Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/761,784

ACCUMULATOR AND VEHICLE DRIVING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 02, 2024
Examiner
DUKE, EMMANUEL E
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Aisin Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
776 granted / 1133 resolved
-1.5% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1160
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1133 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 1. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-5, 7-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUZUKI (English Translated Japanese Patent Publication No.: H02189223-A), hereinafter referred to as SUZUKI ‘223, in view of Hara et al (EP Patent Specification No.: 1049235-B1), hereinafter referred to as Hara et al ‘235. Regarding claim 1, SUZUKI ‘223 discloses an accumulator (22) that separates a liquid refrigerant from a gas refrigerant used for cooling and heating in a vehicle interior of a vehicle {see Figs. 1-3: ¶ [0001]}, wherein heat is exchanged between a coolant (water) that cools any one of a motor (1) that drives the vehicle, and at least one of the gas refrigerants (38) and the liquid refrigerant (36) stored in the accumulator {see Figs. 1-3: ¶ [0001]}. However, SUZUKI ‘223 fails to disclose the limitations of the accumulator that separates a liquid refrigerant from a gas refrigerant; and a power conversion module that operates the motor. RHEE et al. ‘126 teach: the concept of the accumulator (190) that separates a liquid refrigerant from a gas refrigerant {see Figs. 4-5: ¶¶ [0055] and [0062-0063]}. Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify SUZUKI ‘223 accumulator by the accumulator of RHEE et al. ‘126 so as to separates a liquid refrigerant from a gas refrigerant, in order to facilitate the low-temperature, low-pressure gaseous refrigerant discharged from the accumulator to be circulated through an outside cooling system {RHEE et al. ‘126 – ¶ [0073]}. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the SUZUKI ‘223 in view of RHEE et al. ‘126 to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1. Hara et al ‘235 teach: the concept of wherein heat is exchanged between the coolant that cools any one of the motors that drives the vehicle and a power conversion module (U) that operates the motor {see ¶¶ [0027-0029]}. Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify SUZUKI ‘223 in view of Hara et al ‘235 to include exchange of heat between the coolant that cools any one of the motors that drives the vehicle and a power conversion module (U) that operates the motor, in order to facilitate cooling of both motor and power module with a simple structure {Hara et al ‘235 – ¶ [0017]}. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the SUZUKI ‘223 in view of Hara et al ‘235 to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1. Regarding claim 2, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, RHEE et al. ‘126 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 1, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235 further teach the limitation of wherein oil serving as the coolant for cooling the motor is cooled by heat exchange {see ¶ [0031]}. Regarding claim 3, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, RHEE et al. ‘126 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 2, SUZUKI ‘223 discloses wherein the coolant circulates in a piping unit (33) disposed inside of the accumulator (22) {as shown in Fig. 2: Page 3, line 34-36}. Regarding claim 4, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, RHEE et al. ‘126 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 3, SUZUKI ‘223 discloses wherein the piping unit (33) is disposed so as to be immersed in the liquid refrigerant, the piping unit being inside the accumulator (22) {as shown in Fig. 2: Page 4, lines 4-7; liquid refrigerant from (37)}. Regarding claim 5, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, RHEE et al. ‘126 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 4, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by RHEE et al. ‘126 further disclose the limitations of wherein the piping unit (IHX) is formed in a spiral shape {as shown in Figs. 4-5: ¶ [0065]}. Regarding claim 7, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, Hara et al ‘235 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 1, SUZUKI ‘223 discloses wherein the coolant circulates in a piping unit (33) disposed inside of the accumulator (22) {as shown in Fig. 2: Page 3, line 34-36}. Regarding claim 8, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, Hara et al ‘235 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 7, SUZUKI ‘223 disclose wherein the piping unit (33) is disposed so as to be immersed in the liquid refrigerant, the piping unit being inside the accumulator (22) {as shown in Fig. 2: Page 4, lines 4-7; liquid refrigerant from (37)}. Regarding claim 9, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223, Hara et al ‘235 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claim 8, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by RHEE et al. ‘126 further disclose the limitations of wherein the piping unit (IHX) is formed in a spiral shape {as shown in Figs. 4-5: ¶ [0065]}. Regarding claim 11, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach a vehicle driving device comprising: the motor (M) {see ¶ [0001]}; the power conversion module (U) {see ¶ [0028]}; a housing (10) that accommodates at least the motor and the power conversion module {as shown in Figs. 4 and 8: ¶¶ [0028]; and the accumulator (90) according to claim 1 attached to the housing {as shown in Figs. 3 and 8-9: of SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235; {¶¶ [0025-0027], [0031] and [0033-0034]}. Regarding claim 12, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the vehicle driving device according to claim 11, further comprising: an oil cooler (C1) that exchanges heat between cooling water serving as the coolant for cooling the power conversion module and oil serving as the coolant for cooling the motor, wherein the cooling water exchanges heat with the oil in the oil cooler after being cooled by heat exchange in the accumulator {see ¶¶ [0035-0037]}. Regarding claim 13, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235 teach the limitations of a vehicle driving device comprising: the motor (M); the power conversion module (U); a housing (10) that accommodates at least the motor and the power conversion module {as shown in Figs. 8, 12-13 and 15}; and the accumulator according to claim 2 attached to the housing {as shown in Fig. 3}. Regarding claim 14, SUZUKI ‘223 as modified by Hara et al ‘235 further teach the limitations of vehicle driving device according to claim 13, further comprising: an oil cooler (C1) that exchanges heat between cooling water serving as the coolant for cooling the power conversion module and oil serving as the coolant for cooling the motor, wherein the cooling water exchanges heat with the oil in the oil cooler after being cooled by heat exchange in the accumulator {see ¶¶ [0035-0037]}. Claims 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUZUKI ‘223, RHEE et al. ‘126 and Hara et al ‘235 as applied to claims 4, 3, 8 and 7 above, respectively; further in view of ESHIMA (WO Publication No.: 2020100366 A1), hereinafter referred to as ESHIMA ‘366. Regarding claims 6 and 10, the combination of SUZUKI ‘223 and Hara et al ‘235 disclose and teach the accumulator according to claims 3 and 7, respectively, EXCEPT for the limitations of wherein the piping unit is disposed so as to be wound around an outside of accumulator, the outside corresponding to a place where the liquid refrigerant being stored. ESHIMA ‘366 teaches: the concept of the piping unit (11a) is disposed so as to be wound around an outside of accumulator (10), the outside corresponding to a place where the liquid refrigerant being stored {as shown in Fig. 8: Page 13}. Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify SUZUKI ‘223 in view of ESHIMA ‘366 to include the piping unit disposed so as to be wound around an outside of accumulator, the outside corresponding to a place where the liquid refrigerant being stored, in order to facilitate hot gas to flow over the entire surface of the accumulator {ESHIMA ‘366 - Page 13}. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the SUZUKI ‘223 in view of ESHIMA ‘366 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 6 and 10. Conclusion 2. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN-102059957-A to NASU, SHINGO. EP-1049234-B1 to HARA TAKESHI Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL E DUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5290. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM Monday thru Friday; 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. 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. /EMMANUEL E DUKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763 01/20/2026 /FRANTZ F JULES/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589438
APPARATUS FOR COOLING AND/OR DRYING A SHRINK CHUCK AND METHOD FOR COOLING AND/OR DRYING A TOOL HOLDER, IN PARTICULAR A SHRINK CHUCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584466
NEW HYBRID POWER CYCLE FOR 100% CLEAN, AND CONTINUOUS (24x7) HAZARD-FREE LOW-COST POWER GENERATION AND TRANSPORTATION WITHOUT ANY FUEL AND USING ONLY AMBIENT THERMAL ENERGY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576694
METHOD FOR MONITORING A REFRIGERANT FILL-QUANTITY IN A REFRIGERATION MACHINE, REFRIGERATION MACHINE, AND MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577950
COATING LAYER HAVING A CONFORMING MATERIAL FOR A COMPRESSOR AND METHOD OF USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558942
VEHICLE THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+27.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1133 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month