
With regard to claim 19, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claim 14, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 19:
the fluid distribution plate includes at least one over-thickness protruding from an inner face opposite the at least one rigid support part
Figure H: Annotated Dieckmann Figure 2A
PNG
media_image7.png
679
476
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 20, Dieckmann teaches the limitations of claims 14-15, as discussed above. Dieckmann also teaches the following limitation of claim 20:
the outlet hole is oblong (Figures E & F above)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 9, 16, & 21 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 following is a statement of reasons for allowable subject matter:
US20210226280A1 (Dieckmann) in view of CN111934053A (Zhang) and US20180287225A1 (Haag) are the closest prior art of record.
With regard to claim 4, Dieckmann fails to teach the following claim 4 limitations, which are taught by Zhang:
the fluid distribution plate (31) includes at least one over-thickness protruding from an inner face opposite the at least one rigid support part and pierced by an opening (Figure B below),
Figure B: Annotated Zhang Figure 3c
PNG
media_image8.png
482
737
media_image8.png
Greyscale
the fluid distribution plate being arranged against the at least one rigid support part (figures 3a-b) such that said opening is arranged at the level of the at least one receiving cavity of the at least one rigid support part (this is expected based on opening depth) and such that said at least one over-thickness is in contact (contact is expected for battery enclosure, for fluid flow around the batteries 4, and based on opening depth compared with outer edge depth) with the at least one rigid support part between said at least one receiving cavity and the at least one channel (Figure B above)
It would not be useful or obvious to modify Dieckmann in this way because the claimed opening would result in Dieckmann’s coolant leaking out (Figure C above). Also, Dieckmann’s fluid distribution plate is a separate plate for each channel, and would have a very different function if modified by Zhang in this way.
Claims 5-6 are allowable due to their dependence on claim 4.
With regard to claim 9, Dieckmann fails to teach the following claim 9 limitations, which are taught by Haag:
at least one sealed sheath extends into the at least one channel of the at least one rigid support part such that it separates said at least one channel into two separate volumes which are sealed against one another
Haag is directed to cooling batteries (abstract, paragraph 2). Haag teaches use of a shell and tube heat exchanger (paragraph 17, claim 7) for cooling the batteries (paragraph 17, claim 7). A shell and tube heat exchanger has one tube [claimed sealed sheath] inside of a shell [claimed channel] for efficient transfer of heat from one fluid to the other, as part of the overall heat-removal process. It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify Dieckmann in this way. Dieckmann’s reverse flow tubing operates differently from a shell and tube heat exchanger.
With regard to claim 16, Dieckmann, Zhang, and Haag fail to teach the following claim limitations:
at least one sealing sheet is arranged between the at least one rigid support part and the fluid distribution plate, the at least one sealing sheet including one or more orifices opposite at least one channel of the plurality of channels
Even if other prior art did teach a sealing sheet between the rigid support part and the fluid distribution plate, it would not have been obvious to modify Dieckmann in this way because Dieckmann’s fluid distribution plate is a separate plate for each channel.
Claim 21 is allowable due to its dependence on claim 16.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WEST whose telephone number is 703-756-1363 and email address is Robert.West@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am - 7 pm 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684.
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.
/R.G.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights