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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 11, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 11, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant has argued on pages 5-6 of the arguments that “…In fact, no uncoated portion of a metal base portion is identified in Iida for which thermal resistance changes can be determined. Rather, lida describes how the aluminum plate is covered by three successive layers of aluminum oxide, amorphous silicon carbide and copper foil. See column 1, lines 57-63. There is no indication of an uncoated portion of this aluminum plate for which thermal resistance changes can be determined as set forth in Applicant's claim.”
The examiner does not agree. The device of Kanskar as modified would inherently have uncoated portions such as walls 502 and 504 (see Fig. 6 and paragraph [0054] of Kanskar) that would have a different thermal conductivity compared to the coated inner surfaces of channel 306. One of ordinary skill given the teachings of Iida would find it obvious to adjust the thickness and geometry of the coating on the inner surface of the channels in order protect these surfaces from corrosion while also maintaining the thermal conductivity of these surfaces close to that of the uncoated surfaces.
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 (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 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanskar et al. (US PG Pub 2017/0358900) in view of Silverbrook (US 6,071,750) and Iida (US 4,615,945).
Regarding claim 1, Kanskar et al. disclose: a housing (202) having a metal base portion with one or more channels (channels formed on the back side of carrier structure 204) formed therein (Fig. 2A, [0037], [0038]), the one or more channels having an inner surface formed of a bottom surface and one or more side wall surfaces (inner surface of channel 306 including side walls 302 and a bottom surface) (Fig. 6, [0054], [0055]); and a heat source (laser 101) thermally coupled to the inner surface of the one or more channels, the one or more channels formed to conduct a liquid coolant from a liquid inlet to a liquid outlet to dissipate heat away from the heat source (Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046]).
Kanskar et al. do not disclose: a coating of an anti-corrosive material adhered to a portion of the inner surface of the one or more channels wherein the anti-corrosive material is selected to have a thermal conductivity, a thickness, and a geometry such that presence of the coating changes the thermal resistance for heat transfer of a coated portion of the inner surface less than 25% with respect to an uncoated portion of the metal base portion.
Silverbrook discloses: a coating of an anti-corrosive material (diamond like carbon coating to protect against corrosion) (col. 4, lines 49-59). 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 device of Kanskar by coating the inner surface of the channels including the bottom surface and the side wall surfaces in order to protect these surfaces from corrosion.
Kanskar as modified do not disclose: wherein the anti-corrosive material is selected to have a thermal conductivity, a thickness, and a geometry such that presence of the coating changes the thermal resistance for heat transfer of a coated portion of the inner surface than 25% with respect to an uncoated portion of the metal base portion.
Iida discloses: the thickness of each of the coating layers of … silicon carbide should be determined in consideration of the thermal conductivity of the resultant laminate and other requirements (col. 2, lines 30-42). 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 device of Kanskar as modified by adjusting the thickness and geometry of the coating on the inner surface of the channels in order to adjust the thermal conductivity of the coating.
Regarding claim 2, Kanskar as modified disclose: further comprising a lid (700) formed to couple to the metal base portion so as to form a liquid tight seal over the one or more channels (Kanskar, Fig. 7, [0056]).
Regarding claim 3, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the metal base (202) portion comprises aluminum (Al) at least in part (Kanskar, Fig. 2A, [0037]).
Regarding claim 4, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the anti-corrosive material is a diamond like carbon (DLC) or silicon carbide (SiC) (DLC) (Silverbrook, col. 4, lines 49-59).
Regarding claim 5, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the DLC is adhered to the inner surface by a passivation technique (Silverbrook, col. 4, lines 49-59).
Regarding claim 6, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the heat source is one or more laser diodes (101) (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046]).
Regarding claim 7, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein at least one of the one or more laser diodes is disposed on a heatsink comprising thermal dissipation members (submount 102, heatsink 104) (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033]- [0035]).
Regarding claim 8, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the heatsink is configured to mate to the metal base portion such that the thermal dissipation members extend into at least one of the one or more channels (Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046]).
Regarding claim 9, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the thermal dissipation members are coated with an anti-corrosive material (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 10, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the coating is DLCC (Silverbrook, col. 4, lines 49-59).
Regarding claim 11, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the DLCC is adhered to a surface of the thermal dissipation members by a passivation technique (Silverbrook, col. 4, lines 49-59).
Regarding claim 12, Kanskar as modified disclose: further comprising one or more fins disposed in one or more of the channels (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046]).
Regarding claim 13, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the one or more fins comprise Al (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033]- [0034]).
Regarding claim 14, Kanskar as modified do not disclose: wherein the one or more fins are anfractuous.
The examiner takes official notice that a heat sink with anfractuous fins was well known in the art before the time of filing (for example, see Chen (US PG Pub 2004/0244947) [0002]). 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 device of Kanskar as modified by forming a heat sink with anfractuous fins in order to improve heat dissipation in the package.
Regarding claim 15, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the coating is adhered to the one or more fins (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 16, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the heat source is one or more laser diode assemblies and wherein the one or more fins are each coupled through the metal base portion to the one or more laser diodes (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046]).
Regarding claim 17, Kanskar as modified do not disclose: wherein the coating is adhered to an inner surface of the lid.
Silverbrook discloses: a coating of an anti-corrosive material (diamond like carbon coating to protect against corrosion) (col. 4, lines 49-59). 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 device of Kanskar by coating the inner surface of the lid in order to protect the inner surface of the lid from corrosion.
Regarding claim 18, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the anti-corrosive material is a DLC or SiC and wherein the liquid coolant is water (Kanskar, Figs. 1 and 2A, [0033], [0038], [0046], [0048]).
Regarding claim 19, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the thermal conductivity threshold range of the coating changes the thermal resistance of the coated portion with respect to the un-coated portion within a range of 0%-20%, 0%-10%, 0-5%, 0-2% or 0-1% (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 20, Kanskar as modified disclose: wherein the anti-corrosive material is DLC, SiC, B4C, AlN, c-BN, h-BN, Si3N4, or any combinations thereof (Silverbrook, col. 4, lines 49-59).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINNING(TOM) NIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Minsun Harvey can be reached on 571-272-1835. 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.
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828