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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the unidirectional fluid path is actuated in a first direction by a pump” as put forth in Claim 1, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “facilitates comprises” in ll. 10 should be rewritten to be -- comprises --, and will be interpreted accordingly. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 lacks punctuation separating the limitations. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Clam 1, the pump providing a unidirectional fluid path in a first direction within the module is not described in the specification.
Regarding Clam 1, “a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels” is not supported in the original specification, wherein the ridges are not detailed in conjunction with the thermal management module. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels” will be interpreted as describing the turbulator shown in figure 4.
Regarding Clam 1, “an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet on the first cover plate, arranging a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” is not supported in the original specification, wherein the sensors are not described as being inlets or outlets.
Regarding Clam 17, “bonding a pump is fluidic connection with the first arrangeable connection flange” is not supported in the original specification, wherein the pump is not disclosed as being soldered to a plate or rather what specific surface or component of said pump is soldered to the respective plate. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “bonding a pump” will be interpreted as attaching a pump.
Regarding Clam 17, “bonding a heat exchanger” is not supported in the original specification, wherein the heat exchanger is not disclosed as being soldered to a plate or rather what specific surface or component of said heat exchanger is soldered to the respective plate. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “bonding a heat exchanger” will be interpreted as attaching a heat exchanger.
Regarding Clam 17, “arranging a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” is not supported in the original specification, wherein the valve device is not described as being situated on a first arrangeable connection flange being an inlet or the sensor is not described as being situated on a second arrangeable connection flange being an outlet. Further, the specification does not describe a fluidly connected circuit that has a valve at the inlet and a sensor at the outlet. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “arranging a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” will be interpreted as -- arranging a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange and at least a second arrangeable connection flange --.
Regarding Clam 17, “ where a claim directed to a device can be read to include the same element twice, the claim may be indefinite.” Ex parte Kristensen, 10 USPQ2d 1701 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989). See MPEP 2173.05(o). Claim 17 states, “at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” in ll. 16, it is unclear if the aforementioned second arrangeable connection flange is the same second arrangeable connection flange previously put forth in Claim 17 or a new and distinct connection flange. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, the second arrangeable connection flange is hereby interpreted as a new flange.
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 1-20 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 or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1, the limitation “wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels” in ll. 12 is indefinite, in context, since it cannot be discerned in what manner the channels are continuous. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels” will be interpreted as – wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels on either side of a respective ridge --.
Regarding Claim 1, “ where a claim directed to a device can be read to include the same element twice, the claim may be indefinite.” Ex parte Kristensen, 10 USPQ2d 1701 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989). See MPEP 2173.05(o). In the present case, it cannot be determined if “at least a second arrangeable connection flange” is referring to the previously put forth second arrangeable connection flange or a new and distinct connection flange. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “at least a second arrangeable connection flange” will be interpreted as – the at least a second arrangeable connection flange --.
Claims 2-5 and 18 recite the limitation "the at least one channel plate" in ll. 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding Claim 12, the limitation “turbulence generating structures are arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other” in ll. 1 is indefinite, in context, since it cannot be discerned what are the turbulence generating structures if the ridges are previously put forth in Claim 1. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “turbulence generating structures are arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other” will be interpreted as –a further portion of the ridges includes turbulence generating structures being arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other --.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitation “a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” is indefinite, in context, since it cannot be discerned how the components (valve, sensor) are associated with the flanges. Are the valve and sensor mounted on a single flange. For Examination purposes and in accordance with the specification and drawings, “a valve device and a sensor on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet” will be interpreted as – a valve device and a sensor are fluidly connected to a first or second arrangeable connection flange in any manner --.
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 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 of this title, 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 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) and in further view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), hereinafter referred to as Lin, Sato and Bojan, respectively.
[AltContent: textbox (Fluid Channels 18639070)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
292
483
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lin Figure 2
Regarding Claim 1, Lin discloses a thermal management module for an electrically powered motor vehicle (“The invention relates to the technical field of vehicles, in particular to a multi-channel cooling pipeline integration device, a heat management integration module and an electric vehicle”), comprising:
at least a first preformed module carrier (110), with at least a first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet (1115) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange (1113) forming an outlet (shown in figure 1), wherein
the at least a first module carrier (110) is formed from a first cover plate (112) and a second cover plate (113, shown at least in figure 3),
a fluid channel (shown in annotated figure 2), wherein
the fluid channel is in fluid connection with the at least a first connection flange forming an inlet (connecting flange forming the liquid inlet port (1115)) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet (connecting flange forming the liquid output port (1113)), wherein
the fluid channel creates a unidirectional fluid path through the at least a first preformed module carrier (shown in figure 6), and wherein
the unidirectional fluid path is actuated in a first direction by a pump (140, shown in figure 4, “As shown in Figure 6, two electronic water pumps 140 (referred to as battery water pumps and motor water pumps)”).
Lin fails to disclose at least a first channel plate arranged between the first cover plate and the second cover plate.
Sato, also drawn to a thermal distribution system for an electric vehicle, teaches a first channel plate (252) arranged between the first cover plate (251) and the second cover plate (254).
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. If any of these findings cannot be made, then this rationale cannot be used to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per MPEP 2143-I, a simple substitution of one known element for another, with a reasonable expectation of success supports a conclusion of obviousness. In the instant case, the simple substitution is related to substituting a single cover plate comprising multiple channels with a cover plate and separate plates forming the channels; further the prior art to Sato teaches having separate channel plates is known for distributing fluid within a thermal management device of an electric vehicle. Therefore, since modifying the prior art to Lin with having multiple channel plates and a separate cover plate, can easily be made without any change in the operation of the thermal management device; and in view of the teachings of the prior art to Sato there will be reasonable expectations of success, it would have been obvious to have modified the invention of Lin by having multiple channel plates in order to allow flexibility in fabricating a desired thickness or height of the module, wherein the “number of sheets and the thickness may be appropriately changed according to the length and flow rate of the circuit.” Alternately, constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 V (C).
Although Lin discloses at least a first connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet, wherein the continuous fluid channel creates a unidirectional fluid path (see rejection above), Lin fails to disclose the at least a first channel plate facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path.
Bojan, also drawn to a manifold heat exchanger teaches the at least a first channel plate (shown in figure 7) facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges (38d-1), wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels (shown in figure 7, wherein a plurality of fluid channels are provided on either side of the “turbulator”), wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet (shown in figure 6, being 34d and 36d), wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path (shown in figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with the at least a first channel plate facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path, as taught by Bojan, the motivation being “By suitably mounting or arranging such structures or cooling fins (such as so-called "turbolators") a selectively directed or turbulent and non-laminar flow can be advantageously created in the coolant passage(s) in order to improve the cooling effect” ¶27).
Regarding Claim 2, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) has channels (shown in figures 18-19 of Sato) and the first cover plate and the second cover plate each have at least one opening (shown in figures 17 and 20 of Sato).
Regarding Claim 3, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) comprise a substantially flat sheet metal (shown in figures 18-19 of Sato) and is punched (see product by process analysis below).
In product-by-process claims, as in Claim 3, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference” MPEP 2113.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is proper because the "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). The combination of previous references meets the structural limitations put forth in Claim 3, wherein the final product existing after fabrication is compared to prior art for the purposes of patentability. The limitations regarding “punched” are drawn to methods of production and not the structural aspects of the instant invention.
Regarding Claim 4, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) and first cover plate (251) and second cover plate (254) are fully stacked and the circumferential outer edges of the plates form outer surfaces of the at least one module carrier (10, shown in figures 15-16 of Sato).
Regarding Claim 5, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) has a sheet thickness of 1 mm to 7 mm (“The thickness of the first intermediate plate 252 is preferably 3.0 mm≦t≦4.0 mm, and particularly preferably 3.5 mm”).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I)
Regarding Claim 6, Lin further discloses the second cover plate is a plastic component (“In order to ensure thermal insulation between the cooling connecting pipelines 111 and reduce heat loss, the multi-channel cooling pipeline integration device 110 can be made of thermally insulating plastics, such as PP (Polypropylene, polypropylene) or PA66 (Polyamide 66, polyamide 66) Wait. By using PP or PA66 material, the strength of the multi-channel cooling pipeline integration device 110 can be ensured while ensuring thermal insulation, so as to improve the structural stability and durability of the multi-channel cooling pipeline integration device 110”).
Regarding Claim 7, a modified Lin further teaches at least one second channel plate (253 as taught by Sato) is arranged between the first cover plate (251 as taught by Sato) and the second cover plate (254 as taught by Sato).
Regarding Claim 8, a modified Lin further teaches the first cover plate (251, as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1), the first channel plate (252) and the at least one second channel plate (253) and the second cover plate (254) are fluid- tightly connected to one another (“the metal plates 25 are laminated so that they can be kept airtight”).
Regarding Claim 9, a modified Lin further teaches the first channel plate (252, as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) and the at least one second channel plate (253) have differently formed channels (shown in figures 18-19).
Regarding Claim 10, a modified Lin further teaches the channels formed in the first channel plate (252, as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1 and shown in figure 18) and the at least second channel plate (253) form at least one first heat exchanging fluid guide and one second heat exchanging fluid guide, facilitating a heat exchange with each other (shown in figures 15, 18 and 19).
Regarding Claim 12, a modified Lin further teaches turbulence generating structures (38d-2 of Bojan) are arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other (shown in figure 7 of Bojan).
Regarding Claim 13, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one connection flange (shown in figure 1 of Lin) is connected to the first cover plate (shown in figure 1 of Lin, being the inlet and outlet connection flanges, see also Sato figure 15).
[AltContent: textbox (Valve Device)][AltContent: textbox (Second Flange)][AltContent: textbox (First Flange)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
270
656
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lin Figure 3
Regarding Claim 17, Lin discloses a method for manufacturing a thermal management module, an electrically powered motor vehicle (“The invention relates to the technical field of vehicles, in particular to a multi-channel cooling pipeline integration device, a heat management integration module and an electric vehicle”), the method comprising:
assembling a module carrier (110), comprising
a first cover plate (113)
a second cover plate (112),
by bonding the first cover plate and at least a second cover plate to each other (“the body part, the first cover part and the second cover part are assembled by hot plate welding, friction welding or laser welding”),
arranging a first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet (1106, shown in annotated figure 3) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange (shown in annotated figure 3) forming an outlet on the first cover plate (shown in annotated figure 3),
arranging a valve device (shown in annotated figure 3) and a sensor (170) on the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet (shown in figures 4-5) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet (shown in figure 3, wherein the annotated valve is attached to the first cover part (113)), and
bonding a heat exchanger (150, 160) on the second cover plate (shown in figures 1 and 4, heat exchanger is attached at points (1104 and 1105)),
bonding a pump (140, shown in figure 4) in fluidic connection with the first arrangeable connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet (the pump is in fluid connection with the fluid connection pipes 111a, shown in figure 3).
Lin fails to disclose at least a first channel plate at least a second channel plate.
Sato, also drawn to a thermal distribution system for an electric vehicle, teaches a first cover plate (251) with at least a first channel plate (252) at least a second channel plate (253) and a second cover plate (254). It is noted that Lin discloses the plates being bonded together, wherein Sato teaches it old and well known to have intermediate plates between two opposing cover plates. Therefore a modified Lin having the intermediate plates as taught by Sato, further comprises the plate stack being bonded.
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. If any of these findings cannot be made, then this rationale cannot be used to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per MPEP 2143-I, a simple substitution of one known element for another, with a reasonable expectation of success supports a conclusion of obviousness. In the instant case, the simple substitution is related to substituting a single cover plate comprising multiple channels with a cover plate and separate plates forming the channels; further the prior art to Sato teaches having separate channel plates is known for distributing fluid within a thermal management device of an electric vehicle. Therefore, since modifying the prior art to Lin with having multiple channel plates and a separate cover plate, can easily be made without any change in the operation of the thermal management device; and in view of the teachings of the prior art to Sato there will be reasonable expectations of success, it would have been obvious to have modified the invention of Lin by having multiple channel plates in order to allow flexibility in fabricating a desired thickness or height of the module, wherein the “number of sheets and the thickness may be appropriately changed according to the length and flow rate of the circuit.” Alternately, constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 V (C).
Regarding limitations “inlet” and “outlet” recited in Claim 17, which are directed to an intended fluid flow direction, it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Further, 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, as is the case here. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114.
Regarding Claim 18, a modified Lin further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) has a sheet thickness of 2 mm to 4 mm (“The thickness of the first intermediate plate 252 is preferably 3.0 mm≦t≦4.0 mm, and particularly preferably 3.5 mm”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) and in further view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), as applied in Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 are rejected above and in further view of Calderone (US PG Pub. 2022/0388374A1), hereinafter referred to as Calderone.
Regarding Claim 6, in addition to Lin, Calderone, also drawn to a manifold for an electric vehicle, teaches a cover plate is a plastic component (“The manifold 102 may be made of a same or single material, such as plastic, metal, rubber, or others, or a combination of materials, such as a plastic and a metal or others”, ¶33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with the second cover plate being a plastic component, as taught by Calderone, the motivation being that plastic is light weight and corrosion resistant.
Alternately, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to fabricate a second cover plate from plastic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known materials on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) in view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), as applied in Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 above and in further view of Braic et al. (US PG Pub. 2010/0089548A1), hereinafter referred to as Braic.
Regarding Claim 6, in addition to Lin, Braic, also drawn to a heat exchanger, teaches a cover plate is a plastic component (“case cover, in particular made of non-metal, for example, a plastic, fibrous composite or a ceramic, should be comparatively secure and, on the other hand, sufficiently flexible with respect to thermal relative movements of the base, which is preferably composed of metal, e.g., aluminum and a base cover”, ¶13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with the second cover plate being a plastic component, as taught by Braic, the motivation being to alleviate stresses that occur due to thermal expansion and that that plastic is light weight and corrosion resistant.
Alternately, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to fabricate a second cover plate from plastic, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known materials on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) in view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), as applied in Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 above and in further view of Wang et al. (Translation of CN217197694U), hereinafter referred to as Wang.
Regarding Claim 11, Lin fails to disclose a channel is formed in the at least first channel plate, which does not form a fluid guide and hence has a thermal insulating effect.
Wang, also drawn to a manifold for an electric vehicle, teaches a channel (104) is formed in a at least first channel plate, which does not form a fluid guide and hence has a thermal insulating effect (“the second main runner plate 20 between any two adjacent first flow passage 101 position is respectively with a heat insulation cavity 104, for the two adjacent first flow passage 101 for heat insulation, Thus, it can greatly reduce the heat exchange between the different temperature liquid in the different first flow passage 101”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with a channel being formed in the at least first channel plate, which does not form a fluid guide and hence has a thermal insulating effect, as taught by Wang, the motivation being to regulate heat transfer between working fluids in the manifold, thereby mitigating heating/cooling loss and increasing efficient heat transfer.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) in view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), as applied in Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 above and in further view of Bergmann et al. (USP 4352378A), hereinafter referred to as Bergmann.
Regarding Claim 12, a modified Lin fails to teach turbulence generating structures are arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other.
Bergmann, also drawn to a channel having heat exchange fluid, teaches turbulence generating structures (3) are arranged in at least one of a first and second fluid guides exchanging heat (see abstract) with each other (“The ribbed construction assembled from toothed metal bands ensures the improved heat transfer primarily by slowing down the velocity of the medium flowing in the center of the pipe; furthermore it improves the temperature distribution of the flowing medium by means of metallic contact and mixing”, abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with turbulence generating structures being arranged in at least one of the first and second fluid guides exchanging heat with each other, as taught by Bergmann, the motivation being to increase heat transfer and temperature distribution of the working fluid.
Claim 14-16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (Translation of WO2022/266945A1) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) in view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), as applied in Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 17-18 above and in further view of Hamadate et al. (Translation of WO2022/210382A1), hereinafter referred to as Hamadate.
Regarding Claim 14, a modified Lin fails to teach the first cover plate and/or the second cover plate has an inward-facing or an outward-facing collar at the at least one opening.
Hamadate, also drawn to a manifold having heat exchange fluid, teaches a first cover plate (21) has an inward-facing or an outward-facing collar (21b, being the left most connection cylinder (21b) on the top plate (21)) at the at least one opening (shown in figure 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Lin with the first cover plate and/or the second cover plate has an inward-facing or an outward-facing collar at the at least one opening, as taught by Hamadate, the motivation being to increase surface area contact between the plate and the pipe, thereby creating a robust connection for an increased operational life and the mitigation of leakage.
Regarding Claim 15, a modified Lin in view of Hamadate further teaches the first cover plate (21, as taught by Hamadate in the rejection of Claim 14) has at least one alignment element (21b, being the right most connection cylinder (21b) on the top plate (21)).
Regarding Claim 16, a modified Lin further teaches the inward-facing or outward-facing collar (21b, being the left most connection cylinder (21b) on the top plate (21)) positions at least one connection flange (12).
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhejiang Sanhua (Translation of CN114791183A) in view of Sato (Translation of WO2020174705A1) and in further view of Bojan (US PG Pub. 2008/0285230A1), hereinafter referred to as Zhejiang, Sato and Bojan, respectively.
[AltContent: textbox (Fluid Channels 18639070)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
319
781
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Lin Figure 2
Regarding Claim 1, Zhejiang discloses a thermal management module for an electrically powered motor vehicle (see intended use analysis below), comprising:
at least a first preformed module carrier (100), with at least a first arrangeable connection flange (shown in figures 1 and 12, being the connector for port (102)) forming an inlet (shown in figure 12, being the inlet for flow passage (1019), see intended use analysis below) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange (shown in figures 1 and 12, being the connector for other port (102)) forming an outlet (shown in figure 12, being the outlet for flow passage (1019), see intended use analysis below), wherein
the at least a first module carrier (100) is formed from a first cover plate (1110) and a second cover plate (1120, shown at least in figure 7),
a fluid channel (1019), wherein
the fluid channel is in fluid connection with the at least a first connection flange (102, shown in figures 12 and 13) forming an inlet (see intended use analysis below) and at least a second arrangeable connection flange (102) forming an outlet (shown in figure 12, see intended use analysis below), wherein
the fluid channel creates a unidirectional fluid path through the at least a first preformed module carrier (shown in figure 12), and wherein
the unidirectional fluid path is actuated in a first direction by a pump (2101-2103, shown in figure 13, wherein the pumps and electronic valves control the flow of working fluid through the fluid management device (100))).
Zhejiang fails to disclose at least a first channel plate arranged between the first cover plate and the second cover plate.
Sato, also drawn to a thermal distribution system for an electric vehicle, teaches a first channel plate (252) arranged between the first cover plate (251) and the second cover plate (254).
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that the substitution of one known element for another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. If any of these findings cannot be made, then this rationale cannot be used to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Per MPEP 2143-I, a simple substitution of one known element for another, with a reasonable expectation of success supports a conclusion of obviousness. In the instant case, the simple substitution is related to substituting a single cover plate comprising multiple channels with a cover plate and separate plates forming the channels; further the prior art to Sato teaches having separate channel plates is known for distributing fluid within a thermal management device of an electric vehicle. Therefore, since modifying the prior art to Zhejiang with having multiple channel plates and a separate cover plate, can easily be made without any change in the operation of the thermal management device; and in view of the teachings of the prior art to Sato there will be reasonable expectations of success, it would have been obvious to have modified the invention of Zhejiang by having multiple channel plates in order to allow flexibility in fabricating a desired thickness or height of the module, wherein the “number of sheets and the thickness may be appropriately changed according to the length and flow rate of the circuit.” Alternately, constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 V (C).
Although Zhejiang discloses at least a first connection flange forming an inlet and at least a second arrangeable connection flange forming an outlet, wherein the continuous fluid channel creates a unidirectional fluid path (see rejection above), Zhejiang fails to disclose the at least a first channel plate facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path.
Bojan, also drawn to a manifold heat exchanger teaches the at least a first channel plate (shown in figure 7) facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges (38d-1), wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels (shown in figure 7, wherein a plurality of fluid channels are provided on either side of the “turbulator”), wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet (shown in figure 6, being 34d and 36d), wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path (shown in figure 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a modified Zhejiang with the at least a first channel plate facilitates comprises a plurality of spaced ridges, wherein the plurality of spaced ridges form a plurality of continuous fluid channels, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels are in fluid connection with an inlet and an outlet, wherein the plurality of continuous fluid channels create a unidirectional fluid path, as taught by Bojan, the motivation being “By suitably mounting or arranging such structures or cooling fins (such as so-called "turbolators") a selectively directed or turbulent and non-laminar flow can be advantageously created in the coolant passage(s) in order to improve the cooling effect” ¶27).
A recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed, regarding “electrically powered motor vehicle”, “inlet”, and “outlet”, does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. Please see Section 2114 of the MPEP entitled Functional Language.
Regarding Claim 2, a modified Zhejiang further teaches the at least one channel plate (252 as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1) has channels (shown in figures 18-19 of Sato) and the first cover plate and the second cover plate each have at least one opening (shown in figures 17 and 20 of Sato).
Regarding Claim 7, a modified Zhejiang further teaches at least one second channel plate (253 as taught by Sato) is arranged between the first cover plate (251) and the second cover plate (254).
Regarding Claim 8, a modified Zhejiang further teaches the first cover plate (251, as taught by Sato in the rejection of Claim 1), the first channel plate (252) and the at least one second channel plate (253) and the second cover plate (254) are fluid- tightly connected to one another (“the metal plates 25 are laminated so that they can be kept airtight”).
Regarding Claim 13, a modified Zhejiang further teaches the at least one connection flange (shown in figures 1 and 12 of Zhejiang) is connected to the first cover plate (shown in figure 1 of Zhejiang, being the inlet and outlet connection flanges, see also Sato figure 15).
Regarding Claim 19, a modified Zhejiang further teaches the first cover plate, the first channel plate and the at least one second channel plate and the second cover plate are soldered (“Here, the "adjacent" includes the first plate body 1110 and the second plate body 1120 contact The solder or glue is provided between the first plate body 1110 and the second plate body 1120”).
Regarding Claim 20, a modified Zhejiang further teaches the at least one connection flange (connector for port (102)) is connected to the first or the second cover plate via soldering (“The solder or glue is provided between the first plate body 1110 and the second plate body 1120”).
In product-by-process claims, as in Claims 19-20, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference” MPEP 2113.
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is proper because the "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). The combination of previous references meets the structural limitations put forth in Claims 19-20, wherein the final product existing after fabrication is compared to prior art for the purposes of patentability. The limitations regarding “the first cover plate, the first channel plate and the at least one second channel plate and the second cover plate are soldered” and “the at least one connection flange is connected to the first or the second cover plate via soldering” are drawn to methods of production and not the structural aspects of the instant invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PAUL ALVARE whose telephone number is (571)272-8611. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0930-1800.
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.
/PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763