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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
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 4 and 5 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.
Regarding Claim 4, the recitation of “…wherein the controller is further configured to stop the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that the temperature of the refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger is higher than the temperature of the second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, the claim purports to have a controller that is configured to perform the functional step of “stopping a pump.” However, pursuant to MPEP 2173.05(g), the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite.
In order for the controller to be configured to stop the pump based upon recited temperatures, the controller would need be programmed with respected temperatures being inputs. Thus, in this instance, the structure needed to provide the required inputs need be included in the claims.
For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear without reciting the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. Therefore, all means or methods of resolving the problem may be encompassed by the claim.
In this instance, the claim does not recite the particular structure, i.e. sensors that accomplish providing said signal inputs.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding Claim 5, the recitation of “…wherein the controller is further configured to stop the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that an inlet-side refrigerant temperature detected at an inlet of the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger is higher than an inlet-side coolant temperature detected at an inlet of the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, the claim purports to have a controller that is configured to perform the functional step of “stopping a pump.” However, pursuant to MPEP 2173.05(g), the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite.
In order for the controller to be configured to stop the pump based upon recited temperatures, the controller would need be programmed with respected temperatures being inputs. Thus, in this instance, the structure needed to provide the required inputs need be included in the claims.
For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear without reciting the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. Therefore, all means or methods of resolving the problem may be encompassed by the claim.
In this instance, the claim does not recite the particular structure, i.e. sensors that accomplish providing said signal inputs.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US2020/0180391) in view of Choi et al. (US2020/0353795).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim teaches a vehicle thermal management system [fig 1], comprising:
a refrigerant subsystem including a refrigerant circulation path [at least HVAC module 52; 0103];
a first coolant subsystem [10] including a first coolant circulation path into which a first coolant flows and power electronics (PE) [15] component fluidly connected to the first coolant circulation path [0061; 0063-0068];
a second coolant subsystem [20] including a second coolant circulation path, and a radiator [22] and a pump fluidly connected to the second coolant circulation path [0061; 0069-0079];
a heat exchanger [54] including a refrigerant passage fluidly connected to the refrigerant circulation path of the refrigerant subsystem, a first coolant passage fluidly connected to the first coolant circulation path of the first coolant subsystem, and a second coolant passage fluidly connected to the second coolant circulation path of the second coolant subsystem [0105-0113; see fig 1]; and
a controller operatively connected to the pump and configured to control the pump of the second coolant subsystem [0134].
Kim does not teach where the controller operatively connected to the pump and configured to control the pump of the second coolant subsystem based on a temperature of a refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger and a temperature of a second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger.
However, Choi teaches a heat pump system for an electric vehicle [0002] having a controller [39] operatively connected to a pump and configured to control the pump of a coolant subsystem [at 28] based on a temperature of a refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage [as measured by sensor “PT”] of a heat exchanger [25] and a temperature of a coolant [as measured by “CT”] flowing into the coolant passage of the heat exchanger [0143-0148; 0264-0267; fig 5] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. control the temperature and moisture content of a target space [0004].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Kim to have where the controller operatively connected to the pump and configured to control the pump of the second coolant subsystem based on a temperature of a refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger and a temperature of a second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger in view of the teachings of Choi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide where the coolant is heat-exchanged with the refrigerant and thereby cool the battery.
Regarding Claim 2, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Kim teaches wherein the refrigerant subsystem further includes an evaporator [58], an internal condenser [52a], and a refrigerant line [51] connecting the internal condenser and the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger, and a dehumidification-side bypass line [64] connecting an upstream point of the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger and an upstream point of the evaporator and allowing the refrigerant to bypass the evaporator and the internal condenser [0103; 0287-0308; fig 8].
Regarding Claim 3, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 2 above and Kim teaches a compressor [59] connected to the internal condenser [52a; 0112]; and
a heating-side bypass line [62] connecting a downstream point of the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger [54] and an upstream point of the compressor and allowing the refrigerant discharged from the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger to bypass the heat exchanger to the compressor through the heating-side bypass line [0125; 0126].
Regarding Claim 4, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Kim teaches wherein the controller is further configured to stop the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that the temperature of the refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger is higher than the temperature of the second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger [0233-0252; fig 6].
Regarding Claim 5, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Kim teaches wherein the controller is further configured to stop the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that an inlet-side refrigerant temperature detected at an inlet of the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger is higher than an inlet-side coolant temperature detected at an inlet of the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger [0233-0252; fig 6].
Regarding Claim 8, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Kim teaches where the first coolant subsystem further includes:
a PE radiator [12] fluidly connected to the first coolant circulation path [0063];
a bypass line [18] connected to the first coolant circulation path at upstream and downstream of the PE radiator and allowing the first coolant to bypass the PE radiator [0081]; and
a control valve [V2] configured to adjust the flow of the first coolant between the bypass line and the PE radiator [0083].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US2020/0180391) and Choi et al. (US2020/0353795) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shibaoka et a. (US2024/0278619).
Regarding Claim 6, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above but does not explicitly teach a first sensor disposed on the downstream side of the radiator; and
a second sensor disposed on the upstream side of a compressor of the refrigerant subsystem,
wherein the controller is further configured to calculate a saturation temperature of the refrigerant passing through the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger based on a suction pressure of the compressor detected by the second sensor.
However, Shibaoka teaches an air conditioning apparatus for an electric vehicle [0018] having a first sensor [54, 56] disposed on the downstream side of a radiator [7; 0069-0071]; and
a second sensor [44] disposed on the upstream side of a compressor [2] of the refrigerant subsystem [0068-0071],
wherein the controller is further configured to calculate a saturation temperature of the refrigerant passing through the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger based on a suction pressure of the compressor detected by the second sensor [0068-0071] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide where the refrigerant discharge pressure value and the refrigerant suction pressure value can be recovered to their desired states and thereby prevent, for example, a reduction in heating performance, a reduction in durability and failure of the compressor, and false detection of refrigerant shortage [0073].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Kim to have a first sensor disposed on the downstream side of the radiator; and
a second sensor disposed on the upstream side of a compressor of the refrigerant subsystem,
wherein the controller is further configured to calculate a saturation temperature of the refrigerant passing through the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger based on a suction pressure of the compressor detected by the second sensor in view of the teachings of Shibaoka where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide where the refrigerant discharge pressure value and the refrigerant suction pressure value can be recovered to their desired states and thereby prevent, for example, a reduction in heating performance, a reduction in durability and failure of the compressor, and false detection of refrigerant shortage [0073].
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US2020/0180391) and Choi et al. (US2020/0353795) as applied to claim 1above, and further in view of Jeong (US2022/0355645).
Regarding Claim 9, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above but does not teach wherein the controller operatively connected to the control valve is further configured to control the control valve to allow the first coolant to bypass the PE radiator through the bypass line in response that a temperature difference between a temperature of the PE component and an ambient temperature is greater than a first threshold.
However, Jeong teaches a thermal management system for a vehicle [0002] having where a controller [10] operatively connected to the control valve [116] is further configured to control the control valve to allow the first coolant to bypass a PE radiator [113] through a bypass line [115] in response that a temperature difference between a temperature of the PE component and an ambient temperature is greater than a first threshold [0120-0128; fig 4; where the threshold is temperature T] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. facilitates air heat recovery utilizing the heat of the outside air [0133].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Kim to have controller operatively connected to the control valve is further configured to control the control valve to allow the first coolant to bypass the PE radiator through the bypass line in response that a temperature difference between a temperature of the PE component and an ambient temperature is greater than a first threshold in view of the teachings of Choi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. facilitates air heat recovery utilizing the heat of the outside air.
Regarding Claim 10, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 9 above and Jeong teaches wherein the controller is further configured to stop the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that the temperature difference between the temperature of the PE component and the ambient temperature is greater than a second threshold, and
wherein the second threshold is greater than the first threshold [0134-0136; fig 5; where the threshold temperature is T + ἀ].
Regarding Claim 11, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 10 above and Jeong teaches wherein the controller is further configured to operate the pump of the second coolant subsystem in response that the temperature difference between the temperature of the PE component and the ambient temperature is less than or equal to a third threshold, and
wherein the third threshold is less than the first threshold [0136-0140; fig 6; where the threshold is temperature T-ἀ].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per independent Claim 12, the prior art, Kim (US2020/0180391), Choi et al. (US2020/0353795), Shibaoka et a. (US2024/0278619) and Jeong (US2022/0355645) does not teach the method as recited, in particular “...the method being performed by “… calculating, by a controller operatively connected to the pump, a temperature of a refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger and a temperature of a second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger; and
controlling, by the controller, the pump of the second coolant subsystem based on the temperature of the refrigerant flowing into the refrigerant passage of the heat exchanger, the temperature of the second coolant flowing into the second coolant passage of the heat exchanger, and a temperature difference between a temperature of the PE component and an ambient temperature,” when added to the other features claimed in independent Claim 12.
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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, Jerry Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763