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 .
This action is in response to applicant’s 1/14/2026 amendment.
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.
Claims 1-14 are 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.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “wherein each of the at least one laser diode is directly mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments” (emphasis added) (lines 14-16) appears to introduce new matter. While the specification discloses that the laser diodes are mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments (Paragraph 30), there does not appear to be sufficient support for the laser diodes are directly mounted (i.e. with no other elements therebetween) with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments
Regarding claim 8, the recitation “wherein each of the at least one laser diode is directly mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments” (emphasis added) (lines 12-13) appears to introduce new matter for the same reasons that claim 1 appears to introduce new matter.
Claims 2-7 and 9-14 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “wherein each of the at least one laser diode is directly mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments” (emphasis added) (lines 14-16) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if there is one laser diode or there are laser diodes.
Further regarding claim 1, the recitation “electrically insulates each of the at least one laser diode from one another” (emphasis added) (lines 18-19) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if there is one laser diode or there are laser diodes.
Regarding claim 8, the recitation “wherein each of the at least one laser diode is directly mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments” (emphasis added) (lines 12-13) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if there is one laser diode or there are laser diodes.
Regarding claim 15, the recitation “electrically insulates each of the at least one laser diode from one another” (emphasis added) (lines 15-16) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if there is one laser diode or there are laser diodes.
Claims 2-7 and 9-20 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), and further in view of Schleuning et al. (US 2014/0119393), Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299), and Reeves et al. (US 2018/0042137).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink (1) configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (14/15), where the heat sink comprises:
A heat sink body (22) configured to be filled with a cooling fluid (Paragraph 54), where the heat sink body includes a cavity (Figure 2A: See space between 21 and 22), and
A removable insert (21 and 23) configured to be placed within the cavity (Figure 2A and paragraph 79: The insert is removable in that the heat sink body 22 and mounting plate 21 are configured to be either mechanically connected or integrally welded together), the removable insert comprising:
A plurality of fins (23) (Figure 2A) formed of a material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraph 78), the composite material different from a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77 and 78: The fins 23, heat sink body 22, and mounting plate 21 are configured to be formed from the same or different materials. In one example the fins are configured to comprise copper and the heat sink body is configured to comprise aluminum), and
A mounting plate (21) having a plurality of mounting plate segments (17) structured as raised elements (i.e. segments 17 define elements that are raised from a surface of 21) with cutouts (i.e. gaps/spaces) between respective ones of plurality of mounting plate segments (Figures 1-2B) and the mounting plate seals the cavity when the removable insert is placed within the cavity so that the cooling liquid cannot exit the cavity (Paragraphs 53 and 79), the mounting plate including a first side that couples with the at least one power semiconductor element to mount the at least one power semiconductor element (Figure 2A: See side facing 14/15) and a second side opposite the first side that couples with the plurality of fins (Figure 2A: See side facing 22), where respective ones of the at least one power semiconductor element are mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments (Figure 2A-2B and Paragraphs 46-47).
Further, while Gohara et al. discloses the heat sink as configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (Paragraph 49), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the at least one power semiconductor element comprises at least one laser diode directly mounted to the mounting plate segments.
Schleuning et al. teaches a heat sink configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element, where the at least one power semiconductor element includes at least one laser diode (Paragraph 3), and where the at least one laser diode is directly or indirectly mounted to a mounting plate segment (Paragraph 3). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the heat sink as disclosed by Gohara et al. to remove heat from at least one laser diode as taught by Schleuning et al. to improve heat sink versatility by configuring the heat sink to cool a variety of high-heat flux heat sources.
Further, while Gohara et al. discloses the fins are formed of an alloy material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K ) (Paragraph 78), while the heat sink body is formed from a material with a thermal conductivity (Paragraph 77: Aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, or a copper alloy), and while there is a configuration in which the fins are formed of a material having a higher thermal conductivity than a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77-78: Fins formed of copper and a base formed of aluminum), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the fins are formed of a composite material.
Campbell et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (150) and a heat sink body (140), where the plurality of fins are formed of a composite material (Paragraphs 71-73: A copper-diamond composite) with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraphs 71-73), and where (claim 2) the composite material is a material that includes copper and diamond, a material that includes aluminum and diamond, or a material that includes aluminum and graphite (Paragraphs 71-73: A copper-diamond composite). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the fins as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a composite material as taught by Campbell et al. to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by forming the heat sink from a combination of materials having greater thermal conductivity than a single material.
While Gohara et al. discloses that a material forming the mounting plate is configured to have a highest thermal conductivity within the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77 and 78: There is a combination of disclosed materials in which the mounting plate 21 has a highest thermal conductivity. For example, a ceramic/resin case 22, aluminum fins 23, and copper mounting plate 21) and a thermal expansion coefficient is compatible with a thermal explanation coefficient of the plurality of fins (Paragraphs 77 and 78: The materials of the case 22, fins 23, and mounting plate 21 are configured in a useable configuration), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that a material forming the mounting plate electrically insulates each of the at least one laser diode from one another.
Reeves et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a mounting plate (14), where the mounting plate is configured to be thermally conductive and electrically insulates the at least one electronic device (Paragraph 35). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the mounting plate as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a thermally conductive and electrically insulating material as taught by Reeves et al. to improve heat sink safety and reliability by minimizing a possibility of damaging an electrical device attached to the heat sink due to electrical shorting.
Regarding claim 3, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where the mounting plate is ceramic, diamond, copper, aluminum, graphite, or a material that includes copper and diamond (Paragraph 78: The mounting plate 21 comprises copper or aluminum).
Regarding claim 4, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where the fins -when the removable insert is coupled with the heat sink body- form at least one channel through which the cooling fluid can flow within the heat sink body (Paragraph 59).
Regarding claims 5 and 7, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where the first side of the mounting plate is configured to couple with between 1 and 20 power semiconductor elements (Figure 8). While Gohara et al. discloses the heat sink as configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (Paragraph 49), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the at least one power semiconductor element comprises at least one laser diode.
Miller et al. teaches a heat sink configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element, where (claim 5) the at least one power semiconductor element includes at least one laser diode (Paragraph 3), and where (claim 7) the at least one laser diode is a laser diode that produces between 1 and 100 Watts (W) of power (Paragraph 3). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the heat sink as disclosed by Gohara et al. to remove heat from at least one laser diode as taught by Miller et al. to improve heat sink versatility by configuring the heat sink to cool a variety of high-heat flux heat sources.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), Schleuning et al. (US 2014/0119393), Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299), and Reeves et al. (US 2018/0042137), and further in view of Lin (US 2007/0261819) and Kawabata et al. (US 2005/0211416).
Regarding claim 6, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above. While Gohara et al. discloses the fins are formed of an alloy material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K ) (Paragraph 78), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the fins are formed of a composite material.
Lin teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (120), where the plurality of fins are formed of one of a plurality of different composite materials (Paragraph 17) with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraphs 17: Graphite for example). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the fins as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a composite material as taught by Lin to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by forming the heat sink from a combination of materials having greater thermal conductivity than a single material.
While Gohara et al. as modified by Lin discloses a heat sink comprising fins formed of a composite material, Gohara et al. as modified by Lin does not explicitly teach or disclose that a fin of the plurality of fins is formed from a different composite material than another fin of the plurality of fins.
Kawabata et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (3), where a fin of the plurality of fins is formed from a different material than another fin of the plurality of fins (Paragraph 90: Each of the fins are formed from a same material or a combination of different materials). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the fins as disclosed by Gohara et al. as modified by Lin from a combination of different materials as taught by Kawabata et al. to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by forming different areas of the heat sink with different degrees of thermal conductivity (e.g. selectively placing higher thermal conductivity fins in locations directly over a heat source).
Claims 8-11, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), and further in view of Schleuning et al. (US 2014/0119393), and Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink (1) configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (14/15), where the heat sink comprises:
A heat sink body (22) configured to be filled with a cooling fluid (Paragraph 54), where the heat sink body includes a cavity (Figure 2A: See space between 21 and 22), and
A removable insert (21 and 23) configured to be placed within the at least one cavity (Figure 2A and paragraph 79: The insert is removable in that the heat sink body 22 and mounting plate 21 are configured to be either mechanically connected or integrally welded together), where the removable includes:
A plurality of fins (23) (Figure 2A) formed of a material with a thermal conductivity (Paragraph 78), and
A mounting plate (21) having a plurality of mounting plate segments (17) structured as raised elements (i.e. segments 17 define elements that are raised from a surface of 21) with cutouts (i.e. gaps/spaces) between respective ones of plurality of mounting plate segments (Figures 1-2B) with a first side that couples (i.e. thermally) with the at least one power semiconductor element (Figure 2A: See side facing 14/15) and a second side that couples (i.e. thermally) with the fins (Figure 2A: See side facing 22) opposite the first side, where respective ones of the at least one power semiconductor element are mounted with a corresponding one of the plurality of mounting plate segments (Figure 2A-2B and Paragraphs 46-47: Respective circuit elements e.g. 12 are provided on respective mounting plate segments e.g. 13, 16, 17),
Where the fins define at least one channel through which the cooling fluid can flows when the removable insert is positioned within the at least one cavity (Paragraph 59).
While Gohara et al. discloses the heat sink as configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (Paragraph 49), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the at least one power semiconductor element comprises at least one laser diode directly mounted to the mounting plate segments.
Schleuning et al. teaches a heat sink configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element, where the at least one power semiconductor element includes at least one laser diode (Paragraph 3), and where the at least one laser diode is directly or indirectly mounted to a mounting plate segment (Paragraph 3). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the heat sink as disclosed by Gohara et al. to remove heat from at least one laser diode as taught by Schleuning et al. to improve heat sink versatility by configuring the heat sink to cool a variety of high-heat flux heat sources.
Further, while Gohara et al. discloses the fins are formed of an alloy material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K ) (Paragraph 78), while the heat sink body is formed from a material with a thermal conductivity (Paragraph 77: Aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, or a copper alloy), and while there is a configuration in which the fins are formed of a material having a higher thermal conductivity than a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77-78: Fins formed of copper and a base formed of aluminum), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the fins are formed of a composite material.
Campbell et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (150) and a heat sink body (140), where the plurality of fins are formed of a composite material (Paragraphs 71-73: A copper-diamond composite) with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraphs 71-73), where the composite material is different from and has a higher thermal conductivity than a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 71-73 and 48), and where (claim 10) the composite material has a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraphs 71-73). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the fins as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a composite material as taught by Campbell et al. to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by forming the heat sink from a combination of materials having greater thermal conductivity than a single material.
Regarding claim 10, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where the mounting plate is ceramic, diamond, copper, aluminum, graphite, or a material that includes copper and diamond (Paragraph 78: The mounting plate 21 comprises copper or aluminum).
Regarding claim 11, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where respective fins of the plurality of fins are parallel with one another with respect to a direction of fluid flow through the at least one channel (Paragraph 56).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above, where the first side of the mounting plate is configured to couple with between 1 and 20 power semiconductor elements (Figure 8). While Gohara et al. discloses the heat sink as configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (Paragraph 49), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the at least one power semiconductor element comprises at least one laser diode.
Miller et al. teaches a heat sink configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element, where the at least one power semiconductor element includes at least one laser diode (Paragraph 3), and where the laser diode is a laser diode that produces between 1 and 100 Watts (W) of power (Paragraph 3). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the heat sink as disclosed by Gohara et al. to remove heat from at least one laser diode as taught by Miller et al. to improve heat sink versatility by configuring the heat sink to cool a variety of high-heat flux heat sources.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), Schleuning et al. (US 2014/0119393), and Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299), and further in view of Tsai (US 2017/0235350).
Regarding claim 12, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above. While Gohara et al. discloses the fins as parallel, Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that at least one fin is not parallel.
Tsai teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (124), where the plurality of fins are parallel with one another with respect to a direction of fluid flow through at least one channel (Paragraph 36) or at least one fin of the plurality of fins is not parallel with another fin of the plurality of fins with respect to a direction of fluid flow through the at least one channel (Paragraph 36). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise at least one fin as disclosed by Gohara et al. to be non parallel with at least one other fin as taught by Tsai to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by inducing/encouraging turbulent mixing flow.
Claims 15, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), and further in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0063848), Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299), and Reeves et al. (US 2018/0042137).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Gohara et al. discloses an apparatus, comprising:
A heat sink (1) that includes a heat sink body (22) configured to be filled with a cooling fluid (Paragraph 54), where the heat sink body includes a cavity (Figure 2A: See space between 21 and 22), and
A removable insert (21 and 23) configured to be placed within the at least one cavity (Figure 2A and paragraph 79: The insert is removable in that the heat sink body 22 and mounting plate 21 are configured to be either mechanically connected or integrally welded together), where the removable includes:
A plurality of fins (23) (Figure 2A) formed of a material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraph 78), and
A mounting plate (21) with a first side (Figure 2A: See side facing 14/15) and a second side (Figure 2A: See side facing 22) opposite the first side that couples with the plurality of fins (Figure 2A) that define at least one channel through which the cooling fluid can flow when the removable insert is positioned within the at least one cavity (Paragraph 59), and at least one power semiconductor element (i.e. 14/15) is coupled with the first side of the mounting plate (Figure 2A).
While Gohara et al. discloses the heat sink as configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element (Paragraph 49), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose the at least one power semiconductor element comprises at least one laser diode.
Miller et al. teaches a heat sink configured to remove heat from at least one power semiconductor element, where the at least one power semiconductor element includes at least one laser diode (Paragraph 3). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the heat sink as disclosed by Gohara et al. to remove heat from at least one laser diode as taught by Miller et al. to improve heat sink versatility by configuring the heat sink to cool a variety of high-heat flux heat sources.
Further, while Gohara et al. discloses the fins are formed of an alloy material with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K ) (Paragraph 78), while the heat sink body is formed from a material with a thermal conductivity (Paragraph 77: Aluminum, an aluminum alloy, copper, or a copper alloy), and while there is a configuration in which the fins are formed of a material having a higher thermal conductivity than a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77-78: Fins formed of copper and a base formed of aluminum), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that the fins are formed of a composite material.
Campbell et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a plurality of fins (150) and a heat sink body (140), where the plurality of fins are formed of a composite material (Paragraphs 71-73: A copper-diamond composite) with a thermal conductivity above 200 Watts per meter-Kelvin (W/m-K) (Paragraphs 71-73), where the composite material is different from and has a higher thermal conductivity than a material forming the heat sink body (Paragraphs 71-73 and 48), and where (claim 16) the composite material is a material that includes copper and diamond, a material that includes aluminum and diamond, or a material that includes aluminum and graphite (Paragraphs 71-73: A copper-diamond composite). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the fins as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a composite material as taught by Campbell et al. to improve heat sink heat transfer capacity by forming the heat sink from a combination of materials having greater thermal conductivity than a single material.
While Gohara et al. discloses that a material forming the mounting plate is configured to have a highest thermal conductivity within the heat sink body (Paragraphs 77 and 78: There is a combination of disclosed materials in which the mounting plate 21 has a highest thermal conductivity. For example, a ceramic/resin case 22, aluminum fins 23, and copper mounting plate 21) and a thermal expansion coefficient is compatible with a thermal explanation coefficient of the plurality of fins (Paragraphs 77 and 78: The materials of the case 22, fins 23, and mounting plate 21 are configured in a useable configuration), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that a material forming the mounting plate electrically insulates each of the the at least one laser diode from one another.
Reeves et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a mounting plate (14), where the mounting plate is configured to be thermally conductive and electrically insulates the at least one electronic device (Paragraph 35). As a result it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise the mounting plate as disclosed by Gohara et al. from a thermally conductive and electrically insulating material as taught by Reeves et al. to improve heat sink safety and reliability by minimizing a possibility of damaging an electrical device attached to the heat sink due to electrical shorting.
Regarding claim 20, Gohara et al. as modified by Campbell et al. discloses an apparatus having composite fins as discussed above, where Gohara et al. further discloses that the material of the fins is different than a material of the mounting plate (Paragraphs 77-78: The heat sink body 22, the mounting plate 21, and the fins 23 comprise same or different materials).
Claims 17, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gohara et al. (US 2016/0343640), Miller et al. (US 2019/0063848), Campbell et al. (US 2007/0121299), and Reeves et al. (US 2018/0042137), and further in view of Kodani et al. (US 2012/0217630).
Regarding claims 17, 18, and 19, Gohara et al. discloses a heat sink as discussed above. While Gohara et al. generally discloses configuring length, height, and width of the heat sink to minimize pressure drop (Paragraph 12), Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose dimensions of the insert.
Kodani et al. teaches a heat sink defining an insert (Figure 3), where the insert has length (L), width (W), and height (H), and where Kodani acknowledges that each of the length (L), width (W), and height (H) influence thermal characteristics of the insert (Paragraph 24). Therefore, length, width, and height of an insert are recognized as result-effective variables, i.e. variables which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is that increasing insert length increases volume thermal resistance (Paragraph 50), increasing insert height increases volume thermal resistance (Paragraph 51), and increasing insert width decreases thermal resistance (Paragraph 52). Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. that length, width, and height of an insert are variable as taught by Kodani et al., it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to configure an insert as disclosed by Gohara et al. with length, width, and height in accordance with the teachings of Kodani et al. to improve a capacity of a heat sink to dissipate heat by minimizing pressure drop and a flow resistance of a fluid flowing through the heat sink since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Response to Arguments
Regarding the arguments on page 7, line 15 to page 8, line 3:
Applicant alleges that the Office Action identifies element 23 of Gohara as both the plurality of fins and the mounting plate as recited in amended claim 1. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they not found to be persuasive.
Applicant’s argument is unclear as the claimed removable insert comprises a plurality of fins and a mounting plate. To clarify the rejection of record, Gohara discloses a removable insert (21 and 23) comprises a plurality of fins (23) and a mounting plate (21) as claimed.
Regarding the arguments on page 8, line 4 to page 9, line 13:
Applicant alleges that Gohara does not teach or disclose a mounting plate having a plurality of mounting plate segments as recited in amended claim 1. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they not found to be persuasive.
As noted in the 35 USC 103 rejections as discussed above, Gohara discloses a mounting plate (21) having a plurality of mounting plate segments (17) structured as raised elements (i.e. segments 17 define elements that are raised from a surface of 21) with cutouts (i.e. gaps/spaces) between respective ones of plurality of mounting plate segments (Figures 1-2B) as recited in amended claim 1. The claims do not appear to specify whether or not the mounting plate and mounting plate segments are integral or separate.
Regarding the arguments on page 9, line 13 to page 10, line 9:
Applicant alleges that Reeves does not teach or disclose the claimed invention in that Reeves on its own does not teach or disclose a mounting plate having a plurality of mounting plate segments as recited in amended claim 1. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they not found to be persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In the instant case, Gohara et al. discloses a mounting plate having a plurality of mounting plate segments as recited in amended claim 1. However, Gohara et al. does not explicitly teach or disclose that a material forming the mounting plate electrically insulates each of the at least one laser diode from one another. It is asserted that Reeves et al. remedies Gohara et al. in that Reeves et al. teaches a heat sink, comprising at least: a mounting plate (14), where the mounting plate is configured to be thermally conductive and electrically insulates the at least one electronic device (Paragraph 35). Forming a mounting plate as disclosed by Gohara et al. from materials as taught by Reeves et al. for the purposes of minimizing a possibility of damaging an electrical device attached to the heat sink due to electrical shorting appears to be obvious based upon the art of record.
Regarding the arguments on page 9, lines 9-12:
Applicant alleges that claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are allowable by virtue of dependency. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not found to be persuasive for the same reasons as discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2019/0259632 discloses an electronics cooling device with protruding mounting surfaces.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 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 JASON N THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6391. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 8:30 am -5:00 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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/JASON N THOMPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763