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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “top cover comprises power terminals” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10, in lines 1-2, recites “An apparatus comprising: top cover”. It should read: An apparatus comprising: a top cover. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 7-8, and 10-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Shigyo et al. (US 20170334375 A1, and Shigyo hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1, Shigyo discloses an apparatus comprising:
a top cover (20, fig. 1), wherein the top cover comprises power terminals (53, fig. 3; “The terminal 53 has about 60 to 80 poles in total including a signal system terminal and a power system terminal”, [0064]) sealed by a gasket (31, fig. 1);
a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (including 10 and 31, fig. 1) comprising a gasket (31, fig. 1) to seal connector headers (50, fig. 1); and
a base cover (22, fig. 1), the base cover attached with the top cover and sealed with a gasket (30, fig. 1; “The cover 22 and the case 20 are fixed by the screws 41, together with the seal material 30”, [0075]).
Regarding Claim 7, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus is waterproof (“The case 20 accommodates the printed wiring board 10 therein together with the cover 22, and protects the printed wiring board 10 to which the electronic components are mounted from water, foreign matters and the like”, [0035]. See also [0033]).
Regarding Claim 8, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the base cover comprises an aluminum enclosure (fig. 1; “aluminum-based steel plate is preferably used as the material of the cover 22”, [0073]).
Regarding Claim 10, Shigyo discloses an apparatus comprising:
top cover (20, fig. 1), wherein the top cover comprises connector headers (50a-50c);
a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (10, fig. 1); and
a base cover that covers the PCBA (22, fig. 1), the base cover attached with the top cover (fig. 1; “The cover 22 and the case 20 are fixed by the screws 41”, [0075]).
Regarding Claim 11, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the PCBA comprises press fit pins (53, fig. 3; “The terminal 53 and the penetrating through hole of the printed wiring board 10 are connected using a conductive alloy (not illustrated) such as solder. In addition, a press-fit terminal (not illustrated) may be used as the terminal 53, and the terminal 53 and the printed wiring board 10 may be mechanically and electrically connected”, [0065]).
Regarding Claim 13, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the top cover comprises molded-in headers (fig. 3, “51 is molded using resin by an injection molding method”, [0063]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda et al. (US 20130094269 A1, and Maeda hereinafter) in view of Shigyo.
Regarding Claim 1, Maeda discloses an apparatus comprising:
a top cover (fig. 3 shows label for housing 10, the top portion corresponds to lid 8 (unlabeled); “The lid 8 is provided with a first opening 202 and a second opening 204”, [0087]), wherein the top cover comprises power terminals (fig. 3, “204 is provided with the DC connector 138 for transferring DC power with respect to the battery 136”, [0087]) sealed by a gasket (“8 is provided with seal members (not shown) on an inner wall thereof around … the second opening 204”, [0088]);
a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (20, fig. 3) comprising a gasket to seal connector headers (21, fig. 3; “the seal member which comes into contact with the lid 8 can press the connector 21, whereby air-tightness is improved”, [0088]); and
a base cover (119, fig. 3), the base cover attached with the top cover (fig. 3).
Maeda does not explicitly disclose the base cover attached with the top cover are sealed with a gasket
Shigyo discloses a base cover (22, fig. 1) attached with a top cover (20, fig. 1) and sealed with a gasket (30, fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Maeda to incorporate the teachings of Shigyo so that the base cover attached with the top cover are sealed with a gasket, in order to provide protection against entering of water or other environmental factors (“The seal material 30 waterproofs a space between an opening edge portion 20a of the case 20 and an inner surface of a peripheral edge portion 22b of the cover 22”, [0033] of Shigyo).
Regarding Claim 2, Maeda/Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus comprises an electronic control unit of a vehicle (Maeda, fig. 2; “The power conversion apparatus according to the present invention may be applied not only to the hybrid motor vehicles, but also to so-called electric motor vehicles which travel only using a motor”, [0069] and “A control circuit 172 calculates amounts of control of the motor generator MG1, the motor generator MG2 or the motor 195 for auxiliary equipment on the basis of a command from the connector 21, and calculates whether to be operated as a motor or a generator, generates control pulses depending on the result of calculation, and supplies the control pulse to a driver circuit 174 or a driver circuit 350A of the power module 350 for auxiliary equipment”, [0075]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda in view of Shigyo, further in view of Jones et al. (US 20040121642 A1, and Jones hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 3, Maeda/Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the connector headers are soldered to the PCBA.
Jones discloses connector headers (3, fig. 1) are soldered to a printed circuit board (6, fig. 1, “the PCB 6 and the header connector 3 combination is subjected to a wave soldering process”, [0026]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Maeda and Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Jones so that the connector headers are soldered to the PCBA, in order to provide anchoring means.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeda in view of Shigyo, further in view of Fino (US 20080291646 A1, and Fino hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 4, Maeda/Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the base cover acts as a heat sink.
Fino discloses a base cover (6, fig. 1) acts as a heat sink (“base 6 of housing 5 performs the function of heat sink for dissipating the heat which is produced by electric/electronic components”, [0016]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Maeda and Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Fino so that a base cover acts as a heat sink, in order to provide redundant heat sink means that is continuously available and could prevent overheating in case the flow of cooling medium is interrupted (“Generally, in addition to its natural containing and mechanical protection function, base of housing performs the function of heat sink for dissipating the heat which is produced by electric/electronic components”, [0004] of Fino).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigyo in view of Babic et al. (US 20200052605 A1, and Babic hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 5, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the top cover comprises a pressure vent.
Babic discloses a top cover (90, fig. 1) comprises a pressure vent (“the housing cover 90 can additionally incorporate a pressure equalization opening”, [0052]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Babic so that the top cover comprises a pressure vent, in order to allow pressure equalization (“For the purposes of pressure equalization the housing cover 90 can additionally incorporate a pressure equalization opening”, [0052] of Babic).
Regarding Claim 14, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 10 but does not explicitly disclose the top cover comprises a pressure vent.
Babic discloses a top cover (90, fig. 1) comprises a pressure vent (“the housing cover 90 can additionally incorporate a pressure equalization opening”, [0052]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Jones so that the top cover comprises a pressure vent, in order to allow pressure equalization (“For the purposes of pressure equalization the housing cover 90 can additionally incorporate a pressure equalization opening”, [0052] of Babic).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigyo in view of Mita et al. (US 6220380 B1, and Mita hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 6, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the apparatus is located on an undercarriage of a vehicle.
Mita discloses a control unit apparatus (11, fig. 1) is located on an undercarriage of a vehicle (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of so that the apparatus is located on an undercarriage of a vehicle, in order to, for instance, lower the center of gravity and optimize space utilization. Furthermore, a PHOSITA would have recognized that even if the apparatus is intended to be disposed in a different location, the above modification would be equivalent to a mere rearrangement of parts. Rearrangement of parts has been ruled to carry no patentable weight (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). See also MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C).
Claims 9, 12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigyo in view of Yang et al. (US 20140334104 A1, and Yang hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 9, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the base cover comprises thermal pads to assist with thermal transfer.
Yang discloses a base cover (20, fig. 2) comprises thermal pads (50, fig. 2) to assist with thermal transfer (“a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20. Therefore, the heat generated by the heating elements 41 is conducted to the electronic control board 40 and the heat radiating pad 50, and conducted to the base 20 at a lower side, such that a heat radiating mechanism is formed”, [0031]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that the base cover comprises thermal pads to assist with thermal transfer, in order to radiate heat generated by the electronic components inside the cover (“In order to radiate heat generated by the heating elements 41, a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20”, [0031] of Yang).
Regarding Claim 12, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 10 but does not explicitly disclose the base cover acts as a heat sink.
Yang discloses a base cover (20, fig. 2) acts as a heat sink (“the heat generated by the heating elements 41 is conducted to the electronic control board 40 and the heat radiating pad 50, and conducted to the base 20 at a lower side, such that a heat radiating mechanism is formed”, [0031]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that the base cover acts as a heat sink, in order to provide additional means to radiate heat generated by the electronic components inside the cover (“In order to radiate heat generated by the heating elements 41, a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20”, [0031] of Yang).
Regarding Claim 15, Shigyo discloses the apparatus of claim 10 but does not explicitly disclose the base cover comprises thermal pads to assist with thermal transfer.
Yang discloses a base cover (20, fig. 2) comprises thermal pads (50, fig. 2) to assist with thermal transfer (“a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20. Therefore, the heat generated by the heating elements 41 is conducted to the electronic control board 40 and the heat radiating pad 50, and conducted to the base 20 at a lower side, such that a heat radiating mechanism is formed”, [0031]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that the base cover comprises thermal pads to assist with thermal transfer, in order to radiate heat generated by the electronic components inside the cover (“In order to radiate heat generated by the heating elements 41, a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20”, [0031] of Yang).
Claims 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasunori (US 20200180530 A1 and Yasunori hereinafter) in view of Shigyo, further in view of Yang.
Regarding Claim 16, Yasunori discloses a system for an electric vehicle, comprising:
a plurality of electronic control units (ECUs) (4, fig. 1) arranged in different zones of the vehicle (fig. 1),
Yasunori does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one ECU of the plurality of ECUs comprises: a top cover comprising power terminals sealed by a gasket; a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) comprising connector headers sealed by a gasket; and a base cover attached with the top cover and sealed with a gasket, wherein the base cover is configured to act as a heat sink.
Shigyo discloses a top cover (20, fig. 1), comprising power terminals (53, fig. 3; “The terminal 53 has about 60 to 80 poles in total including a signal system terminal and a power system terminal”, [0064]) sealed by a gasket (31, fig. 1);
a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (including 10 and 31, fig. 1) comprising connector headers (50, fig. 1) sealed by a gasket (31, fig. 1); and
a base cover (22, fig. 1) attached with the top cover and sealed with a gasket (30, fig. 1; “The cover 22 and the case 20 are fixed by the screws 41, together with the seal material 30”, [0075]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasunori to incorporate the teachings of Shigyo so that at least one ECU of the plurality of ECUs comprises: a top cover comprising power terminals sealed by a gasket; a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) comprising connector headers sealed by a gasket; and a base cover attached with the top cover and sealed with a gasket, in order to provide electronic control devices that minimize deformation of the case during manufacturing (“to provide an electronic control device capable of improving the flow of hot water during molding between openings through which connectors penetrate while suppressing deformation of a case of the electronic control device, the size of which has increased as a result of an increase in the level of functionality of the electronic control device”, [0017]).
Yang discloses a base cover (20, fig. 2) acts as a heat sink (“the heat generated by the heating elements 41 is conducted to the electronic control board 40 and the heat radiating pad 50, and conducted to the base 20 at a lower side, such that a heat radiating mechanism is formed”, [0031]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasunori and Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that the base cover acts as a heat sink, in order to provide additional means to radiate heat generated by the electronic components inside the cover (“In order to radiate heat generated by the heating elements 41, a heat radiating pad 50, which is made of a conductive material, is inserted between a bottom side of the electronic control board 40 and the base 20”, [0031] of Yang).
Regarding Claim 18, Yasunori/Shigyo/Yang discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the at least one ECU is located in a front zone of the vehicle and at least one ECU is located in a rear zone of the vehicle (fig. 1 of Yasunori).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasunori in view of Shigyo and Yang, further in view of Hashimoto et al. (US 20020091475 A1, and Hashimoto hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 17, Yasunori/Shigyo/Yang discloses the system of claim 16 but does not explicitly disclose the plurality of ECUs is configured to provide functional redundancy.
Hashimoto discloses a plurality of ECUs is configured to provide functional redundancy (fig. 1, “The present invention provides a vehicle control system … allowing the redundancy to be effectively used even during normal operation of the network … a cooperative control ECU which acts as a server apparatus and a plurality of subsystems which are connected to this cooperative control ECU and act as client apparatuses. The plurality of subsystems comprise, for example, a motor control ECU, a reactive gas supply control ECU, an electrical power distribution control ECU, and a cell voltage detection control ECU” (Summary section of Hashimoto)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasunori and Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that the plurality of ECUs is configured to provide functional redundancy, in order to maintain functionality during the occurrence of damage to the vehicle (“when damage occurs on the network that connects the control operation communication unit and the plurality of electronic control units, there is a concern that a chain of damage or failure in the system as a whole will occur. Thus, a method is known in which redundancy is provided in order to maintain functionality during the occurrence of damage that is equivalent to that during normal operation by introducing redundancy into the network”, [0012]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasunori in view of Shigyo and Yang, further in view of Jiang et al. (US 20150113328 A1, and Jiang hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 19, Yasunori/Shigyo/Yang discloses the system of claim 16 but does not explicitly disclose the at least one ECU comprises a fault isolation system.
Jiang discloses at least one ECU (10, 20, 30, 40, fig. 1) comprises a fault isolation system (“Subsequent operation includes adding each controller (ECU) to its own fault signature set and adding all the controllers to the signature set of the bus short fault”, [0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasunori and Shigyo to incorporate the teachings of Yang so that at least one ECU comprises a fault isolation system, in order to facilitate troubleshooting and/or repair (Jiang: “detection systems generally are unable to identify a root cause of a fault, and are unable to distinguish transient and intermittent faults”, [0006] and “The on-board monitoring controller determines a fault signature for each of the links starting with the link having the highest ranking, said fault signature including identified ones of the associated nodes distal to the monitor for each of the corresponding links”, [0008]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasunori in view of Shigyo and Yang.
Regarding Claim 20, Yasunori/Shigyo/Yang discloses the system of claim 16 but does not explicitly disclose the at least one ECU is configured to be located on an exterior portion of the vehicle.
However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that having at least one ECU is configured to be located on an exterior portion of the vehicle would be equivalent to a rearrangement of parts. Absent disclosure of functional criticality, rearrangement of parts has been ruled to carry no patentable weight (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). See also MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C). A person of ordinary skill could be motivated to implement said modification, for instance, for passive air cooling purposes because placing at least one ECU on the exterior portion of the vehicle would allow it to tap directly into external vehicle airstreams.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Martin A Asmat-Uceda whose telephone number is (571)270-7198. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 PM.
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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/MARTIN ANTONIO ASMAT UCEDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights