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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's amendments to claim 1 and corresponding arguments, pages 5-6 of the remarks, filed 09/29/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C 103 rejection of claim 1 as unpatentable over US 2010/0172091 A1; Akira Nishiura (hereinafter “Nishiura”) in view of US 2002/0050403 A1; Yasukawa et al.; (hereinafter “Yasukawa”) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Nishiura in view of Yasukawa, and further in view of US 20070062674 A1; Ippoushi et al.; (hereinafter “Ippoushi”). Ippoushi has been introduced in view of the amendments to claim 1 for teaching the recessed part having a triangular cross-sectional shape, and providing a motivation that renders the amended claim 1 obvious (see 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1 below).
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.
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 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishiura in view of Yasukawa, and further in view of Ippoushi.
Regarding Claim 1 (currently amended), Nishiura teaches a cooling device configured to cool a semiconductor component mounted on a surface of a substrate ([0042-0044], an apparatus for cooling semiconductor chip #16 mounted on an insulator base #17), the cooling device comprising:
a base (#11, Figure 2(A), metal base) mounted on a back surface of the substrate (#11 disposes on the back surface of #17); and
a bottom plate (#13, duct cover) disposed separately from the base (#13 is separate from #11), the base being arranged between the substrate and the bottom plate (#11 is between #17 and #13),
Nishiura does not teach an introduction port being formed in the bottom plate at a position corresponding to the semiconductor component, the introduction port being configured to guide a refrigerant from the introduction portion in a direction toward the base, wherein a recessed part is formed in a region of the base which faces the introduction port, the recessed part being recessed toward the back surface of the substrate
However, Yasukawa teaches a cooling device ([0013]) comprises an introduction port (#9, Figure 1, inflow pipe) being formed at a position corresponding to the semiconductor component (#1, chips), the introduction port being configured to guide a refrigerant from the introduction portion in a direction toward the base ([0013], #9 leads cooling liquid upward through nozzles #6, toward base #4), wherein a recessed part (#4a, recess) is formed in a region of the base which faces the introduction port (Figure 1, #4a forms within #4 facing #6), the recessed part being recessed toward the back surface of the substrate (#4a is recessed toward #17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Nishiura with the teaching of Yasukawa in order to increase the heat transferring efficiency from the semiconductor component to the cooling liquid according to [0013 - 0014] of Yasukawa.
Nishiura in view of Yasukawa does not teach the recessed part having a triangular cross-sectional shape.
However, Ippoushi teaches a cooling device (Figure 3, [0035], cooling structure), wherein a recessed part having a triangular cross-sectional shape (#15, Figure 5B, [0116], triangle fine recess).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Nishiura in view of Yasukawa with the teaching of Ippoushi in order to improve the heat dissipating capability of the cooling structure with the specific shape of the recess according to Ippoushi, [0116].
Regarding Claim 2, Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi teaches the cooling device as described in claim 1, wherein Nishiura further teaches a plurality of fins (#12, Figure 2(A), radiation fins) provided between the base and the bottom plate (#12 dispose between base #11 and duct cover #13).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi, further in view of JPH05299549 (see attached original and translated patent document); Kawasaki et al.; (hereinafter “Kawasaki”).
Regarding Claim 3, Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi teaches the cooling device as described in claim 2, wherein Nishiura further teaches:
the plurality of fins (#12/#12a, Figure 2(B), radiation fins) extend in a first direction along the base (#12 extends horizontally along metal base #11) and are arranged at intervals in a second direction intersecting the first direction (#12 dispose at different intervals vertically along #11),
a channel extending in the first direction is formed between the fins ([0012], #12 dispose on #11, in combination with duct cover #13, guides the coolant flow).
Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi does not explicitly teach a width of the channel is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port in the first direction.
However, Kawasaki teaches a cooling device ([0005]), wherein a width of the channel is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port in the first direction (Figure 1 of Kawasaki annotated, as fins #4 disposes further away from inlet #5 in directions #d1 and #d2, fin gaps #10b are larger than fin gaps #10a, see
PNG
media_image1.png
563
633
media_image1.png
Greyscale
also [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Kawasaki with Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi so that a width of the channel is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port in the first direction in order to significantly reduce the frictional resistance of the fluid and increase the heat transfer area which improves the cooling efficiency according to [0013-0014] of Kawasaki.
Regarding Claim 4, Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi teaches the cooling device as described in claim 2.
Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi does not explicitly teach an interval between the fins is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port.
However, Kawasaki teaches an interval between the fins is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port (Figure 1 of Kawasaki annotated, fins #4 disposes at lower frequency with increasing distance to inlet #5 in directions #d1 and #d2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Kawasaki with Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi so that an interval between the fins is gradually widened with increasing distance from the introduction port for the reason set forth in the rejection of claim 3.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi, further in view of US5519938A; Kojima et al.; (hereinafter “Kojima”).
Regarding Claim 6 (currently amended), Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi teaches the cooling device as described in claim 2, wherein Nishiura further teaches the plurality of fins extend in a first direction along the base and are arranged at intervals in a second direction intersecting the first direction (Figure 2(B), fins #12a extend along horizontal direction of base #11 and are at intervals along vertical direction).
Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi does not teach the plurality of fins includes a fin that is located on an outermost side in the second direction and that has a plate thickness which is larger than the other fins of the plurality of fins.
However, Kojima teaches a cooling device (Col. 1, ln. 16-19, fin shaped heat sink for IC packages), wherein the plurality of fins (#26, Figure 7A-B, heat sink fins) includes a fin that is located on an outermost side in the second direction (Figure 7A, outermost fins #26b) and that has a plate thickness which is larger than the other fins of the plurality of fins (#26b has larger thickness compared to the inner plates #26a, see also col.6, ln. 64-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi with the teaching of Kojima in order to increase the heat dissipating capability of the outermost fins which prevent the deformation of the inward thinner fins during operation according to Kojima, col. 6, ln. 56-64.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi, further in view of US 2019/0080984 A1; Higashiyama et al.; (hereinafter “Higashiyama”).
Regarding Claim 7 (currently amended), Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi teaches the cooling device as described in claim 2, wherein Nishiura further teaches the plurality of fins extend in a first direction along the base (Figure 2(B), fins #12a extend along horizontal direction of base #11).
Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi does not explicitly teach for each fin of at least some of the plurality of fins, both ends of the fin in the first direction are inclined so as to extend outwardly in the first direction with increasing distance from the back surface.
However, Higashiyama teaches a cooling device ([0007], cooling device by liquid for electronic component), wherein for each fin of at least some of the plurality of fins, both ends of the fin in the first direction are inclined (Figure 3, ends #38a and #38b of fins #18 are inclined) so as to extend outwardly in the first direction with increasing distance from the back surface (#18 extends from top wall #24 to bottom wall #28, according to [0040-0042], alternative shapes of the cutouts for #18 without change in function. See also MPEP 2144(IV)(B)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Nishiura in view of Yasukawa and Ippoushi with the teaching of Higashiyama in order to increase the channel area between supply and discharge ports which reduces pressure loss of the cooling liquid flowing through the channel and improves the cooling efficiency according to [0037-0038] of Higashiyama.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TIEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6967. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, CHRISTINE S KIM can be reached on (571)272-8458. 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.
/TIEN TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/CHRISTINE S. KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812