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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/01/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Accordingly, Pucher fails to disclose or suggest ‘the body further comprises an oblong liner plate disposed in the interface, the oblong liner plate and the interface jointly define an oblong positioning groove therebetween, and the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube...,’ as recited in amended claim 1.
The Office relies on Klarhorst and CN112833267 for other purposes. Klarhorst and CN112833267 do not cure the deficiencies of Pucher because they also fail to disclose or suggest the above-quoted claim elements recited in amended claim 1. Without acquiescing to the Office's characterizations, Applicant respectfully submits that Pucher, Klarhorst, and CN112833267, whether taken alone or in any combination, fail to disclose or suggest the above- quoted claim elements recited in amended claim 1.
In view of the above, the Office has neither properly determined the scope and content of the cited references nor properly ascertained the differences between the claimed invention and the cited references. Moreover, the Office has articulated no reason as to why one of ordinary skill in the art would find the claimed combination obvious in view of the references, despite these differences. For at least this reason, no prima facie case of obviousness has been established with respect to claim 1. Claim 1 is thus allowable.
Claims 3-15 are also allowable at least by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.”
The rejection is a 103 rejection of Pucher et al (US 2021/0013565) in view of Klarhorst (US 5,358,352). However, Applicant argues that Pucher alone fails to disclose “the body further comprises an oblong liner plate disposed in the interface, the oblong liner plate and the interface jointly define an oblong positioning groove therebetween, and the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube...,” as recited in amended claim 1. Applicant then states “The Office relies on Klarhorst and CN112833267 for other purposes. Klarhorst and CN112833267 do not cure the deficiencies of Pucher because they also fail to disclose or suggest the above-quoted claim elements recited in amended claim 1.” However, no arguments are made against the validity of the 103 rejection of Pucher et al in view of Klarhorst. Applicant merely asserts that the Klarhorst does not cure the deficiencies of Pucher. The Examiner disagrees. Refer to the following rejection.
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, 3-7 and 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher et al (US 2021/0013565) in view of Klarhorst (US 5,358,352).
As to claim 1, Pucher et al discloses a tube connector (50), configured to connect a flat tube (51) and a round tube (10) in a thermal management system of a battery, the tube connector comprising: a body, a fluid channel being formed inside the body; a first connecting portion (181) formed on the body and configured to be connected to the round tube; and a second connecting portion (15) formed on the body and configured to be connected to the flat tube; wherein: the first connecting portion is a hollow columnar structure, and the columnar structure is configured to be socketed to the round tube; and the second connecting portion comprises an oblong interface (15), and a weld face (as at 27, 151) that fits a shape of the flat tube is formed on an inner sidewall of the interface; and wherein the body further comprises an oblong liner plate (151) disposed in the interface.
Pucher et al fails to teach the oblong liner plate and the interface jointly define an oblong positioning groove therebetween, and the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube, the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube such that, when the end of the flat tube is accommodated in the positioning groove, an outer wall of the flat tube is in contact with an inner wall of the interface, an inner wall of the flat tube is in contact with an outer wall of the oblong liner plate, and an end face of the flat tube abuts against a bottom of the positioning groove.
However, Klarhorst demonstrates that such a joining connection between to two tubular articles is well-known. Referring to Fig. 6, Klarhorst teaches joining the end of tube (7) into the end of an annular groove (30) defined by inner and outer walls of tubular connector (5/6). The end of the tube (7) is disposed within the groove and abuts the bottom of the groove. The inner surface of the tube is in contact with the outer surface of the inner wall, and the outer surface of the tube is in contact with the inner surface of the outer wall.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tube connector connecting structure such that, the oblong liner plate and the interface jointly define an oblong positioning groove therebetween, and the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube, the positioning groove is configured to accommodate an end of the flat tube such that, when the end of the flat tube is accommodated in the positioning groove, an outer wall of the flat tube is in contact with an inner wall of the interface, an inner wall of the flat tube is in contact with an outer wall of the oblong liner plate, and an end face of the flat tube abuts against a bottom of the positioning groove, as taught by Klarhorst, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to more securely and more reliably connect the flat tube and the round tube.
Modifying Pucher et al by Klarhorst results in the round tube (10) receiving the flat tube (51) within an annular channel defined by inner and outer walls, like “28” and “29” shown in Fig. 6 of Klarhorst. Klarhorst’s annular channel (30) correlates to the claimed positioning groove. This receiving structure configuration establishes a large contact area on the inside and outside of the flat tube, thereby providing stability to the connection (see Klarhorst, col. 6, ll. 20-27).
"A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ." Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
As to claim 3, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 1, wherein a first reinforcing rib (Pucher: 152) is disposed on an inner wall of the oblong liner plate, and the first reinforcing rib is disposed along the fluid channel.
As to claim 4, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 3, wherein the first reinforcing rib, the oblong liner plate, and the body are made of a same material. Refer to [0069], [0076] and Fig. 3 of Pucher.
As to claim 5, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 3, wherein the first reinforcing rib is one or one or more first reinforcing ribs disposed on the inner wall of the oblong liner plate. Refer to Fig. 3 of Pucher.
As to claim 6, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 1, wherein a chamfer is formed on an end face of the oblong liner plate. In Fig. 3 of Pucher, as at 152 or the groove at the top part of 15.
As to claim 7, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 1, wherein a chamfer is formed on an end face of the body. In Fig. 3 of Pucher, as at the groove at the top part of 15.
As to claim 10, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses a thermal management system, comprising: the flat tube; the round tube; and the tube connector according to claim 1, wherein the first connecting portion is connected to the round tube, and the second connecting portion is connected to the flat tube. Refer to Fig. 4 of Pucher.
As to claim 11, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the thermal management system according to claim 10, wherein a second reinforcing rib (152) is disposed on an inner wall of the flat tube along an axial direction. Refer to Fig. 3 of Pucher.
As to claim 12, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the thermal management system according to claim 10, wherein an outer wall of the round tube is fitted with a locking hoop (aperture adjacent “21” in Fig. 4 of Pucher).
As to claim 13, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the thermal management system according to claim 10, wherein the flat tube is connected to the tube connector by laser welding. Refer to [0076] of Pucher.
Note that the method of forming the device (laser welding) is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself and does not serve to patentably distinguish the claims.
As to claim 14, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses a battery box, comprising the thermal management system according to claim 10. Refer to [0066] and [0067] of Pucher.
As to claim 15, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses a battery, comprising the thermal management system according to claim 10. Refer to [0066] and [0067] of Pucher.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pucher et al in view of Klarhorst, and further in view of CN 112833267 A.
As to claim 8, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 1, except for: further comprising: a sealing element; wherein a groove capable of accommodating the sealing element is created on an outer wall of the first connecting portion, and the sealing element is socketed in the groove; and
As to claim 9, Pucher et al/ Klarhorst discloses the tube connector according to claim 8, except that the sealing element is a sealing ring or a sealing washer.
However, CN 112833267 teaches a similar tube connector (20) having a barbed connecting portion at one end with grooves, and at least one sealing ring (22) disposed in the groove.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Pucher’s connecting portion to include a barbed end having grooves to accommodate at least one sealing ring, as taught by CN ‘267, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an effective sealed connection means for tubing.
Examiner’s Note:
The italicized portions in the foregoing claims are functional recitations. These clauses, as well as other statements of intended use do not serve to patently distinguish the claimed structure over that of the reference(s), as long as the structure of the cited reference(s) is capable of performing the intended use. See MPEP 2111-2115.
See also MPEP 2114, which states:
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 USPQ 2d 1647;
Claims directed to apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531; and
[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525,1528.
Any one of the systems in the cited reference(s) is capable of being used in the same manner and for the intended or desired use as the claimed invention. Note that it is sufficient to show that said capability exists, which is the case for the cited reference(s).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James M Hewitt II whose telephone number is (571)272-7084. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 730am-930pm (MST), mid-day flex.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
James M. Hewitt II
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679
/JAMES M HEWITT II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights