DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment received on 05/27/2026. Amended claims 1 and 11 are acknowledged. Claims 1-12 and 14-21 are pending. Claim 13 is cancelled. Claims 5 and 15-20 remain withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b).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 1-2, 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choudhury et al. (US 2017/0186665, herein “Choudhury”).
Regarding claim 1, Choudhury discloses:
a heat spreader (202) [par. 0030] having a longitudinal axis (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, below), comprising:
a top surface opposite a bottom surface, the bottom surface including a first side portion, a second side portion, and an intermediate portion (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, below);
an outer periphery extending around the bottom surface and including inner facing walls separate from the first side portion, the second side portion, and the intermediate portion of the bottom surface (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, below);
PNG
media_image1.png
360
786
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of domes (207, 209) [par. 0031, lines 10-14] formed within and extending from the bottom surface toward the top surface, and separate from the inner facing walls of the outer periphery, wherein each dome (207, 209) of the plurality of domes (207, 209) is defined by a radius and a depth [x-y-z dimensions of par. 0050-0051, as it applies to par. 0031, lines 10-14], the plurality of domes including a first dome (207) and a second dome (209) [par. 0031, lines 10-14] (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2);
wherein the plurality of domes (207, 209) are longitudinally aligned with one another along the longitudinal axis (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2);
wherein the first side portion of the bottom surface is disposed between the outer periphery and the first dome cavity (207), the second side portion of the bottom surface is disposed between the outer periphery and the second cavity (209), and the intermediate portion of the bottom surface is disposed between the first cavity (207) and the second cavity (209) (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2);
wherein the heat spreader (202) lacks any features, except for the outer periphery, below the bottom surface (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2).
Regarding claim 2, Choudhury discloses:
each of the plurality of domes (207, 209) being defined by a curved profile [par. 0031, lines 10-14].
Regarding claim 4, Choudhury discloses:
the plurality of domes (207, 209) each extend upwardly relative to the bottom surface of the heat spreader (202), such that each dome (207, 209) forms a cavity within the heat spreader (202) (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2).
Regarding claim 11, Choudhury discloses:
the heat spreader (202) consisting of copper [par. 0031].
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.
Claims 3, 6-10, 12, 14 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choudhury.
Regarding claim 3, Choudhury does not further include a third dome. However, the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04, section VI, part B. In this case, adding a third dome will allow for the arrangement of another heat generating component under the third dome optimizing heat transfer according to the user’s needs.
Regarding claims 6-7, Choudhury does not disclose:
the radius of each of the plurality of domes being between 5 and 15mm, as claimed in claim 6, and the depth of each of the plurality of domes being between 0.005 and 0.03mm, as claimed in claim 7.
However, the sizing of the radius and the depth of the plurality of domes/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 radius and the depth of the domes/cavities of Choudhury to match the shape and dimensions that correspond to the underlying heat generating component (203, 204) [par. 0031]. Further, Choudhury alludes to the use of domes (207, 209) of different dimensions (x-y-z dimensions) [par. 0050-0051].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive to the radius and depth of each of the plurality of domes (207, 209) being between 5 mm and 15 mm, and between 0.005 and 0.03mm, respectively, as a matter of an obvious design choice according to the user’s needs, since it has been held that, when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (in this case, the different options for x-y-z dimensions of Choudhury domes 207, 209 of par. 0050-0051), it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II).
Regarding claim 8, the Examiner takes Official Notice that heat spreaders having rectangular shapes for their use in cooling electronic devices and the design of these known devices would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. 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 claim 9, Choudhury discloses, as it applies to claim 8, above:
the outer periphery extending along each of the four sides of the heat spreader (202).
Regarding claim 10, Choudhury discloses:
the outer periphery being at least partially vertically offset from the bottom surface of the heat spreader (202) (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2).
Regarding claims 12 and 14, Choudhury discloses:
a heat spreader (202) (fig. 2C) [par. 0030], comprising:
a top surface opposite a bottom surface (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2);
an outer periphery extending around the bottom surface (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2);
a first cavity (207) within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2), the first cavity defined by a lateral radius and a depth [par. 0031, lines 10-14];
a second cavity (209) within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface and positioned adjacent the first cavity (207) (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2), the second cavity defined by a lateral radius and a depth [par. 0031, lines 10-14];
wherein the first and second cavities are defined by a domed profile [par. 0031, lines 10-14];
wherein the heat spreader (202) consists of a single integral body defining the top surface, the bottom surface, the outer periphery, the first cavity (207), the second cavity (209) (see annotated fig. 2C-CHOU, page 2)
Choudhury does not disclose:
a third cavity within and extending upwardly from the bottom surface and positioned adjacent to the second cavity, the third cavity defined by a lateral radius and a depth;
the lateral radius of the first cavity, second cavity, and third cavity being between approximately 5mm and 15mm, as claimed in claim 12, and
the depth of each of the first, second and third cavity being between 0.005 and 0.03mm, as claimed in claim 14.
The mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04, section VI, part B. In this case, adding a third cavity will allow for the arrangement of another heat generating component under the third cavity optimizing heat transfer according to the user’s needs.
The sizing of the radius and the depth of the plurality of domes/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 radius and the depth of the domes/cavities of Choudhury to match the shape and dimensions that correspond to the underlying heat generating component (203, 204) [par. 0031, lines 10-14]. Further, Choudhury alludes to the use of domes (207, 209) of different dimensions (x-y-z dimensions) [par. 0050-0051].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to arrive to the radius and depth of each of the plurality of domes (207, 209) being between 5 mm and 15 mm, and between 0.005 and 0.03mm, respectively, as a matter of an obvious design choice according to the user’s needs, since it has been held that, when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (in this case, the different options for x-y-z dimensions of Choudhury domes 207, 209 of par. 0050-0051), it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II).
Regarding claim 21, Choudhury discloses:
The single integral body (of heat spreader 202) is composed of copper [par. 0030].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/27/2026 have been fully considered but the arguments do not apply to the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 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
Prosecution Insights