DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 02/19/2026.
3. Claims 1-3, 5-6 are pending. Claims 1-3, 5-6 are under examination on the merits. Claims 1-3, 5-6 are amended. Claims 4, 7 are cancelled.
4. The objections and rejections not addressed below are deemed withdrawn.
5. Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, thus claims 1-3, 5-6 stand rejected as set forth in Office action dated 11/19/2025 and further discussed in the Response to Arguments below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Nobutoki et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0259475 A1, hereinafter “’475”) in view of Ito et al. (JPH08259930 A1, machine translation, hereinafter “’930”) or in view of Imura et al. (JP 2005-009752 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’752”).
Regarding claims 1-3: ‘475 teaches a heat storage apparatus (Page 2, [0015], Fig. 1) includes: a container sealed, with a heat storage material encased in the container, wherein the heat pipe has a laminated structure (Page 2, [0018]-[0019], Figs 2-3), the material including a thermosensitive polymer gel including a thermosensitive polymer (Page 3, [0023]) and a solvent selected from the group consisting of water, organic solvents, and compounds of water, wherein the content of the water is 90 wt% or greater (Page 6, [0044]), or organic solvents such as 1,4-dioxane (Page 3, [0029]). ‘475 does not expressly teach and the content of the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane is from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether is from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%.
However, ‘930 teaches working fluid is used as a heat transfer fluid for refrigerators, heat pumps (Page 3/10, [0001]). ‘930 teaches the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane in the range of 0.01 to 5% by weight (Page 7/10, [0034]) or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (Page 7/10, [0037]) with benefit of providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease (Page 7/10, [0034]).
Alternatively, ‘752 teaches heat pipe capable of preventing damage of a pipe body due to freezing of an operating liquid in a cold district, and having operating performance almost the same as that of a heat pipe using water as the operating liquid (Page 4/11, [0007]). ‘752 teaches in the heat pipe, water containing 0.5-10 wt.% of glycols, preferably from 0.7 to 5% by weight, particularly preferably from 1.0 to 3% by weight, based on 100% by weight of the working fluid is used as a working liquid (Page 6/11, [0016]) with benefit of providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated (Page 6/11, [0016])
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘475, so as to include 1,4-dioxane is from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% as taught by ‘930, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease as suggested by ‘930 (Page 7/10, [0034]).
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘475, so as to include diethylene glycol dimethyl ether is from 0.5 to 5.0 wt% as taught by ‘752, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated as suggested by ‘752 (Page 6/11, [0016]).
It is submitted that the physical structural limitation is considered as the intended use, wherein the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Furthermore, "Where ... the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical ... the PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his claimed product such as heat shock test or high-temperature storage test." In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (CCPA 1977) (citations and footnote omitted). The mere recitation of a property or characteristic not disclosed by the prior art does not necessarily confer patentability to a composition or a method of using that composition. See In re Skoner, 51 7 F .2d 94 7, 950 ( CCP A 197 5).
8. Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Nobutoki et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0259475 A1, hereinafter “’475”) in view of Ito et al. (JPH08259930 A1, machine translation, hereinafter “’930”) or in view of Imura et al. (JP 2005-009752 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’’752”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Khao Chachai (JP 3170206 U, machine translation, hereinafter “’’206”).
Regarding claims 5-6: The disclosure of ‘475 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 is adequately set forth in paragraph 7 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘475 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 does not expressly teach the heat pipe includes copper as a main component, and a non-metal material as a main component.
However, ‘206 teach a multi-heat pipe type heat dissipation device (Page 5/25, [0001]). As shown in Fig. 1, the multi-heat pipe heat dissipation device includes a heat sink 100 is a
hollow rectangular heat sink and a plurality of heat pipes 200 (Page 9/25, [0022]). ‘206 teaches the heat sink 100 may be made of a metal (e.g., aluminum, copper, or an alloy thereof) or a non-metal (e.g., graphite) having good thermal conductivity (Page 9/25, [0023]).
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘475, so as to include the heat pipe includes copper as a main component, and a non-metal material as a main component as taught by ‘206, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing a good thermal conductivity as suggested by ‘206 (Page 9/25, [0023]).
9. Claims 1-3, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Mizuta et al. (US Pub. No. 2012/0106084 A1, hereinafter “’084”) in view of Ito et al. (JPH08259930 A1, machine translation, hereinafter “’930”) or in view of Imura et al. (JP 2005-009752 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’752”).
Regarding claims 1-3: ’084 teaches a heat pipe for cooling an exothermic body by the vaporization and condensation of an enclosed cooling medium (Page 1, [0002]). The heat pipe comprises a flat plate upper plate, a flat plate lower plate opposed to the upper plate, and a plurality of flat plate intermediate plates overlaid on each other between the upper plate and the lower plate and having internal through-holes, and wherein the flat plate heat pipe has a laminated structure (Page 3, [0045], Fig. 3). The internal through-holes formed in each of a plurality of the intermediate plates are adapted such that only part of each through-hole is overlapped on each other to form capillary tube paths, each having a cross-sectional area smaller than the cross-sectional area of the through-hole in the flat surface direction (Page 1, [0012]; Page 11, Claim 1). The flat plate pipe coolant comprising water and solvent (Page 6, [0081]). ‘084 does not expressly teach the content of the water is 90 wt% or greater, and the solvent is 1,4-dioxane from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%.
However, ‘930 teaches working fluid is used as a heat transfer fluid for refrigerators, heat pumps (Page 3/10, [0001]). ‘930 teaches the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane in the range of 0.01 to 5% by weight (Page 7/10, [0034]) or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (Page 7/10, [0037]) with benefit of providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease (Page 7/10, [0034]).
Alternatively, ‘752 teaches heat pipe capable of preventing damage of a pipe body due to freezing of an operating liquid in a cold district, and having operating performance almost the same as that of a heat pipe using water as the operating liquid (Page 4/11, [0007]). ‘752 teaches in the heat pipe, water containing 0.5-10 wt.% of glycols, preferably from 0.7 to 5% by weight, particularly preferably from 1.0 to 3% by weight, based on 100% by weight of the working fluid is used as a working liquid (Page 6/11, [0016]) with benefit of providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated (Page 6/11, [0016])
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘’084, so as to include 1,4-dioxane is from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% as taught by ‘930, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease as suggested by ‘930 (Page 7/10, [0034]).
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘’084, so as to include diethylene glycol dimethyl ether is from 0.5 to 5.0 wt% as taught by ‘752, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated as suggested by ‘752 (Page 6/11, [0016]).
It is submitted that the physical structural limitation is considered as the intended use, wherein the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Furthermore, “Where ... the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical ... the PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his claimed product such as heat shock test or high-temperature storage test." In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (CCPA 1977) (citations and footnote omitted). The mere recitation of a property or characteristic not disclosed by the prior art does not necessarily confer patentability to a composition or a method of using that composition. See In re Skoner, 51 7 F .2d 94 7, 950 (CCP A 197 5).
Regarding claims 5-6: ’084 teaches the flat plate-like heat pipe, wherein the heat pipe includes copper as a main component, and a non-metal material as a main component (Page 4, [0050]).
10. Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Mizuta et al. (US Pub. No. 2012/0106084 A1, hereinafter “’084”) in view of Ito et al. (JPH08259930 A1, machine translation, hereinafter “’930”) or in view of Imura et al. (JP 2005-009752 A, machine translation, hereinafter “’’752”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Khao Chachai (JP 3170206 U, machine translation, hereinafter “’’206”).
Regarding claims 5-6: The disclosure of ‘084 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 is adequately set forth in paragraph 9 above and is incorporated herein by reference. This rejection is applied in the interest of advancing prosecution in the event it can be shown that ’084 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 does not expressly teach the heat pipe includes copper as a main component, and a non-metal material as a main component.
However, ‘206 teach a multi-heat pipe type heat dissipation device (Page 5/25, [0001]). As shown in Fig. 1, the multi-heat pipe heat dissipation device includes a heat sink 100 is a
hollow rectangular heat sink and a plurality of heat pipes 200 (Page 9/25, [0022]). ‘206 teaches the heat sink 100 may be made of a metal (e.g., aluminum, copper, or an alloy thereof) or a non-metal (e.g., graphite) having good thermal conductivity (Page 9/25, [0023]).
In an analogous art of the heat pipe coolant, and in the light of such benefit before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heat pipe coolant by ‘084, so as to include the heat pipe includes copper as a main component, and a non-metal material as a main component as taught by ‘206, and would have been motivated to do so with reasonable expectation that this would result in providing a good thermal conductivity as suggested by ‘206 (Page 9/25, [0023]).
Response to Arguments
11. Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive,
In response to the Applicant’s argument that Nobutoki ’475 fails to teach or suggest a "the heat pipe coolant to be enclosed in e pipe serving as a heat diffusion plate, and having a laminated structure being formed by laminating and bonding a top plate, a plurality of middle plates, and a bottom plate, and including an internal space constituted by a vapor diffusion passage and a capillary channel" as presently claimed.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The instant claim 1 is a product claim, not functional structural device limitation. It is submitted that the physical structural limitation is considered as the intended use, wherein the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that Nobutoki ’475 teaches that in its preferred embodiment, alcohols such as ethanol and acetone are used in its heating storage material. However, this is in contrast to the present application where ethanol and acetone are not suitable additions to pure water as coolant for a heating pipe.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. It is axiomatic that a reference must be considered in its entirety, and it is well established that the disclosure of a reference is not limited to specific working examples contained therein. In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792, 794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (C.C.P.A. 1982). A reference must be considered for everything it teaches by way of technology. EWP Corp. v. Reliance Universal Inc., 755 F.2d 898, 907, 225 USPQ 20, 25 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 843 (1985). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also > Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). ‘475 teaches a heat storage apparatus (Page 2, [0015], Fig. 1) includes: a container sealed, with a heat storage material encased in the container, wherein the heat pipe has a laminated structure (Page 2, [0018]-[0019], Figs 2-3), the material including a thermosensitive polymer gel including a thermosensitive polymer (Page 3, [0023]) and a solvent selected from the group consisting of water, organic solvents, and compounds of water, wherein the content of the water is 90 wt% or greater (Page 6, [0044]), or organic solvents such as 1,4-dioxane (Page 3, [0029]). ‘475 does not expressly teach and the content of the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane is from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether is from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%. However, Ito ’930 or Imura ‘752 cures the deficiency in Nobutoki ’475 reference relied upon in rejecting independent claim 1.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that there is no motivation to combine
Nobutoki ’475 in view of Ito ’930 or Imura ‘752 references in the manner claimed absent undue experimentation or impermissible hindsight.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
The disclosure of ‘475 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 is adequately set forth in paragraph 7 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘475 does not expressly teach and the content of the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane is from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether is from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%.
However, ‘930 teaches working fluid is used as a heat transfer fluid for refrigerators, heat pumps (Page 3/10, [0001]). ‘930 teaches the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane in the range of 0.01 to 5% by weight (Page 7/10, [0034]) or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (Page 7/10, [0037]) with benefit of providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease (Page 7/10, [0034]). Alternatively, ‘752 teaches heat pipe capable of preventing damage of a pipe body due to freezing of an operating liquid in a cold district, and having operating performance almost the same as that of a heat pipe using water as the operating liquid (Page 4/11, [0007]). ‘752 teaches in the heat pipe, water containing 0.5-10 wt.% of glycols, preferably from 0.7 to 5% by weight, particularly preferably from 1.0 to 3% by weight, based on 100% by weight of the working fluid is used as a working liquid (Page 6/11, [0016]) with benefit of providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated (Page 6/11, [0016]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that Mizuta ’084 only mentions the composition of its cooling media once, and states "[p]referable cooling media include water (e.g., pure water and distilled water), ethanol, methanol and acetone, thus ‘084 teaches away from the preset claims.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. It is axiomatic that a reference must be considered in its entirety, and it is well established that the disclosure of a reference is not limited to specific working examples contained therein. In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792, 794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (C.C.P.A. 1982). A reference must be considered for everything it teaches by way of technology. EWP Corp. v. Reliance Universal Inc., 755 F.2d 898, 907, 225 USPQ 20, 25 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 843 (1985). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also > Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). The disclosure of ‘084 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 is adequately set forth in paragraph 9 above and is incorporated herein by reference. ‘084 teaches the flat plate pipe coolant comprising water and solvent (Page 6, [0081]). ‘084 does not expressly teach the content of the water is 90 wt% or greater, and the solvent is 1,4-dioxane from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%.
However, ‘930 teaches working fluid is used as a heat transfer fluid for refrigerators, heat pumps (Page 3/10, [0001]). ‘930 teaches the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane in the range of 0.01 to 5% by weight (Page 7/10, [0034]) or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (Page 7/10, [0037]) with benefit of providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease (Page 7/10, [0034]). Alternatively, ‘752 teaches heat pipe capable of preventing damage of a pipe body due to freezing of an operating liquid in a cold district, and having operating performance almost the same as that of a heat pipe using water as the operating liquid (Page 4/11, [0007]). ‘752 teaches in the heat pipe, water containing 0.5-10 wt.% of glycols, preferably from 0.7 to 5% by weight, particularly preferably from 1.0 to 3% by weight, based on 100% by weight of the working fluid is used as a working liquid (Page 6/11, [0016]) with benefit of providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated (Page 6/11, [0016]). Thus, Ito ’930 or Imura ‘752 cures the deficiency in Mizuta ’084 reference relied upon in rejecting independent claim 1.
Furthermore, the present claims “Comprising” language leaves the claim open for the inclusion of unspecified ingredients even in major amounts, see Ex parte Davis et al., 80 USPQ 448 (PTO Ed. App. 1948). Also, the broad “comprising” and “containing” terminology do not exclude the presence of other ingredients in the composition, see Swain v.Crittendon, 332 F 2d 820,14 1 USPQ 8 11 (CCPA 1964).
In response to the Applicant’s argument that there is no motivation to combine Mizuta ’084 in view of Ito ’930 or Imura ‘752 references in the manner claimed absent undue experimentation or impermissible hindsight.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
The disclosure of ‘’084 in view of ‘930 or ‘752 is adequately set forth in paragraph 9 above and is incorporated herein by reference. 084 teaches the flat plate pipe coolant comprising water and solvent (Page 6, [0081]). ‘084 does not expressly teach the content of the water is 90 wt% or greater, and the solvent is 1,4-dioxane from 0.5 to 6.0 wt% or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether from 0.5 to 5.0 wt%.
However, ‘930 teaches working fluid is used as a heat transfer fluid for refrigerators, heat pumps (Page 3/10, [0001]). ‘930 teaches the deformation suppressant such as 1,4-dioxane in the range of 0.01 to 5% by weight (Page 7/10, [0034]) or diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (Page 7/10, [0037]) with benefit of providing higher stabilities under severe use conditions for
working fluid, since if the amount of the stabilizer added is less than 0.01% by weight, it may be difficult to obtain the effect of the addition, and if the amount of the stabilizer added exceeds 5% by weight, the heating property and the evaporation property of the working fluid may decrease (Page 7/10, [0034]). Alternatively, ‘752 teaches heat pipe capable of preventing damage of a pipe body due to freezing of an operating liquid in a cold district, and having operating performance almost the same as that of a heat pipe using water as the operating liquid (Page 4/11, [0007]). ‘752 teaches in the heat pipe, water containing 0.5-10 wt.% of glycols, preferably from 0.7 to 5% by weight, particularly preferably from 1.0 to 3% by weight, based on 100% by weight of the working fluid is used as a working liquid (Page 6/11, [0016]) with benefit of providing to prevent the working liquid from freezing and solidifying regardless of the mixing amount of the glycols within the above range. On the other hand, when the mixing amount of the glycol exceeds the above range, the heat transfer performance of the working liquid is deteriorated (Page 6/11, [0016]).
Thus, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, since the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.
The applicant is invited to submit any declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 to overcome the rejection based upon reference applied under 35 U.S.C. 103 (a) as set forth in this Office action to compare their invention product (i.e., a heat pipe coolant) and show the product is actually different from and unexpectedly better than the teachings of the references. It is noted that the burden is on the applicant to establish that the results are in fact unexpected, unobvious, and of statistical and practical significance. See MPEP 716.02(b). See also Ex parte Gelles, 22 USPQ2d 1318 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992), and such a showing also must be commensurate with the scope of the claimed invention, i.e., must bear a reasonable correlation to the scope of the claimed invention.
12. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Examiner Information
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bijan Ahvazi, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571) 270-3449. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9.00 A.M. -7 P.M..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Del Sole can be reached on 571-272-1130. 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.
/Bijan Ahvazi/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
03/16/2026
bijan.ahvazi@uspto.gov