Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/23/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-9, 11 and 13-21 are pending. Claims 1, 7 and 11 are amended. Claims 10 and 12 are cancelled. Claims 16-20 remain withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102:
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 11, 14-15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shim et al. (US 2004/0075987, herein “Shim”).
Regarding claim 1, Shim discloses:
a heat spreader (300, 302 plus 304 plus 306 plus 308 plus 310 plus 312 plus 314) (figs. 7-9), comprising:
a top surface opposite a bottom surface (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3);
a first cavity formed within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface, the first cavity having a first cavity bottom surface defining a first plane and a first depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3);
a second cavity formed within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface, the second cavity having a second cavity bottom surface defining a second plane and a second depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3); and
an outer periphery (at 312) extending around the first cavity and the second cavity, and the outer periphery (312) having a periphery top surface recessed from the top surface and facing a direction parallel to the top surface (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3);
PNG
media_image1.png
397
785
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the first depth is greater than the second depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3), and
an inclined surface (at 314) extends between and couples the first cavity and the second cavity, the inclined surface (at 314) being completely disposed between the first plane and the second plane (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, above);
wherein the first cavity extends from a first side of the outer periphery to the inclined surface (at 314) and the second cavity extends from the inclined surface (at 314) to a second side of the outer periphery (at 312) (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, above).
Regarding claim 2, Shim discloses:
the heat spreader (300) being defined by a generally rectangular shape having at least four sides (see in fig. 7).
Regarding claim 3, Shim discloses:
wherein at least two of the sides of the heat spreader (300) include a raised surface extending at least upwardly from the outer periphery (at 312) of the heat spreader (300) (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, above).
Regarding claim 4, Shim discloses:
the raised surface defining a thickness that is less than an overall thickness of the heat spreader (300) (see in annotated fig. 8-SHIM, above).
Regarding claim 5, Shim discloses:
the outer periphery (at 312) defining a thickness that is less than an overall thickness of the heat spreader (300) (seen in annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3).
Regarding claim 6, Shim discloses:
the heat spreader (300) being composed of copper [par. 0131].
Regarding claim 11, Shim discloses:
a heat spreader (300, 302 plus 304 plus 306 plus 308 plus 310 plus 312 plus 314) (figs. 7-9), comprising:
a top surface opposite a bottom surface (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, below);
a first cavity formed within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface, the first cavity having a first cavity bottom surface defining a firs plane and a first depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3);
a second cavity formed within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface, the second cavity having a second cavity bottom surface defining a second plane and a second depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3); and
an outer periphery (at 312) extending vertically upward from the bottom surface of the heat spreader (300) and extending around at least a portion of the first cavity and at least a portion of the second cavity (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3); and
the outer periphery (at 312) having a periphery top surface recessed from the top surface and facing a direction parallel to the top surface (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3); and
wherein the first depth is greater than the second depth (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, below), and
an inclined surface (at 314) extends between and couples the first cavity and the second cavity, the inclined surface (at 314) being completely disposed between the first plane and the second plane (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3);
wherein the first cavity extends from a first side of the outer periphery to the inclined surface (at 314) and the second cavity extends from the inclined surface (at 314) to a second side of the outer periphery (at 312) (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3).
Regarding claim 14, Shim discloses:
the outer periphery (at 312) including a raised surface extending upwardly and outwardly from the outer periphery (at 312) (seen in annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3).
Regarding claim 15, Shim discloses:
the raised surface defining a thickness that is less than a thickness of the heat spreader (300) (seen in annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3).
Regarding claim 21, Shim discloses:
the bottom surface of the heat spreader (300) is a planar bottom surface (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103:
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim in view of Antoniswamy et al. (US 2017/0186628, herein “Antoni ‘628”).
Regarding claim 7, Shim discloses:
the first cavity being defined by the first cavity bottom surface bottom surface and at least four sides of the first cavity (see annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3), but does not disclose:
the first cavity including a curved surface extending between the first cavity bottom surface and the outer periphery of the heat spreader.
However, Antoni ‘628, also directed to heat spreaders (102) used in cooling electronics (figs. 1 and 2) [par. 0002], teaches that
heat spreaders (102) comprising a first cavity (220 for memory die 204 at left side of the heat spreader 102) having a first depth and a second cavity (220 for memory die 204 at right side of the heat spreader 102) having a second depth (seen in fig. 2), wherein the first depth is greater than the second depth (seen in fig. 2),
are known to have
the first cavity (220 for memory die 204 at left side of the heat spreader 102) including a curved surface extending between the first cavity bottom surface and the bottom surface of the heat spreader (fig. 2) (it is noted, Antoni ‘628 teaches the heat spreader 102 having a rectangular or polygonal profile, par. 0022).
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate into Shim the teachings of Antoni ‘628 to have the first cavity including a curved surface extending between the first cavity bottom surface and the bottom surface of the heat spreader as a matter of an obvious design choice according to the user needs. Further, Applicant has not disclosed any criticality on having the first cavity including a curved surface extending as claimed and it has been held that changing the shape of an old device is a matter of design choice which involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04, section IV, part A.
Claims 8-9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim.
Regarding claim 8, Shim discloses:
the second cavity being defined by a generally rectangular shape (seen in fig. 7, as it applies to fig. 8), but does not specifically disclose:
the first cavity being defined by a non-rectangular shape.
However, it is old and known in the art that heat spreaders used in cooling electronics are design according to the user’s needs and to fit the shape of the electronic component needed to be cooled, as also acknowledged by Shim [par. 0126, where marking area 302 of fig. 51 corresponds to marking area 302 of fig. 8, and which geometry and associates support configurations may be selected as desired, and adjusted according to the semiconductor chips onto which the heat spreaders are to be assembled].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have Shim first cavity being defined by a non-rectangular shape, as a matter of an obvious design choice according to the user’s needs. Further, it has been held that changing the shape of an old device is a matter of design choice which involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04, section IV, part A.
Regarding claims 9 and 13, the sizing of the depth of the cavities is considered to be an obvious design choice, wherein one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would design or size the depth of the cavities to provide a proper fit for the electronic components needed to be cooled. See for instance par. 0103 of Shim alluding to an appropriate overall scaling of the dimensions of the heat spreader (1400, similar to spreader 300 of fig. 8) to accommodate the intended underlying semiconductor chip. Further, par. 0126 of Shim alludes to the fact that supports (314) (of heat spreader 300) configurations may be selected according to the semiconductor chips onto which the heat spreaders are to be assembled. This is, the depth of the first and second cavities are designed to match the semiconductor chip intended to be used. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the depths of the first and second cavities of Shim through routine experimentation to arrive to the depths claimed in order to optimize heat transfer contact between the substrate and a respective semiconductor chip arranged in each cavity.
Response to Arguments
The rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, is withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In pages 8-9, Applicant argues that “Shim does not disclose the newly added limitation ‘the first cavity extends from a first side of the outer periphery to the inclined surface and the second cavity extends from the inclined surface to a second side of the outer periphery’ as recited in claim 1 and 11, since the ‘first cavity’ of the device of Shim is centrally located relative to ‘the outer periphery’.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Please refer to the rejection above, particularly to annotated fig. 8-SHIM, page 3, for an explanation on how Shim reads on the newly added limitations of claims 1 and 11. It is noted, the overly broad language of the newly added limitations allows a broad interpretation of the claim, which reference Shim reads on.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6018. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763