DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Final Office Action in response to the Amendment/Remarks received on 29 December 2025. Claims 1-7 and 9 have been amended. Claims 8 has been cancelled. Claims 1-7, 9, and 10 remain pending in this application.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, pg. 6, filed 29 December 2025 with respect to objected claims 1-7 and 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments filed on 29 December 2025. The objections of claims 1-7 and 9 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, pgs. 6-7, filed 29 December 2025 with respect to rejected claims 1, 3-7 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the claim amendments filed on 29 December 2025. The rejections of claims 1, 3-7 and 9 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, pgs. 6-7, filed 29 December 2025 with respect to rejected claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the Applicant’s argument,
The Applicant explains herein that ∆PWM(i) is calculated based on various parameters including T(i), Tsp, T(i-1),T(i-2) and coefficients Kp, Ki, Kd, using the above formula. Then, ∆PWM(i) is utilized together with the read PWM(i-1) to calculate PWM(i).
Accordingly, the Applicant respectfully believes rejections raised in Sections 4-7 on Pages 6-7 of the Office Action can be overcome. (see Remarks, pg. 6, paragraphs 3-4)
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claim 2 recites:
in a case where the temperature trend exists, calculating the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) based on the current temperature value T(i); (lines 5-6)
The Examiner maintains the claim as filed does not recite PWM(i-1); hence, the Applicant’s argument is found unpersuasive.
Claim 1, 2-4 and 10 stand objected to and claims 2-4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as set forth below.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2-4 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 has antecedent support for the limitation of “a PWM difference value ∆PWM(i)” in line 17 per the prior recitation of “a PWM difference value ∆PWM(i)” in line 12. Suggested claim language: “the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i)” in line 17; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 2 has antecedent support for the limitation of “… prior to determining whether the obvious temperature trend exists …” in lines 1-2 per the prior recitation of “determining whether an obvious temperature trend exists …” in line 9 of claim 1. Suggested claim language: “prior to the determining of whether the obvious temperature trend exists …” in claim 2; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 3 has antecedent support for the limitation of “… determining whether the temperature trend exists …” in lines 1-2 per the prior recitation of “determining whether an temperature trend exists comprises …” in line 3 of claim 2. Suggested claim language: “… the determining of whether the temperature trend exists further comprises…” in claim 3; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 4 has antecedent support for the limitation of “… determining whether the temperature trend exists comprises …” in lines 1-2 per the prior recitation of “determining whether an temperature trend exists …” in line 3 of claim 2. Suggested claim language: “prior to the determining of whether the obvious temperature trend exists further comprises …”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Claim 10 includes the grammatical issue “… the current temperature value T(i), the temperature value T(i-1) of the previous moment, and the temperature value T(i-2) of the moment prior to the previous moment of the heating element being read are all floating-point data with decimal places.”. Suggested claim language: “… the current temperature value T(i), the temperature value T(i-1) of the previous moment, and the temperature value T(i-2) of the moment prior to the previous moment of the heating element are all floating-point data with decimal places.”; and has been interpreted as such for the purpose of examination.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2-4 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.
Claim 2 recites the step of “calculating the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) based on the current temperature value” (line 5-6) that only identifies a single value, wherein calculation of a difference is based on multiple values in a formula for a PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) in claim 1 (lines 11-16). Hence, the claim is rendered indefinite for failing to clearly define how the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) difference is computed based on a single value (i.e. the current temperature value T(i)), as well as, reciting a different method of calculating the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) from that set forth in claim 1 (i.e. Claim 1 recites the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) is calculated per a formula comprising of multiple values).
Claims 3 and 4, dependent from claim 2, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same rationale as set forth in claim 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2-4 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objections as set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-4 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 5-7 and 9 are allowable.
Reasons for Indication of Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Numerous U.S. Patent Publications and Patents; e.g. U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0076372 A1 discloses a method and apparatus for automatically controlling rotational speed of a cooling fan based on sampled temperature values; U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0330464 A1 discloses a control circuit for controlling a rotational speed of a fan includes a memory element to store operating data corresponding to an operational profile of the fan defined by RPM (revolutions per minute) versus temperature; and U.S. Patent No. 9,846,444 B2 discloses controlling and adjusting fans includes controlling an operation of a fan according to a default rotating speed, after an electronic apparatus is booted; obtaining an operating watt value of a CPU while detecting a temperature of the CPU reaches a set-point; inquiring one of a learning table and a pre-established neural-network data array for obtaining a PWM value and PID parameters corresponding to the operating watt value;
However, none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, expressly teach or fairly suggest the combination of the specifics of increasing or decreasing a fan’s rotational speed based on a current pulse with modulation (PWM) value PWI(i); wherein the current PWI(i) value is calculated based on a PWM value PWM(i-1) at a previous moment and a PWM difference value ∆PWM(i); and the PWM difference value ∆PWM(i) is computed in a case where an obvious trend exist and in a case of where the obvious trend does not exist the PWM difference is set to zero.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following references are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to cooling systems.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0137267 A1 discloses a fan speed control system that communicates with an external processor resource while retaining some autonomy, and utilizes pulse width modulation to maintain a predetermined relationship between fan speed and equipment temperature.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0216882 A1 discloses a heat dissipation system used in an electronic device includes a casing, an inlet, an outlet, two thermal sensors, at least one fan, and a microprocessor.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0145548 A1 discloses a fan driving circuit includes a temperature sensor, a super input and output (SIO) chip, an integrator, a feedback circuit, and a control circuit.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0192475 A1 discloses controlling an air mover (e.g., a fan or a blower) associated with an information handling system.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0291605 A1 discloses controlling an output of air volume and a memory medium.
U.S. Patent No. 8,489,250 B2 discloses a fan control system and method that determines an acceptable temperature raising range, and to prevent a fan from excess operating to achieve energy saving.
U.S. Patent No. 10,496,143 B2 discloses an adaptive fan control method for a mother board.
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 JENNIFER L NORTON whose telephone number is (571)272-3694. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:30 p.m..
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/JENNIFER L NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117