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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “a plurality of the heat sinks is connected in parallel” in lines 5-6. The examiner suggests amending the limitation to read “a plurality of the heat sinks are connected in parallel” to be consistent with the plural term “heat sinks”.
Claim 2 recites “a branch flow control valve for adjusting a flow rate of the plurality of branch pipes” in lines 2-3. The examiner suggests amending the limitation to read “a branch flow control valve for adjusting a flow rate of the refrigerant flowing within the plurality of branch pipes”, for improved clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (b)
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.
Claim 2 is 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.
Claim 2 recites “the plurality of branch pipes connecting between the main pipe and the plurality of heat sinks connected in parallel” in lines 3-4. The above limitation is not clear and as currently written the limitation may be reasonably interpreted in different ways. The instant specification does not adequately provide clarity about the intended meaning of the limitation. For example, the above limitation may be interpreted to mean at least: 1) that the plurality of branch pipes are connected at a location which is between the main pipe and the plurality of heat sinks, wherein the plurality of heat sinks are connected in parallel, OR 2) that the plurality of branch pipes serve to connect the main pipe and the plurality of heat sinks to one another in a parallel arrangement. The examiner notes that for purposes of examination, the above limitation will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation during review of the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishikawa et al. (WO 2017033412 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 07/02/2024, citations herein directed to the English machine transition attached to this office action).
Regarding Claim 1, Nishikawa discloses a battery cooling device (heat exchangers, 3, and circulation path, 8) of a vehicle for cooling a battery (battery unit, 2) by using a heat sink (heat exchangers, 3) including a channel (cooling pipe, 31) formed therein and through which a refrigerant (coolant) flows (Figures 1 and 8, [0008, 0033, 0043]). Nishikawa further discloses that the battery cooling device (heat exchangers, 3, and circulation path, 8) comprises a unit heat sink set including: a heat sink group (see annotated Figure 1 below) in which a plurality of the heat sinks (heat exchangers, 3) are connected in parallel, and a main pipe (main circulation path, 8A) connected to the heat sink group (see annotated Figure 1 below) (Figure 1, [0048-0049]). Nishikawa further discloses that the main pipe (main circulation path, 8A) includes: a connecting section (joint, 23) capable of removably connecting a main pipe (main circulation path, 8A) of another unit heat sink set; and a main flow control valve (flow rate adjustment unit, 20) for adjusting a flow rate of the refrigerant (coolant) flowing from the main pipe (main circulation path, 8A) to the heat sink group (see annotated Figure 1 below) (Figures 4 and 11, [0050, 0054]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
544
815
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 Nishikawa (WO 2017033412 A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Nishikawa further discloses a plurality of branch pipes (branch section, 8B) which are each provided with a branch flow control valve (flow rate adjustment valves, 24) for adjusting a flow rate of the plurality of branch pipes (branch section, 8B), the plurality of branch pipes (branch section, 8B) connecting the main pipe (main circulation path, 8A) and the plurality of heat sinks (heat exchangers, 3) in parallel (Figures 1 and 12, [0049, 0052, 0058]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
Regarding Claim 3, Nishikawa further discloses that the main flow control valve (flow rate adjustment unit, 20) may operate by adjusting the flow path diameter of the branch pipes (branch section, 8B) thereby changing the flow rate of the refrigerant (coolant) circulating to the heat sinks (heat exchangers, 3), thus reducing the temperature difference between the plurality of heat sinks (heat exchangers, 3) and ensuring uniform cooling (Figures 1 and 11, [0054]). Nishikawa further discloses that the adjustment of the main flow control valve (flow rate adjustment unit, 20) is performed by adjusting the flow path diameter of the branch pipes (branch section, 8B) (Figures 1 and 11, [0054]).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the degree of opening (i.e., flow path diameter) of the main flow control valve (flow rate adjustment unit, 20) is adjusted based on a number of heat sinks (heat exchangers, 3) in the heat sink group, in order to perform uniform cooling (Figures 1 and 11, [0054]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
Regarding Claim 4, Nishikawa further discloses that the channel (cooling pipe, 31) formed in the heat sink (heat exchangers, 3) includes a unit channel in which the refrigerant (coolant) before cooling a battery cell (base cell, 1) flows from one end (connecting end, 32) of the unit channel and the refrigerant (coolant) after cooling the battery cell (base cell, 1) is discharged from another end (connecting end, 32) of the unit channel (Figures 5 and 8, [0017, 0043]). Nishikawa further discloses that the unit channel has an overall serpentine path shape which includes at least one U-shape (see Figure 8).
The examiner notes that the term “a width” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of the prior art. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the unit channel would necessarily have a width which is shorted than a cell width of the battery cell (base cell, 1), as the total width (dimension in the up and down direction of the page as shown in Figure 5) of the heat sink (heat exchangers, 3) comprising the unit channel appears to be smaller than the total cell width (dimension in the up and down direction of the page as shown in Figure 5) of the battery cell (base cell, 1) based on Figure 5. In any case, the skilled artisan would appreciate that there is necessarily some width of the unit channel which may be selected as “a width” which is smaller than a cell width of the battery cell (base cell, 1).
The examiner further notes that the claim recites a product, but also includes a limitation directed to a particular method for obtaining the structure of the claimed product. Specifically, Claim 4 recites that the U-shape is formed by folding. Patentability of product-by-process claims is based on the product itself. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP 2113 citing In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695,698, 227 USPQ964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.
/E.E.F./
Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights