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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention of Embodiment I of Figure 2, Claims 13-18 and 26-44, in the reply filed on 04/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification does not disclose the computing system comprises a battery, as recited in claim 44.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 13, 15-17, 30-31, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cader et al. (US 2016/0066472).
Regarding claim 13, Cader et al. discloses, as shown in Figures 1-3, an apparatus comprising:
an integrated circuit component (102);
a printed circuit board (106), the integrated circuit component attached to the printed circuit board, the printed circuit board comprising a breakout region (peripheral side between 102 and 134) associated with the integrated circuit component;
a heat sink (112,114,116);
a heat exchanger (134);
a heat transfer device (120) comprising an internal cavity containing a working fluid, the heat transfer device attached to the heat sink and the heat exchanger; and
a layer (130) comprising a thermal interface material, the layer comprising the thermal interface material disposed between the heat sink and the integrated circuit component;
wherein the heat exchanger is attached to the printed circuit board (through 102,130, or 304) beyond the breakout region of the printed circuit board.
Regarding claim 15, Cader et al. discloses the integrated circuit component (102) is a first integrated circuit component, wherein the apparatus further comprises a second integrated circuit component (302 or 304), wherein the heat exchanger is attached to the printed circuit board at one or more heat exchanger attachment points (through 102,130, or 304), and wherein individual of the heat exchanger attachment points are outside of one or more regions of the printed circuit board where signal routing occurs between the first integrated circuit component and the second integrated circuit component [Figure 3].
Regarding claim 16, Cader et al. discloses the apparatus further comprising a heat exchanger printed circuit board attachment means (through 102,130, or 304) to attach the heat exchanger to the printed circuit board [Figures].
Regarding claim 17, Cader et al. discloses the heat exchanger comprises a plurality of fins (not shown, [0024]).
Regarding claim 30, Cader et al. discloses the heat transfer device comprises a heat pipe [Figures].
Regarding claim 31, Cader et al. discloses the heat transfer device comprises a vapor chamber [Figures].
Regarding claim 36, Cader et al. discloses the heat exchanger comprises a plurality of fins (not shown, [0024]) and a plate inherently connecting ends of the plurality of fins distal from the heat transfer device.
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(s) 18 and 32-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cader et al. (US 2016/0066472) in view of Bailey et al. (US 2007/0177367).
Regarding claims 18 and 32-35, Cader et al. discloses the claimed invention including the apparatus having the layer comprising the thermal interface material as explained in the above rejection. Cader et al. does not disclose the material of the thermal interface material comprises indium and another metal, or gallium and silver, a liquid metal, or gallium and another metal, adhesive, or epoxy. However, Bailey et al. discloses a thermal interface material (140) comprises indium and another metal, or gallium and silver, a liquid metal, or gallium and another metal, adhesive, or epoxy. Note Figure 7 and [0055], [0076], [0086] of Bailey et al. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the thermal interface material of Cader et al. comprises indium and another metal, or gallium and silver, adhesive, or epoxy, such as taught by Hill et al. in order to further improve the heat removal.
Claim(s) 14, 26-27, and 37-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cader et al. (US 2016/0066472).
Regarding claims 14 and 26-27, Cader et al. discloses the claimed invention including the apparatus as explained in the above rejection. Cader et al. further discloses the heat exchanger is attached to the printed circuit board at one or more heat exchanger attachment points. Cader et al. does not disclose individual of the one or more heat exchanger attachment points are located at a distance more than 15 millimeters, 30 millimeters, or 50 millimeters away from the integrated circuit component. However, the selection of these parameters such as energy, concentration, temperature, time, speed, molar fraction, depth, thickness, distance, etc., would have been obvious and involve routine optimization which has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. "Normally, it is to be expected that a change in energy, concentration, temperature, time, molar fraction, depth, thickness, distance, etc., or in combination of the parameters would be an unpatentable modification. Under some circumstances, however, changes such as these may impart patentability to a process if the particular ranges claimed produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely degree from the results of the prior art... such ranges are termed "critical ranges and the applicant has the burden of proving such criticality.... More particularly, where 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 re Alter 105 USPQ233, 255 (CCPA 1955). See also In re Waite 77 USPQ 586 (CCPA 1948); In re Scherl 70 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1946); In re Irmscher 66 USPQ 314 (CCPA 1945); In re Norman 66 USPQ 308 (CCPA 1945); In re Swenson 56 USPQ 372 (CCPA 1942); In re Sola 25 USPQ 433 (CCPA 1935); In re Dreyfus 24 USPQ 52 (CCPA 1934).
Regarding claims 37 and 39-40, Cader et al. discloses, as shown in Figures 1-3, a computing system comprising:
an integrated circuit component (102);
a printed circuit board (106), the integrated circuit component attached to the printed circuit board, the printed circuit board comprising a breakout region (peripheral side between 102 and 134) associated with the integrated circuit component;
a heat sink (112,114,116);
a heat exchanger (134);
a heat transfer device (120) comprising an internal cavity containing a working fluid, the heat transfer device attached to the heat sink and the heat exchanger; and
a layer (130) comprising a thermal interface material, the layer comprising the thermal interface material disposed between the heat sink and the integrated circuit component;
wherein the heat exchanger is attached to the printed circuit board (through 102,130, or 304) at one or more heat exchanger attachment points.
Cader et al. does not disclose individual of the one or more heat exchanger attachment points are located at a distance more than 15 millimeters, 30 millimeters, or 50 millimeters away from the integrated circuit component. However, the selection of these parameters such as energy, concentration, temperature, time, speed, molar fraction, depth, thickness, distance, etc., would have been obvious and involve routine optimization which has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. "Normally, it is to be expected that a change in energy, concentration, temperature, time, molar fraction, depth, thickness, distance, etc., or in combination of the parameters would be an unpatentable modification. Under some circumstances, however, changes such as these may impart patentability to a process if the particular ranges claimed produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely degree from the results of the prior art... such ranges are termed "critical ranges and the applicant has the burden of proving such criticality.... More particularly, where 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 re Alter 105 USPQ233, 255 (CCPA 1955). See also In re Waite 77 USPQ 586 (CCPA 1948); In re Scherl 70 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1946); In re Irmscher 66 USPQ 314 (CCPA 1945); In re Norman 66 USPQ 308 (CCPA 1945); In re Swenson 56 USPQ 372 (CCPA 1942); In re Sola 25 USPQ 433 (CCPA 1935); In re Dreyfus 24 USPQ 52 (CCPA 1934).
Regarding claim 38, Cader et al. discloses the printed circuit board comprises a breakout region associated with the integrated circuit component, and wherein individual of the heat exchanger attachment points are located beyond the breakout region of the printed circuit board.
Regarding claim 41, Cader et al. discloses the integrated circuit component comprises a processor unit (CPU, DIMM, SIMM, etc., [0015]).
Regarding claim 42, Cader et al. discloses the system further comprising a memory on the printed circuit board (302, 304, SIMM, etc., [0015]).
Regarding claim 43, Cader et al. discloses the system further comprising an air mover configured to blow air over or through the heat exchanger [0024].
Regarding claim 44, Cader et al. discloses the computing system is used for the computer or server, it is inherent that the computing system comprising an internal battery.
Claim(s) 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cader et al. (US 2016/0066472) in view of Sun et al. (CN 102566722A).
Cader et al. discloses the claimed invention including the apparatus as explained in the above rejection. Cader et al. does not disclose the heat exchanger is attached to the printed circuit board via a bonding material, or via one or more fasteners. However, Sun et al. discloses an apparatus having a heat exchanger is attached to a printed circuit board via a bonding material, or via one or more fasteners. Note [0019] and Figures 1-3 of Sun et al. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time the invention was made to form to attach the heat exchanger of Cader et al. to the printed circuit board by a bonding material or by one or more fasteners, such as taught by Sun et al. in order to securely fix the heat exchanger to the printed circuit board.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG K VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1666. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7am - 5pm.
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, JACOB CHOI can be reached at (469) 295-9060. 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.
/HUNG K VU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights