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 .
Status of the Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the reply dated 11/13/2025 are as follows:
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-10, 12, and 16-20 are amended,
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Merrill et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,755,331, “Merrill”).
Regarding claim 1, Merrill discloses a cooling system (fig 4) comprising:
a cooling channel having a nominal width (see annotated fig 4 below);
N longitudinal portions (see annotated fig 4 below) of the cooling channel, where N is an integer greater than
one;
an inlet (54) connected to an end of a first one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel;
an outlet (56) connected to an end of a last one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel; and
at least one U-turn location (62) within the cooling channel connecting ends of at least two middle ones of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel,
wherein the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location is tapered (see annotated fig 4 below)
such that the cooling channel includes a reduced channel width at the at least one U-turn
location relative to the nominal width.
PNG
media_image1.png
428
600
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Merrill further discloses wherein the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel are arranged over one another in a vertical direction (see annotated fig 4 above).
Regarding claim 4, Merrill further discloses wherein the cooling channel
includes an upper cooling channel (see annotated fig 4 below), and wherein a bottom side (see annotated fig 4 below) of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location is tapered such that the reduced channel width of the upper cooling channel progressively narrows towards an upper side (see annotated fig 4 below) of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location.
PNG
media_image2.png
428
701
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Merrill further discloses wherein the cooling channel
includes a lower cooling channel, and wherein a bottom side (see annotated fig 4 below) of the lower cooling channel (see annotated fig 4 below) at the at least one U-turn location (92) is tapered such that the reduced channel width of the lower cooling channel progressively narrows towards an upper side (see annotated fig 4 below) of the lower cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location.
PNG
media_image3.png
428
692
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Geskes et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0090486, “Geskes”).
Regarding claim 12, Geskes discloses a cooling system (figs 13.1,14.1) comprising: a cooling channel having a nominal width;
N longitudinal portions (see annotated fig 14.1 below) of the cooling channel extending longitudinally, where N is an integer greater than one;
an inlet (1) connected to an end of a first one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel;
an outlet (2) connected to an end of a last one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel;
at least one U-turn location (see annotated fig 14.1 below) within the cooling channel connecting ends of at least two middle ones of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel; and
B annular baffles (see annotated fig 13.1 below) arranged in within the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location where B is an integer greater than zero, wherein the B annular baffles divide the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location into subchannels arranged in a nested configuration of parallel channels.
PNG
media_image4.png
272
589
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
287
548
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Geskes further discloses wherein B is greater than one and the B annular baffles are uniformly spaced (see annotated fig 13.1 above).
Regarding claim 14, Geskes further discloses wherein B is greater than two and the B annular baffles are spaced by an increasing width (see annotated fig 13.1 below).
Regarding claim 15, Geskes further discloses wherein the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel are arranged over one another in a vertical direction (see annotated fig 14.1 above).
Regarding claim 16, Geskes further discloses wherein the cooling channel
at the at least one U-turn location includes a reduced channel width that is tapered in a range from 30% to 70% from the nominal width (see annotated fig 13.1. below, as the width would be 66%).
PNG
media_image6.png
284
548
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merrill as applied to claim1 above, and further in view of Geskes et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0090486, “Geskes”).
Regarding claim 6, baffles arranged in the at least one U-turn location, where B is an integer greater than zero, wherein the B annular baffles divide the cooling channel into subchannels arranged in a nested configuration of parallel channels. Geskes, however, disclose a cooling system (fig 13.) including B annular baffles (see annotated fig 13.1 below) arranged in an at least one U-turn location, where B is an integer greater than zero, wherein the B annular baffles divide the cooling channel into subchannels arranged in a nested configuration of parallel channels. Geskes teaches that the baffles promote swirling and thus increase heat exchange (see ¶0129). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Merrill to provide the baffles of Geskes in order to improve the heat exchange performance of the cooling system.
PNG
media_image7.png
287
548
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Merrill and Geskes discloses all previous claim limitations. Merrill, as modified, further discloses wherein B is greater than one and the B annular baffles are uniformly spaced (see annotate fig 13.1 above, Geskes).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Merrill and Geskes discloses all previous claim limitations. Merrill, as modified, further discloses wherein B (3, see annotated fig 13.1 below, Geskes) is greater than two and the B annular baffles are spaced by an increasing width from an innermost to an outermost of the B annular baffles (see annotated fig 13.1 below, Geskes).
PNG
media_image8.png
287
548
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 3, 11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merrill alone.
Regarding claim 3, Merrill discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Merrill does not explicitly disclose wherein the cooling channel is tapered at the at least one U-turn location in a range from 30% to 70% from the nominal width. However, since Merrill teaches providing a tapered U-turn, the relative range of the width is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable with a recognized result. In this case the recognized result is that the width of the U-turn will determine the number of tubes that can be employed in the cooling system (see col 12, lines 30-40). It would not have been inventive to determine the optimal width via routine experimentation and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Merrill to have the width 30% to 70% from the nominal width in order to optimize the number of tubes.
Regarding claim 11, Merrill discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Merrill does not explicitly discloses a vehicle comprising:
a battery system; and
the cooling system of claim 1 in thermal contact with one or more surfaces of the battery system
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is old and well known in the art of heat exchanger to provide a heat exchanger to cool a vehicle battery. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Merrill to provide the heat exchanger of claim 1 to cool a vehicle battery.
Regarding claim 20, Merrill discloses cooling system comprising: a cooling channel having a nominal width (see annotated fig 4 below);
N longitudinal portions (see annotated fig 4 below) of the cooling channel, where N is an integer greater than
one;
an inlet (54) connected to an end of a first one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel;
an outlet (56) connected to an end of a last one of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel; and
at least one U-turn location (92) connecting ends of at least two middle ones of the N longitudinal portions of the cooling channel,
wherein a bottom side of an upper cooling channel of the cooling channel at the at
least one U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the upper cooling
channel at the at least one U-turn location (see annotated fig 4 below),
wherein a bottom side of a lower cooling channel of the cooling channel at the at
least one U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the lower cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location ((see annotated fig 4 below)), and wherein a cross-sectional area of the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location progressively decreases from the bottom side to the upper side of the upper cooling channel and from the bottom side to the upper side of the lower cooling channel (see annotated fig 4 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
428
696
media_image9.png
Greyscale
However, Merrill does not explicitly disclose wherein the cooling channel is tapered at the at least one U-turn location in a range from 30% to 70% from the nominal width. However, since Merrill teaches providing a tapered U-turn, the relative range of the width is considered a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable with a recognized result. In this case the recognized result is that the width of the U-turn will determine the number of tubes that can be employed in the cooling system (see col 12, lines 30-40). It would not have been inventive to determine the optimal width via routine experimentation and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Merrill to have the width 30% to 70% from the nominal width in order to optimize the number of tubes.
9. Claim(s) 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Merrill as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al. (Chinese Patent Publication CN202057223U, “Li”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 9, Merrill discloses all previous claim limitation. However, Merrill does not explicitly disclose a surface treatment film coated on an inner surface of the at least one U turn location, wherein the surface treatment film is configured to reduce a coolant-wall contact angle of the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn from the nominal width. Li, however, discloses a heat exchanger wherein tube has a surface treatment film coated (2.1) on an inner surface, wherein the surface treatment film is configured to reduce a coolant-wall contact angle (if coolant were to flow as shown below). Li teaches that the coating reduces blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency (¶0002-0005). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Merrill to provide the coating of Li at the U-turn in order to reduce blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency.
PNG
media_image10.png
305
476
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Merrill and Li discloses all previous claim limitations. Merrill further discloses wherein the at least one U turn location comprises a shape memory alloy (¶0027, Li).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geskes as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Merrill et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,755,331, “Merrill”).
Regarding claim 17, Geskes discloses all previous claim limitations. However, Geskes does not explicitly disclose wherein:
the cooling channel includes an upper cooling channel and a lower cooling channel,
a bottom side of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location to provide a reduced channel width that progressively narrows from the bottom side toward the upper side of the upper cooling channel, an
a bottom side of the lower cooling channel at the at least one U U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the lower cooling channel at the at least one
U-turn location to provide a reduced channel width that progressive narrows from the bottom side toward the upper side of the lower cooling channel.
Merrill, however, discloses a cooling system (fig 4) the cooling channel includes an upper cooling channel and a lower cooling channel (see annotate fig 4 below)
a bottom side of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the upper cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location to provide a reduced channel width that progressively narrows from the bottom side toward the upper side of the upper cooling channel (see annotated fig 4 below),
a bottom side of the lower cooling channel at the at least one U-turn location is tapered towards an upper side of the lower cooling channel at the at least one
U-turn location to provide a reduced channel width that progressive narrows from the bottom side toward the upper side of the lower cooling channel (see annotated fig 4 below). Merrill teaches that this allow for an increase in the number of tubes that can be employed in the cooling system (see col 12, lines 30-40). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Geskes to provide the tapers of Merrill in order to increase the number of tubes in the cooling system.
PNG
media_image11.png
428
696
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geskes as applied to claims 12 and 16 above, and further in view of Li et al. (Chinese Patent Publication CN202057223U, “Li”, previously cited).
Regarding claim 18, Geskes discloses all previous claim limitation. However, Merrill does not explicitly disclose a surface treatment film coated on an inner surface of the at least one U turn location, wherein the surface treatment film is configured to reduce a coolant-wall contact angle of the cooling channel at the at least one U-turn from the nominal width. Li, however, discloses a heat exchanger wherein tube has a surface treatment film coated (2.1) on an inner surface, wherein the surface treatment film is configured to reduce a coolant-wall contact angle (if coolant were to flow as shown below). Li teaches that the coating reduces blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency (¶0002-0005). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Geskes to provide the coating of Li at the U-turn in order to reduce blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency.
PNG
media_image10.png
305
476
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Geskes discloses all previous claim limitation. However, Geskes does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one U turn location comprises a shape memory alloy. Li, however, discloses a cooling system wherein a tube has shape memory alloy ((¶0027). Li teaches that the coating reduces blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency (¶0002-0005). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Geskes to provide the coating of Li at the U-turn in order to reduce blockage and thus improves heat exchange efficiency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Nakamura does not teach the claims as amended. However, newly cited Merrill and Geskes are now being relied upon to teach these limitations.
Applicant argues (pages 14-16) that Li fails to teach the reduced angle as required by independent claims 9 and 18. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees; Li teaches a different angle with contact with the shape memory alloy, thus there would be an angle relative to a reference plane within the tube which is reduced. Thus meeting the claim limitation.
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 HARRY E ARANT whose telephone number is (571)272-1105. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10-6 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at (571)270-7740. 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.
/HARRY E ARANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763