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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/16/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
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 5-7 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.
ISSUE 1: DUPLICATIVE AND UNCLEAR RECITATION “SUCTION OPENING OPENING” IN CLAIM 5
Claim 5 recites “the air inlet is at least one suction opening opening formed in the front face of the fairing of the cooling module.” The duplication of “opening” renders the claim language unclear as to the intended structure and scope (e.g., whether the claim is intended to recite a single “suction opening,” multiple openings, or some other distinct feature). As written, the metes and bounds of the “air inlet” are not set forth with reasonable clarity.
ISSUE 2: UNCLEAR POSITIONAL LANGUAGE “FIRST POSITION OPENING” AND “SECOND POSITION CLOSING” IN CLAIM 5
Claim 5 further recites “at least one blocking device that is movable between a first position opening and a second position closing said at least one suction opening.” The phrases “first position opening” and “second position closing” are grammatically unclear and do not distinctly define the claimed states/positions of the blocking device. It is unclear whether “opening” and “closing” are intended as adjectives modifying “position” (e.g., “open position,” “closed position”), as verbs, or as some other relationship. This ambiguity prevents a determination of the scope of the “first position” and “second position” with reasonable certainty.
PRIOR ART REFERENCES RELIED UPON
Reference 1 (“R1”): Spunar et al., US 2019/0126724 A1 (“Under Vehicle Mounted Cooling Assemblies Including Horizontally Mounted Condensers with Vertical Air Flow”), published May 2, 2019.
Reference 2 (“R2”): DeCrescenzo et al., US 6,766,774 B1 (“Cooling module with axial blower and pressure regulated cross-flow fan”), issued July 27, 2004.
Reference 3 (“R3”): DeAndrea et al., US 2017/0225560 A1 (“Active grill shutter actuation system”), published Aug. 10, 2017.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over R1 in view of R2.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over R1 in view of R2 and further in view of R3.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 1 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
A cooling module for a motor vehicle having an electric or hybrid motor, said cooling module comprising: an air inlet and an air outlet, with the cooling module being intended to be traversed by an airflow circulating between the air inlet and the air outlet, a fairing forming an internal duct in a longitudinal direction of the cooling module that contains at least one heat exchanger intended to be traversed by the airflow, the fairing including a front face containing the air inlet arranged upstream of the at least one heat exchanger, a collector housing positioned downstream of the fairing in the longitudinal direction, said collector housing being designed to receive a tangential-flow turbomachine designed to generate the airflow to be discharged through the air outlet; fastening elements arranged on both sides of the fairing, said fastening elements enabling the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to the cooling module and enabling said module and the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to a chassis of a motor vehicle such that the front face of the fairing faces an underbody of the motor vehicle.
CLAIM 1 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
“A cooling module for a motor vehicle …” R1 teaches an under-vehicle mounted cooling assembly (cooling assembly 200 / UVMCA 302) for a motor vehicle (vehicle 204) configured to provide thermal management using at least one heat exchanger, where the assembly is mountable under a vehicle floor/underbody structure (e.g., floor 202). R1’s cooling assembly is therefore a vehicle cooling module.
“… having an electric or hybrid motor …” R1 teaches vehicle thermal management for vehicle systems using a cooling assembly mounted under the vehicle. R1’s cooling assembly is suitable for vehicles having electrified powertrains (including vehicles having power electronics, battery thermal management components, etc.), as the cooling assembly is a general vehicle thermal management module. The claimed “for a motor vehicle having an electric or hybrid motor” is satisfied by the structural cooling module disclosed in R1 as applied in such vehicles.
“an air inlet and an air outlet … intended to be traversed by an airflow circulating between the air inlet and the air outlet” R1 teaches airflow (airflow 220) driven through the cooling assembly/housing, passing through openings (e.g., through the bottom wall 212 with protective screen 232 and through the top wall 208 with protective screen 230), thereby defining an inlet opening and an outlet opening for airflow 220 traversing the module from one side to the other.
“a fairing forming an internal duct in a longitudinal direction … contains at least one heat exchanger … intended to be traversed by the airflow” R1 teaches a housing (housing 206 / housing 302) with bounding walls (e.g., top wall 208, side walls 210, bottom wall 212; similarly side walls 315) that forms an internal flow passage/duct through which airflow 220 circulates. R1 further teaches at least one heat exchanger within the housing, such as condenser 214 (and/or condenser 308), arranged such that airflow 220 passes through it.
“the fairing including a front face containing the air inlet arranged upstream of the at least one heat exchanger” R1 teaches an airflow entry side of the housing, such as bottom wall 212 (with protective screen 232) defining an opening through which airflow 220 enters prior to traversing the heat exchanger (condenser 214). In the draw-through arrangement described by R1, the inlet opening (screen 232/openings in bottom wall 212) is upstream of the condenser 214 with respect to airflow 220.
“a collector housing positioned downstream of the fairing … designed to receive a tangential-flow turbomachine … to generate the airflow … discharged through the air outlet” R1 teaches a downstream fan assembly region (fan assembly 216; fan housing 250; fan 252; motor 254) positioned downstream of the heat exchanger (e.g., downstream of condenser 214 in the airflow path) to generate airflow 220 to be discharged out through the outlet opening (e.g., through top wall 208 / screen 230).
However, R1’s fan 252 is an axial-flow fan, not a tangential-flow turbomachine.
R2 teaches a cooling module/cooling unit having a tangential-flow (cross-flow) fan (cross-flow fan 28) disposed in a fan housing (fan housing 33) with an outlet (outlet 34), where the cross-flow fan generates airflow through the module. A cross-flow fan is a tangential-flow turbomachine because air is moved tangentially relative to the rotor and discharged from the housing outlet.
Thus, R1 in view of R2 teaches (or renders obvious) a collector housing (R1 fan housing 250 region; modified to include the R2 cross-flow fan 28 within a housing analogous to R2 fan housing 33) positioned downstream of the ducted heat exchanger region (R1 housing portion containing condenser 214) and receiving a tangential-flow turbomachine (R2 cross-flow fan 28) to generate airflow and discharge through an air outlet opening of the cooling module.
“fastening elements arranged on both sides of the fairing … enabling the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to the cooling module and enabling said module and the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to a chassis … such that the front face … faces an underbody” R1 teaches the cooling assembly mounted under the vehicle floor/underbody (floor 202) using fastening structures including hanging fasteners 271 and shock absorbing members 272 (and/or hangers 322). R1’s hangers 322 are described as brackets attached to the housing and/or side walls and to the vehicle floor, providing mounting on lateral sides of the housing. This teaches fastening elements arranged at opposite lateral sides of the housing/fairing.
R1 further teaches that the heat exchanger (condenser 214 / 308) is installed within and retained by the housing/duct structure, such that fastening the module correspondingly fastens the heat exchanger as part of the module assembly. Further, R1 teaches the cooling assembly positioned under the vehicle floor/underbody such that the inlet face/opening is oriented toward the underside region of the vehicle (underbody region), i.e., the airflow intake is from the underbody side of the vehicle.
Accordingly, R1 teaches fastening elements enabling the module (and contained heat exchanger) to be fastened to the chassis/floor structure such that the inlet face of the duct/housing faces the underbody region.
CLAIM 1 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify R1’s downstream fan assembly (fan 252 within fan housing 250) by substituting or implementing a tangential-flow (cross-flow) fan as taught by R2 (cross-flow fan 28 in fan housing 33 with outlet 34), because both references address vehicle cooling modules that generate forced airflow through a heat exchanger, and a tangential-flow fan provides a known alternative fan architecture that can satisfy packaging constraints (e.g., reduced module depth/height in certain directions), provide a more laterally distributed discharge profile, and maintain required airflow through the heat exchanger. The resulting modified R1 module would predictably perform the same airflow-generation function as R1 while employing the tangential-flow turbomachine taught by R2.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 2 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 1, wherein the fastening elements include at least one side bar fastened to each side wall of the fairing, said side bars being oriented perpendicular to the plane of the at least one heat exchanger, said at least one heat exchanger being fastened to said side bars, said side bars also being designed to be fastened to the chassis of the motor vehicle.
CLAIM 2 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitations of claim 2:
“fastening elements include at least one side bar fastened to each side wall of the fairing” R1 teaches lateral mounting structures on opposite sides of the housing/fairing, including hangers 322 described as brackets attached to the housing and/or side walls (e.g., side walls 315) of the under-vehicle cooling assembly. These hangers 322 correspond to “side bars” fastened to each side wall of the fairing.
“said side bars being oriented perpendicular to the plane of the at least one heat exchanger” R1 teaches the heat exchanger (condenser 214 / 308) mounted generally as a planar heat exchanger core. The housing side walls (210 / 315) extend in a direction generally perpendicular to the plane of the heat exchanger core, and the hangers/brackets 322 attached to the side walls likewise extend in a direction providing mounting support (i.e., in the direction used to suspend/support the assembly relative to floor 202). Therefore, R1 teaches side-mounted bars/brackets oriented generally perpendicular to the plane of the heat exchanger.
“said at least one heat exchanger being fastened to said side bars” R1 teaches the heat exchanger installed and retained as part of the cooling module within the housing, with the housing and its side structures (including side walls and side-mounted brackets/hangers 322) forming the structural retention system for the heat exchanger as part of the module. Thus, the heat exchanger is fastened within the module structure supported by the side-mounted bracket system.
“said side bars also being designed to be fastened to the chassis of the motor vehicle” R1 expressly teaches hangers/brackets 322 and/or hanging fasteners 271 coupled to the vehicle structure (floor 202) to mount the assembly to the vehicle, i.e., to chassis/underbody structure. Therefore, the side bars are designed to be fastened to the chassis.
CLAIM 2 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to implement the tangential-flow fan architecture of R2 within the downstream fan/collector region of R1 while retaining R1’s side mounting bracket/hanger approach (e.g., hangers 322 coupled to side walls 315 and vehicle floor 202), because the fan substitution does not negate the need for robust lateral mounting and because the combined module would still require support on the vehicle structure. Maintaining/using side bars/brackets on both sides provides predictable structural support, vibration isolation, and installation consistency for the combined duct/heat exchanger/fan assembly.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 3 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 2, wherein the side bars are intended to be fastened directly to beams of the chassis on both sides of said cooling module.
CLAIM 3 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 3:
“side bars … fastened directly to beams of the chassis on both sides” R1 teaches mounting the under-vehicle cooling assembly to the vehicle structure including the floor 202 using mounting hardware (e.g., hangers 322 and/or hanging fasteners 271). The floor/underbody structure is supported by vehicle frame members and beams, and R1’s hangers/brackets are configured to directly couple the module housing to that chassis structure (i.e., structural members supporting the floor/underbody). Thus, R1 teaches side mounting members intended to be fastened directly to chassis structural members on opposite sides of the cooling module.
CLAIM 3 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to mount the modified R1 cooling module (having the tangential-flow fan of R2) directly to chassis beams/structural members on both sides because the under-vehicle location requires rigid structural attachment points to manage weight and vibration loads, and using beam-to-bracket attachment is a conventional, predictable approach for mounting underbody thermal modules. The R2 fan substitution does not alter the desirability of direct beam attachment and would be expected to function normally in the mounted configuration.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 4 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 2, wherein the fastening elements include a connecting part intended to connect the side bars and beams of the chassis on both sides of said cooling module.
CLAIM 4 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 4:
“fastening elements include a connecting part intended to connect the side bars and beams of the chassis” R1 teaches that mounting hardware such as hanging fasteners 271 and/or brackets/hangers 322 provide an interface between the module housing (including side-mounted bracket structures) and the vehicle structure (floor 202 / chassis structure). Such brackets and fasteners function as connecting parts that mechanically connect the side-mounted bracket members to the vehicle structural members. Accordingly, R1 teaches fastening elements that include connecting parts between the module side mounting members and chassis structure.
CLAIM 4 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to use connecting parts (e.g., brackets, hangers, fasteners) to connect side bars to chassis beams in the combined R1/R2 system because the modified cooling module must be secured to structural members of the vehicle, and intermediate connecting parts provide predictable benefits including alignment tolerance management, vibration isolation integration (e.g., using shock absorbing members 272), and ease of assembly/service. Such mounting adaptations are routine mechanical implementation details when packaging a different fan type (R2 cross-flow fan) within an underbody-mounted heat exchanger module (R1).
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 5 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2 AND FURTHER IN VIEW OF R3) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 1, wherein the air inlet is at least one suction opening opening formed in the front face of the fairing of the cooling module, wherein the cooling module further comprises at least one blocking device that is movable between a first position opening and a second position closing said at least one suction opening.
CLAIM 5 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitations of claim 5:
“air inlet is at least one suction opening … formed in the front face of the fairing” R1 teaches inlet openings in a housing face, such as bottom wall 212 including protective screen 232 (openings permitting airflow 220 into the duct/housing). These openings function as suction openings when the downstream fan draws air into the module.
“cooling module further comprises at least one blocking device … movable between a first position opening and a second position closing said at least one suction opening” R3 teaches a grille shutter system including grille shutters 16 that move between open, partially open, and closed positions to control airflow through an opening (e.g., grille opening 12). R3 therefore teaches a blocking device (shutters 16) movable between an opening position and a closing position for an airflow opening.
Thus, in view of R3, it would have been obvious to provide the R1 module’s inlet opening(s) (e.g., openings of protective screen 232 on bottom wall 212/front inlet face) with a movable blocking device analogous to R3’s shutters 16 to selectively open/close the inlet suction opening(s).
CLAIM 5 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2 + R3)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a movable blocking device at the inlet openings of the underbody-facing cooling module of R1 (as modified by R2 to use a tangential-flow fan) in view of R3’s teaching of movable shutters 16 for selectively opening/closing airflow openings, because controllable shutters provide known benefits including aerodynamic drag reduction when cooling airflow is not required, reduction of debris/water ingestion, improved thermal management by regulating airflow, and faster warm-up/temperature control. Applying R3’s shuttering concept to R1’s inlet openings is a predictable use of a known airflow control technique in the context of vehicle cooling airflow management.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 6 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2 AND FURTHER IN VIEW OF R3) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 5, wherein the at least one blocking device includes at least one pivoting flap that is designed to pivot about a pivot axis and to block the at least one suction opening.
CLAIM 6 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 6:
“blocking device includes at least one pivoting flap … pivot about a pivot axis … to block the suction opening” R3 teaches grille shutters 16 that are moved between open/partially open/closed positions to block or allow airflow through an opening (grille opening 12), i.e., shutter vanes functioning as flaps.
Further, R2 teaches a pivoting baffle/flap (baffle 36) mounted to pivot about a hinge (hinge 44) between open and closed positions to control airflow. This teaches a flap structure designed to pivot about a pivot axis (hinge 44) to block an airflow passage.
Thus, R1 in view of R2 and R3 teaches or renders obvious a blocking device implemented as at least one pivoting flap (as taught by R2’s pivoting baffle 36 about hinge 44 and/or by R3’s shutters 16) configured to block a suction opening (R1 inlet openings on bottom wall 212 / screen 232).
CLAIM 6 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2 + R3)
It would have been obvious to implement the blocking device of claim 5 specifically as a pivoting flap because pivoting vanes/baffles are a well-established, mechanically simple, low-cost approach to opening/closing airflow passages in vehicle thermal systems. R2 provides an explicit example of a pivoting airflow baffle (36) about a hinge (44), and R3 provides an example of shutter vanes (16) controlled to different positions; adapting these teachings to the inlet suction openings of the R1 module would yield predictable airflow regulation with minimal added complexity and with reliable sealing/closing behavior.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 7 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2 AND FURTHER IN VIEW OF R3) ────────────────────────────────────────
The cooling module according to claim 5, further comprising a control unit designed to control the at least one blocking device.
CLAIM 7 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 7:
“further comprising a control unit designed to control the at least one blocking device” R3 teaches a vehicle control module (control module 62, e.g., a powertrain control module) providing command inputs to a controller/CPU (controller 60) and motor 54 to actuate an actuator system (linear actuator 30 with shaft 42 and linkages 36) that moves grille shutters 16 between open, partially open, and closed positions. This is a “control unit” designed to control the blocking device (shutters 16).
Therefore, R1 as modified in view of R2, and further modified in view of R3, teaches or renders obvious a cooling module including a control unit (R3 control module 62 and related controller 60/motor 54 actuation arrangement) designed to control the blocking device used to open/close the suction opening(s).
CLAIM 7 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2 + R3)
It would have been obvious to provide a control unit for controlling the blocking device at the inlet openings of the underbody-facing cooling module because controllable shutters are commonly operated based on vehicle operating conditions (cooling demand, speed, ambient conditions) to balance thermal performance with aerodynamic efficiency. R3 expressly teaches a control module 62 commanding shutter position (including partial openings), and applying this known control approach to the shuttered inlet openings of the R1/R2 cooling module would be expected to yield predictable control over airflow rate through the heat exchanger, improving system efficiency and performance.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 8 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
A motor vehicle comprising an underbody and a cooling module including: an air inlet and an air outlet, with the cooling module being intended to be traversed by an airflow circulating between the air inlet and the air outlet, a fairing forming an internal duct in a longitudinal direction of the cooling module that contains at least one heat exchanger intended to be traversed by the airflow, the fairing including a front face containing the air inlet arranged upstream of the at least one heat exchanger, a collector housing positioned downstream of the fairing in the longitudinal direction, said collector housing being designed to receive a tangential-flow turbomachine designed to generate the airflow to be discharged through the air outlet; fastening elements arranged on both sides of the fairing, said fastening elements enabling the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to the cooling module and enabling said module and the at least one heat exchanger to be fastened to a chassis of a motor vehicle such that the front face of the fairing faces the underbody of the motor vehicle; wherein, when assembled, the longitudinal direction of the cooling module is contained within a plane generated by a vertical axis and a longitudinal axis of a trihedron associated with the motor vehicle.
CLAIM 8 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
“motor vehicle comprising an underbody and a cooling module including …” R1 teaches a motor vehicle (vehicle 204) having an underbody/floor structure (floor 202) and an under-vehicle mounted cooling assembly (cooling assembly 200 / UVMCA 302) mounted thereto.
The cooling module structural limitations (“air inlet … air outlet … fairing/duct … heat exchanger … collector housing … tangential-flow turbomachine … fastening elements … front face faces underbody”) are taught or rendered obvious by R1 in view of R2 for the same reasons provided above for claim 1, including modification of the downstream fan portion of R1 with the tangential-flow cross-flow fan 28 and fan housing 33 architecture of R2.
Additional limitation of claim 8:
“wherein, when assembled, the longitudinal direction of the cooling module is contained within a plane generated by a vertical axis and a longitudinal axis … associated with the motor vehicle” R1 teaches the cooling assembly mounted under the vehicle floor 202 with airflow 220 through the heat exchanger and fan assembly occurring generally along a vertical direction relative to the vehicle (i.e., through the thickness direction from bottom wall 212 toward top wall 208, or vice versa depending on configuration). This airflow direction corresponds to the cooling module’s longitudinal direction (the direction between inlet and outlet through the duct). A vertical direction is necessarily contained within a plane defined by (i) the vehicle vertical axis and (ii) the vehicle longitudinal axis, i.e., the X-Z plane of the vehicle coordinate system. Accordingly, R1 teaches (or renders obvious) that, when assembled, the cooling module’s longitudinal direction lies within the plane generated by the vehicle vertical axis and vehicle longitudinal axis.
CLAIM 8 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to apply the tangential-flow fan teachings of R2 to the underbody-mounted cooling module of R1 within the vehicle of claim 8 for the same reasons as claim 1 (alternative fan architecture to generate required airflow under packaging constraints). Further, arranging the module longitudinal airflow direction within the vehicle vertical/longitudinal plane is a predictable packaging choice for underbody-mounted heat exchanger modules to align airflow intake/exhaust with available underbody space and adjacent vehicle structure, as exemplified by R1’s under-floor mounting orientation.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 9 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
The motor vehicle according to claim 8, wherein, when assembled, the longitudinal direction of the cooling module is vertical.
CLAIM 9 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 9:
“longitudinal direction of the cooling module is vertical” R1 teaches airflow 220 passing through the cooling assembly between bottom wall 212 and top wall 208, i.e., in a vertical direction relative to the vehicle (under-floor to above/within the housing). As the module’s longitudinal direction is the direction between inlet and outlet through the duct, R1 teaches (or renders obvious) that the longitudinal direction is vertical.
CLAIM 9 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to maintain the vertical longitudinal airflow direction of the R1 underbody cooling assembly when incorporating the tangential-flow fan of R2 because the vertical flow path is dictated by the under-floor mounting location and by the placement of inlet/outlet openings through the housing walls, and because the substituted tangential-flow fan can be packaged and oriented to generate the needed airflow along the same longitudinal (vertical) direction through the heat exchanger duct.
──────────────────────────────────────── CLAIM 10 (REJECTED UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103 OVER R1 IN VIEW OF R2) ────────────────────────────────────────
The motor vehicle according to claim 8, wherein the underbody is provided with at least one underbody opening arranged to face the air inlet of the cooling module to enable an airflow to circulate from outside the motor vehicle into the cooling module.
CLAIM 10 – LIMITATION-BY-LIMITATION ANALYSIS
Additional limitation of claim 10:
“underbody … provided with at least one underbody opening arranged to face the air inlet … to enable an airflow to circulate from outside … into the cooling module” R1 teaches an underbody/under-vehicle protective shield (protective shield 280) having perforations (perforations 282) positioned below/adjacent the cooling assembly. These perforations 282 constitute openings in the underbody shielding region that permit outside air to enter and reach the cooling module inlet openings (e.g., openings through bottom wall 212/protective screen 232), thereby enabling airflow to circulate from outside the vehicle into the cooling module.
CLAIM 10 – MOTIVATION TO COMBINE (R1 + R2)
It would have been obvious to provide (or retain) an underbody opening facing the cooling module inlet in the R1/R2 combined system because such openings are necessary to supply ambient air to an underbody-mounted heat exchanger module, and because R1 already teaches using perforations/openings 282 in underbody shielding to admit airflow while providing protection. The tangential-flow fan substitution from R2 does not change the fundamental need for an aligned underbody airflow inlet path and would predictably operate with the admitted airflow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615