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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/13/2024 and 10/23/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wakabayashi et al. (JP 2017152612 A) (of record, cited in IDS, Applicant provided translation used), hereafter referred to as Wakabayashi.
With regards to claim 1, Wakabayashi discloses:
A motor controller (Contents of Figs. 1 and 4), characterized in that the motor controller comprises: a box (2) (Fig. 1), wherein the box is provided with a liquid coolant flow channel (43) (Fig. 4), and a liquid inlet (41) (Fig. 4) and a liquid outlet (42) (Fig. 4) that are in communication with the liquid coolant flow channel (See Fig. 4; 41-43 are in fluid communication); a first power device (34) (Fig. 4), wherein the first power device (34) (Fig. 4) is disposed in the box (See Figs. 1 and 4) and on a side close to the liquid inlet (34 is closest to inlet 41, see Fig. 4.); and a plurality of second power devices (31, 32) (Fig. 4), wherein the plurality of second power devices (31, 32) (Fig. 4) are disposed in the box (See Figs. 1 and 4) and on a side close to the liquid outlet (31 and 32 are arranged downstream of 34, close to outlet 42, 31 being closest to the outlet. See Fig. 4.); the second power devices have a smaller heating power than the first power device (Paragraph [0026] discusses that the first power device 34 has a greater heating power than second power devices 31 and 32); and a liquid coolant (Not explicitly numbered, discussed in Paragraph [0025]) in the liquid coolant flow channel (43) (Fig. 4) is capable of separately exchanging heat with the first power device and the plurality of second power devices (See Fig. 4; Paragraph [0025] discusses that each component may exchange heat with the coolant in channel 43 through surface 44.).
With regards to claim 2, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 1, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the box (2) (Fig. 1) is provided with an auxiliary cooling structure (21-23, and 45) (Figs. 4, 5), wherein the auxiliary cooling structure is disposed corresponding to the liquid coolant flow channel (Liquid coolant flow channel 43; 45 follows the path of 43, 21-23 are directly above 43) (See Fig. 5).
With regards to claim 3, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 2, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the auxiliary cooling structure (45) (Fig. 5) comprises a plurality of turbulation structures (i.e., fins, see Fig. 5), wherein the plurality of turbulation structures are spaced apart in the liquid coolant flow channel (Each fin of 45 is spaced from the others) (See Fig. 5).
With regards to claim 5, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 3, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the turbulation structure (45) (Fig. 5) is a turbulation column or a turbulation rib (See Fig. 5, 45 is a rib).
With regards to claim 6, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 2, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the auxiliary cooling structure (21-23, and 45) (Figs. 4, 5) further comprises an air cooling structure (The many segments of 23 act as fins) (Fig. 4), wherein the air cooling structure is disposed on the box (Consider 23 visible within 2) (Fig. 1) and correspondingly disposed at an outer side of the liquid coolant flow channel (Disposed at an upper outer side of 43) (Fig. 4).
With regards to claim 8, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 6, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the air cooling structure (23) (Fig. 4) is a plurality of cooling fins spaced apart (See Fig. 4, the segments of 23 act as fins), or the air cooling structure is a plurality of cooling rib plates spaced apart.
With regards to claim 12, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 1, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the liquid inlet (41) (Fig. 4) and the liquid outlet (42) (Fig. 1) are provided on a same side of the box (See Fig. 4).
With regards to claim 13, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 1, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the box is provided with an interface unit (13) (Fig. 3), wherein the first power device and the plurality of second power devices (31, 32, 34) (Fig. 4) are each connected to an external device through the interface unit (31, 32, and 34 receive power via power terminal 13) (See Fig. 7).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi in view of Xie et al. (CN 204761941 U) (of record, cited in IDS, new English translation provided), hereafter referred to as Xie.
With regards to claim 4, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 3, but does not explicitly disclose:
characterized in that a quantity of the turbulation structures corresponding to the first power device is greater than a quantity of the turbulation structures corresponding to any one of the second power devices.
However, Xie discloses:
characterized in that a quantity of the turbulation structures (4) (Fig. 1) corresponding to the first power device (High power production of zone E) (Fig. 1) is greater than a quantity of the turbulation structures (3) (Fig. 1) corresponding to any one of the second power devices (Low power production of zones A through D). (Additionally, line 39 of page 3 through line 13 of page 4 discusses use of fins 4 instead of fins 3 in order to improve the efficacy of radiating heat to the cooling fluid. Notably, fins 4 are more dense - with more fins per unit area - than fins 3.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wakabayashi with the additional fin density for improved heat dissipation efficacy as taught by Xie. One of ordinary skill would know to place the higher density fins on the components that generate the most heat, and Xie explicitly discusses altering fin density for their case of non-uniform heat generation. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so in order to improve heating efficacy, extending the lifespan of the components.
Also, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined / modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination / modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi in view of Blain et al. (US 20150375596 A1), hereafter referred to as Blain.
With regards to claim 14, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 1, but does not disclose:
characterized in that the box is further provided with a connecting structure, wherein the connecting structure is configured to fix the motor controller to a mounting position.
However, Blain discloses:
characterized in that the box is further provided with a connecting structure (130) (Fig. 1), wherein the connecting structure is configured to fix the motor controller to a mounting position (See Paragraph [0019] and Fig. 1, the rear bulkhead includes a mount for the motor controller as well as the motor mount 130. When mounted to the motor mount, the motor would be fixed to a mounting position.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wakabayashi to include the motor mount as taught by Blain. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so in order to improve structural integrity of the system, and to allow for easier integration into electric vehicles.
Also, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined / modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination / modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi in view of Feldmann et al. (US 20220134866 A1), hereafter referred to as Feldmann.
With regards to claim 15, Wakabayashi discloses all as applied to claim 1, and additionally discloses:
characterized in that the power system comprises: a motor (M) (Fig. 7).
Wakabayashi does not explicitly disclose:
a traction battery, wherein the motor is connected to the traction battery through the motor controller.
However, Feldmann discloses:
a traction battery (Abstract), wherein the motor is connected to the traction battery through the motor controller (Paragraph [0003] describes driving an electric motor using power from a traction battery, with an inverter as an intermediate.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Wakabayashi to explicitly include a traction battery and associated connections, as taught by Feldmann. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a power source from which to power the motors from, and allowing for use in an electric vehicle.
Also, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined / modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination / modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
With regards to claim 16, Wakabayashi and Feldmann disclose all as applied to claim 15, and additionally disclose:
An electric apparatus (Contents of the power system described in the rejection of claim 15, which is an electronic apparatus.) (See Figs. 1, 4, and 7 of Wakabayashi, and Abstract and Paragraph [0003] of Feldmann.).
See also KSR, supra.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 9-11 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the device as recited in the subject matter of dependent claims 7 and 9, and at least in part, because claims 7 and 9 recite the limitations:
(Claim 7): “…characterized in that the air cooling structure and the first power device are disposed at two opposite sides of the liquid coolant flow channel, and the air cooling structure is disposed corresponding to the first power device.”
(Claim 9): “…characterized in that the box comprises: a box body, wherein a flow channel groove is formed in the box body; and a flow channel cover plate, wherein the flow channel cover plate is connected to the box body and closes an opening of the flow channel groove, and the flow channel cover plate and the flow channel groove enclose the liquid coolant flow channel.”
The aforementioned limitations, in combination with all remaining limitations of dependent claims 7 and 9, are believed to render the subject matter as allowable over the prior art references of record, taken either alone or in combination.
Wakabayashi et al. (JP 2017152612 A) (of record, cited in IDS) is believed to be the closest prior art reference, and is discussed above.
However, Wakabayashi fails to disclose, at least, the aforementioned allowable limitations of dependent claims 7 and 9.
The remaining prior art references teach various systems for cooling electronics related to motor controllers and inverters, particularly those that are similar in form to the instant Application. However, none of the prior art references, taken alone or in combination, are believed to teach and/or suggest the aforementioned allowable limitations of dependent claims 7 and 9.
Finally, the Office has not identified any double patenting issues. For all of the reasons outlined above, it is believed that the instant Application is allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liu et al. (US 11207982 B2), teaching a cooling system for an inverter for an electric vehicle, which includes a traction battery and motors.
Oechslen (US 20210001714 A1), teaching a housing for an electric drive train with associated active cooling integrated into the housing.
Söhnle (US 20200169147 A1), teaching a motor for an electrical vehicle with associated active cooling for a motor inverter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE OXENKNECHT whose telephone number is (703)756-1976. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at 571-272-3740. 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.
/K.O./Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/MANDEEP S BUTTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights