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 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 1-4, 7-8 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISHIZEKI et al. (US 2020/0346520) in view of Kim et al. (KR20150098984).
In regards to claim 1, ISHIZEKI discloses a thermal management system (Fig. 1) for an electric vehicle (EV), comprising: a refrigerant system (refrigerant circuit R) including a compressor (2), an interior condenser (4), an outside heat exchanger (7), and an expansion valve (73); a coolant system (heat medium circulating device 61, 62) including a pump (63), and a plurality of thermal loads including a traction motor (refer to par. 43), and an energy source (55), (refer to par. 43); a coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64) that includes a coolant flow path (heat medium pipe 67, 69) for transporting coolant therethrough, a refrigerant flow path (a refrigerant pipe 13) for transporting refrigerant therethrough, wherein the coolant flow path and the refrigerant flow path are positioned in order to transfer heat from one of the coolant and the refrigerant to the other of the coolant and the refrigerant (implicit normal operation), and a secondary heater (66) that is positioned to heat both the refrigerant and the coolant in the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64), wherein the expansion valve (73) is upstream from the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64), and wherein the secondary heater (66) is sized to evaporate all of the refrigerant passing through the refrigerant flow path, a control system (32) that is operatively connected to the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64), and is programmed to: operate the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64) in a secondary-heat-only mode in which the secondary heater (66) evaporates the refrigerant in the refrigerant flow path (13) without any heat input from the coolant in the coolant flow path (see paragraphs 105-110, Figure 8: pump 68 stopped, heater 66 on), and to operate the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64) in a heat-scavenging mode in which at least some heat from the coolant in the coolant flow path evaporates the refrigerant in the refrigerant flow path (see paragraphs 112-120, Fig. 9, both pumps 63,68 activated, heater 66 on).
ISHIZEKI fails to explicitly teach a radiator. Kim teaches a system wherein a radiator (first and second radiators 510, 520; refer to par. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of ISHIZEKI to include a radiator as taught by Kim in order to circulate a coolant through the vehicle's electrical components, and a battery stack of an electric vehicle (refer to par. 38 of Kim).
In regards to claim 2, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein in the heat-scavenging mode the coolant in the coolant flow path (67, 69) and the secondary heater (66) together evaporate the refrigerant in the refrigerant flow path (see paragraphs 112-120, Fig. 9, both pumps 63,68 activated, heater 66 on).
In regards to claim 3, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein, in the secondary-heat-only mode, the secondary heater (66) heats the coolant in the coolant flow path (see paragraphs 105-110, Figure 8: pump 68 stopped, heater 66 on).
In regards to claim 4, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein the secondary heater (66) is an electric heater (refer to par. 57).
In regards to claim 7, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein the energy source (55) is a traction battery that is connected to the traction motor to provide electrical power to the traction motor (refer to par. 43).
In regards to claim 8, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein the control system (32) is programmed to: operate the thermal management system (Fig. 3) in an outside heat exchanger mode in which refrigerant is evaporated in the outside heat exchanger (7) and not in the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64).
In regards to claim 13, ISHIZEKI discloses a method of operating a refrigerant system (R; Fig. 8) in an electric vehicle (EV), comprising:
a) compressing a refrigerant (via compressor 2) in the refrigerant system (R), thereby bringing the refrigerant from a first temperature (via a suction temperature sensor 44) and a first pressure to a second temperature and a second pressure (implicit normal operation; also, via temperature sensor 43 and pressure sensor 42), wherein the first temperature is sufficiently low that the first pressure is less than 1 atmosphere;
b) condensing (via condenser 4) the refrigerant after step a), thereby bringing the refrigerant from the second temperature and the second pressure to a third temperature and a third pressure (a temperature lower than second and a pressure lower than second in the normal explicit steps);
c) passing the refrigerant through an expansion valve (73) after step b), thereby bringing the refrigerant from the third temperature and the third pressure to a fourth temperature and a fourth pressure (a temperature lower than third and a pressure lower than third in the normal explicit steps);
h) determining, based on output from at least one sensor, that the first pressure is less than 1 atmosphere (a pressure less than 1 atm in the normal explicit steps);
d) evaporating the refrigerant after step c), in an evaporator that is a coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (64), and having a secondary heater (66), wherein the coolant- refrigerant heat exchanger (64) is positioned to transfer heat between a coolant in a coolant system (system of paths 67 and 69) of the electric vehicle and the refrigerant, wherein the evaporating is carried out by heating the refrigerant using the secondary heater (66), wherein use of the secondary heater (66) is based on the determination in step h), to bring the refrigerant from the fourth temperature and the fourth pressure to a fifth temperature and a fifth pressure (a temperature lower than fourth and a pressure lower than fourth in the normal explicit steps), wherein the fifth temperature is sufficiently high that the fifth pressure is greater than 1 atmosphere (see paragraphs 105-110, Figure 8: pump 68 stopped, heater 66 on);
e) compressing (via compressor 2) the refrigerant after step d), thereby bringing the refrigerant from the fifth temperature and the fifth pressure to beyond the fifth temperature and beyond the fifth pressure;
i) determining that the fifth pressure is greater than 1 atmosphere; and
j) stopping use of the secondary heater (66) based at least in part on the determination made in step i).
ISHIZEKI does not explicitly teach the steps of having different temperatures and pressures in the operation of the system. However, the steps of changing different temperature and pressure to another level of temperature and pressure during the operation of the thermal management system and method is an explicit normal operation that normally takes place.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of ISHIZEKI such that adding the steps of changing different temperature and pressure to another level of temperature and pressure during the operation of the thermal management method order to accurately determine that the heat generating device needs to be cooled and thereby control the respective heat medium circulating devices and to perform air conditioning of a vehicle interior.
In regards to claim 14, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 13. Further, ISHIZEKI teaches wherein step b) includes: f) passing an airflow across a condenser (4), wherein the condenser (4) contains the refrigerant, thereby heating the airflow (refer to par. 46); and
g) transporting the airflow into a cabin (an HVAC unit 10 in which air in the vehicle interior flows) of the electric vehicle to heat the cabin (refer to par. 46).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISHIZEKI et al. (US 2020/0346520) in view of Kim et al. (KR20150098984), further in view of BASTIEN et al. (FR3102550A1).
In regards to claim 5, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger includes a plurality of flow plates each having a plurality of faces and a peripheral edge, wherein the plurality of flow plates are sealingly joined together such that the coolant flow path and the refrigerant flow path are positioned between mutually facing ones of the faces of adjacent ones of the plurality of flow plates, and the secondary heater extends along the peripheral edge of each of the plurality of flow plates.
BASTIEN teaches a heat exchanger (Fig. 1) for an electric or hybrid motor vehicle wherein the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger (corresponding to heat exchanger 1; Fig. 1) includes a plurality of flow plates (12) each having a plurality of faces (6) and a peripheral edge (8), wherein the plurality of flow plates (12) are sealingly joined together (refer to par. 38) such that the coolant flow path (corresponding to path of a first fluid 30) and the refrigerant flow path (corresponding to path of a second fluid 32) are positioned between mutually facing ones of the faces of adjacent ones of the plurality of flow plates (12), and the secondary heater (electrical heater 50, see Fig 5) extends along the peripheral edge of each of the plurality of flow plates (12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of ISHIZEKI such that the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger includes a plurality of flow plates each having a plurality of faces and a peripheral edge, wherein the plurality of flow plates are sealingly joined together such that the coolant flow path and the refrigerant flow path are positioned between mutually facing ones of the faces of adjacent ones of the plurality of flow plates, and the secondary heater extends along the peripheral edge of each of the plurality of flow plates as taught by BASTIEN in order to provide both a battery heating function and a battery cooling function, depending on the target temperature for the batteries at a given time (refer to par. 11 of BASTIEN).
In regards to claim 6, ISHIZEKI as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the plurality of flow plates are aluminum.
BASTIEN teaches a heat exchanger (Fig. 1) for an electric or hybrid motor vehicle wherein the plurality of flow plates (12) are aluminum (refer to par. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of ISHIZEKI such that the plurality of flow plates being aluminum as taught by BASTIEN in order to provide thermally stable over time in a temperature range wider than that theoretically covered by the plates of the stack and/or by the fluids circulating in the heat exchanger 1 (refer to par. 68 of BASTIEN).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
BASTIEN et al. (FR3102550A1) in view of ISHIZEKI et al. (US 2020/0346520).
In regards to claim 11, BASTIEN as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 5. Further, BASTIEN teaches wherein the secondary heater (50) further includes a first end heater (resistive wires 51 which are bonded to the external faces 4) that is positioned to heat a first end of the plurality of flow plates (12) through a thickness of the flow plates (as can be seen in Fig. 5).
In regards to claim 12, BASTIEN as modified meets the claim limitations as set forth above in the rejection of claim 11. Further, BASTIEN wherein the secondary heater further includes a second end heater (resistive wires 52 which are bonded to the external faces 4) that is positioned to heat a second end of the plurality of flow plates (12) through the thickness of the flow plates (as can be seen in Fig. 5).
Response to arguments
Applicant argues all dependent claims are allowable for at least the same reasons as their respective independent claims. As the Examiner maintains that independent claims 1, 4, and 5 are unpatentable over the cited art for all the reasons set forth above, the dependent claims likewise remain unpatentable.
The Applicant argues that Ishizeki does not teach operating the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger in a "secondary-heat-only mode" in which the secondary heater (66) evaporates the refrigerant without any heat input from the coolant in the coolant flow path. Specifically, the Applicant contends that the determination of temperature Tout1 in paragraphs 105–110 of Ishizeki relates solely to the coolant temperature in the first circuit (61), not to a comparison between the temperature of the coolant in the second circuit (62) and the refrigerant temperature. The Applicant further contends that, because refrigerant temperatures downstream of the expansion valve are typically significantly lower than the example threshold of +10°C, heat transfer from the second coolant circuit to the refrigerant would inevitably occur whenever the pump in the second circuit is operating.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant's characterization of Ishizeki for the following reasons.
First, paragraphs 105–110 of Ishizeki, read in conjunction with Figure 8, describe a specific operating mode in which the pump 68 (associated with the second coolant circuit containing the battery) is stopped while the heater 66 is activated. The Examiner's rejection rests on the express disclosure in Ishizeki that pump 68 is stopped during this operating mode (see Fig. 8; paragraphs 105–110). When the pump 68 is stopped, forced circulation of coolant through the second circuit ceases. While the Applicant argues that residual or passive heat transfer from the stagnant coolant in the second circuit might still reach the refrigerant, the operative disclosure of Ishizeki describes the pump as stopped and the heater as the active source of energy input for evaporating the refrigerant. The Examiner maintains that a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the stopped-pump operating mode as functionally equivalent to the claimed "secondary-heat-only mode," because the intentional cessation of pump operation eliminates active heat scavenging from the battery coolant circuit.
Second, the Applicant's argument that passive heat conduction from a stagnant coolant loop would necessarily preclude a "secondary-heat-only mode" is not persuasive. The claim language requires that the secondary heater evaporate the refrigerant "without any heat input from the coolant in the coolant flow path." The Examiner's position is that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim language refers to an active, controlled heat input from a flowing coolant, not incidental thermal contact with a stagnant fluid. Ishizeki's disclosure of stopping pump 68, thereby eliminating active coolant-side heat exchange, meets this limitation under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Third, even if the Examiner's reading of Ishizeki on this point were found insufficient, the motivation to combine Ishizeki with Kim to arrive at the claimed thermal management system remains. The Applicant's arguments are directed exclusively to whether Ishizeki alone teaches the "secondary-heat-only mode" limitation and do not substantively challenge the proposed combination with Kim or the rationale for combining the references. Kim teaches a thermal management system incorporating a radiator, and the combination of Ishizeki and Kim is supported by the well-established principle that the use of known techniques to improve similar systems in predictable ways is prima facie obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-4 and 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishizeki in view of Kim is maintained.
B. Claims 5-6 Over Ishizeki in View of Kim, Further in View of Bastien
The Applicant's sole argument with respect to claims 5-6 is that Bastien does not remedy the alleged deficiency in Ishizeki identified for claim 1. As set forth in Section II.A above, the Examiner maintains that Ishizeki does teach, or at a minimum renders obvious, the "secondary-heat-only mode" limitation of claim 1. Because the Applicant's traversal of the rejection of claims 5–6 depends entirely on the same arguments advanced for claim 1, and those arguments are not persuasive for the reasons stated above, the rejection of claims 5-6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishizeki in view of Kim and Bastien is maintained.
C. Claim 13 Over Ishizeki in View of Kim
The Applicant has amended claim 13 to add steps h), i), and j), and has amended step d). The Applicant argues that the amended claim is directed to a novel and non-obvious method that specifically addresses the problem of refrigerant system pressure falling below 1 atmosphere and the associated risk of contaminant ingress. The Applicant contends that Ishizeki does not contemplate this problem or its solution, because Ishizeki does not describe specific pressures.
The Examiner maintains the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for the following reasons.
As an initial matter, the Examiner acknowledges the Applicant's amendment to claim 13 and the substantive distinction drawn by the Applicant, namely, that the method steps are specifically conditioned on a determination that the refrigerant pressure is less than 1 atmosphere (step h)), and that the secondary heater is stopped once pressure exceeds 1 atmosphere (steps i) and j)). These limitations represent arguable distinctions over the express disclosure of Ishizeki, which does not describe pressure monitoring or pressure-based control of the secondary heater in the manner now claimed.
However, the Examiner maintains that these distinctions do not render claim 13 patentable over the cited art. The sub-atmospheric refrigerant pressure condition that the Applicant identifies as a problem to be solved is a well-known phenomenon in refrigerant systems, particularly at low ambient or startup temperatures. It is established in the art that refrigerants operating below atmospheric pressure create the risk of air and moisture ingress if the system is not sealed perfectly. The use of pressure sensors to monitor refrigerant pressure and to control system components, including heaters, based on pressure readings is a matter of ordinary skill and represents routine engineering design choices in refrigerant system management. The Examiner therefore maintains that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate pressure-based control logic into the system of Ishizeki, as modified by Kim, in order to protect the system from contaminant ingress, a result-effective variable well understood in the art.
Furthermore, the Applicant's removal of the language "and without heating the refrigerant using the coolant-refrigerant heat exchanger" from step d) is noted. While the Examiner understands the Applicant's rationale for the removal, this amendment narrows the distinction from the prior art previously relied upon in the rejection of claim 13, and does not introduce limitations that overcome the rejection.
Accordingly, the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishizeki in view of Kim is maintained. Claim 14, which depends from claim 13, is similarly maintained.
D. Claims 11–12 Over Bastien in View of Ishizeki
The Examiner acknowledges that claims 9–10 have been cancelled and that claims 11–12 have been amended to depend from claim 5. The rejection of claims 11–12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Bastien in view of Ishizeki is maintained. The Applicant has not advanced substantive arguments traversing this rejection beyond the procedural amendments noted above. The Examiner notes that the Applicant has indicated these amendments are made without prejudice to pursuing the subject matter of cancelled claims 9–10 in a continuing application.
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 MARTHA TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-0590. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:00pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M.T/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights