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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "an electronic device," and "a deflection unit" in claims 1 and 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The "electronic device" is sufficiently described in the specification as computer, controller, monitoring device, memory, RAM, HDD (see paragraphs 34-35 and 56).
The "deflection unit" is sufficiently described in the specification as a surface with/without grooved channels (see paragraphs 20, 74).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 12 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelnutt et al. (US 2014/0218861 A1) and in view of Moon (US 2022/0248564 A1) and further in view of Delia (US 2012/0186790 A1).
In regards to claims 1 and 3, Shelnutt discloses a fluid leakage deflection arrangement (immersion tank 400 with liquid return/deflection system 440, see figs. 4-5, 8; and paragraphs 71-72) for a liquid-cooled rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (racks of solid state (SSD), hard disk (HDD) drives 125, 410, 510 and servers 200, 300, see figs. 4-5, which are cooled by liquid 412, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 66-67), comprising:
an immersion case (immersion cooling tanks, figs. 4-5) containing a first cooling liquid (cooling liquid, figs. 4-5) in which an electronic device (servers 200, 300) of the rack-mounted electronic processing assembly is at least partially submerged therein (servers 200, 300 partially submerged in cooling liquid, see figs. 4-5), the electronic device comprising electronic components (SSD, HDD 125, see figs. 4-5);
a liquid cooling block (cooling system 460, 860, see figs. 4-5 and 8, through which cooling liquid flows, see paragraph 71) mounted above the electronic device (460, 860 mounted above 200, 300, SSD and HDD, see figs. 4-5 and 8) and in direct thermal contact with the electronic components (heat transferred from servers and drives to the cooling fluid in cooling system 460 and 860, see paragraphs 71 and 126-130, where the rising vapor from the server and HDDs come in contact with cooling block tubes 460, see paragraphs 70-71) and incorporating an internal conduit (pipes 467 and 867s, see figs. 4-5 and 8) to accommodate the circulation of a channelized cooling liquid (cooling fluid in pipes 467, 867) to absorb and extract thermal energy from the electronic components (cooling fluid in pipes 467, 867 absorbs heat energy, see paragraphs 71, 86, 91-92 and 140); and
a deflection unit (deflection surface 440 and collection system 545, see figs. 4-5) fixedly attached to the immersion case assembly (see figs. 4-5), configured to prevent the electronic device from being in contact with leaking channelized cooling liquid by diverting channelized cooling liquid leaking from the cooling block away from the electronic components (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545 (deflection unit), prevent all the condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5; since the deflection unit 440, 545 are directly below the cooling bock 460, the deflection unit 440, 545 are fully capable of diverting all fluid including the leaking fluid away from the electronic components, see paragraphs 71-72). In addition, the deflection unit includes an overhanging structure (see below annotated fig. 5).
However, Shelnutt does not explicitly teach that the cooling block is mounted on the electronic device.
Moon teaches an immersion tank system (100) including a first coolant liquid (30) and a cooling block (20) mounted on the electronic device (20 on 89, see fig. 7B and paragraph 46), where electronic components (86) of the electronic device (89) are immersed in the first liquid coolant (see paragraph 46 and figs. 7). In addition, Moon discloses that the deflection unit comprises an overhanging structure (mounting hardware plate 15, which overhangs the width of electronic plates 10, see fig. 1A and paragraphs 32, 34).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly of Shelnutt by providing a cooling block on the electronic device based on the teachings of Moon in order to improve heat transfer between the channelized cooling liquid and the electronic device because contact between the cooling and heating surfaces improves heat transfer by conduction.
PNG
media_image1.png
740
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shelnutt also does not explicitly teach that the deflection structure attaches to the liquid pipes/block.
However, Delia teaches electronic equipment enclosure (526) with cooling heat exchanger (500), and fluid shield tray (400, 200) coupled to the supply and return pipes (122, 124) of the cooling heat exchanger (see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 27-28), wherein, the fluid shield tray (400, 200) directs leaked fluid to the bottom of the enclosure (see paragraphs 26-27). In addition, Delia teaches that the fluid shield (200) is fixed to the barrier (204) and overhangs from the barrier (see fig. 2); and the shield (200) guides the leaked fluid into drain channel (206, see paragraph 26).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly or method of Shelnutt as modified by providing the deflection unit structure that is fixedly attached to the liquid cooling block of the electronic device of the assembly of Shelnutt based on the teachings of Delia for the advantage of protecting the electronic devices from receiving leaking channelized liquid from above racks by directly attaching the deflection unit to the source of fluid flow at the cooling heat exchanger or liquid cooling block and to prevent shutting down the electronic computing devices for maintenance due leaking channelized liquid.
In regards to claim 2, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses that a rack system comprising a plurality of fluid leakage deflection arrangements (plurality of rack systems with cooling and immersion tanks, see fig. 8 and paragraphs 65-67). Shelnutt does not explicitly teach bottom and top rows of immersion cases disposed on top of one another, and the deflection unit comprising an overhanging structure fixedly attached to an upper portion of the electronic device to deflect leaking liquid emanating from the immersion cases of the top row.
However, Moon teaches that the rack system (racks 200 with immersion system 100) being arranged so as to respectively accommodate bottom and top rows of immersion cases (stacked bottom and top row immersion cases 100 within rack 200, see fig. 2) disposed on top of one another (see fig. 2), the deflection units (mounting plates 15 of each cooling system 100, see figs. 1-3) of the immersion cases of the bottom row being arranged (above the electronic devices 10 of the immersion stack 100 located at the bottom of the stack 200, see figs. 3 and 1-2) so as to deflect leaking liquid emanating from the immersion cases of the top row (leaking fluid would be directed away from electronic devices 10 due to the top mounting plate 15 above the bottom row of electronic devices 10, see figs. 1-3). Moon also teaches that the deflection unit comprises an overhanging structure fixedly attached to an upper portion of the electronic device (mounting hardware plate 15, which overhangs the width of electronic plates 10, see fig. 1A and paragraphs 32, 34).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly of Shelnutt by providing a stack of electronic rack system such that the bottom and top rows of immersion cases are arranged to be disposed on top of one another and the deflection units of the immersion cases of the bottom row being arranged with an overhanging structure fixedly attached to an upper portion of the electronic device to deflect leaking liquid emanating from the immersion cases of the top row based on the teachings of Moon in order to protect the electronics devices from receiving a channelized liquid that is different from the heat dissipating first cooling fluid, and that is not as efficient heat transfer medium as the first cooling fluid.
In regards to claim 4, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further discloses that the overhanging structure comprises an angular linear cross-sectional profile (see angular liner profile of liquid deflection system 440, figs. 4-5) configured to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545 (deflection unit), prevent all the condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5).
In regards to claim 6, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses one or more sensors (conductivity strip sensor 530, fluid level sensor 535, see fig. 5; and temperature sensor, see paragraph 104), disposed within the immersion case (see fig. 5), and configured to measure a level of at least one physical/chemical property of the first cooling liquid to detect a presence of a leaking liquid in the immersion case (fluid leakage detection system, see paragraph 102) and further configured to provide signals reporting the same (see step 710 where sensor data is monitored, fig. 7); and an electrical power controller (processor 150, controller 140, fig. 1; processing device, see paragraphs 103-104; controller 2650) communicatively coupled to a power distribution unit (PDU) (controller 140 coupled to PDU 145, paragraph 59; PDU 425, see fig. 4; also see controller 2650 communicatively coupled to PDU 425, fig. 26) that supplies electric power to the rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (via 415, see paragraph 75 and fig. 1) and is communicatively coupled to the one or more sensors (sensors coupled to controller, see figs. 1, 26), the electrical power controller configured to receive, assess, and execute commands based on the reported signals from the one or more sensors (see fig. 7; paragraphs 102-104 and 243-244).
In regards to claim 7, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses that the measurement of the at least one physical/chemical property of the first cooling liquid to detect a presence of a leaking liquid leaking in the immersion case comprises measuring at least one of temperature data, conductivity data, viscosity data, and density data (conductivity strip sensor 530, fluid level sensor 535, see fig. 5; and temperature sensor, see paragraph 104, measuring temperature and conductivity data).
In regards to claim 8, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 7 and further discloses that the upon assessing the received reporting signals, the electrical power controller executes commands (see fig. 7 and paragraphs 100-102) to issue the following instructions:
(i) transmit a normal operations message based on the reported property levels being within an acceptable threshold level (detected conditions not requiring maintenance at step 712 fig. 7, wherein the controller continues normal operation and further monitors the sensor data at step 710, see fig. 7);
(ii) transmit a maintenance check message based on the reported property levels being close to a limit of the acceptable threshold level (alternative limitations that are not required by the claim; however, Shelnutt discloses performing control operation at step 714, to maintain equilibrium state if detected conditioners require maintenance or control at step 712, see fig. 7); and
(iii) transmit a shutdown alert message and issue instructions to disconnect the electrical power supplied by the PDU to the rack-mounted assembly (automatic power shutoff and transmission of notification, see paragraph 102) based on the reported property levels exceeding the acceptable threshold level (power shutoff or notification issued in response to detected conditions above high level threshold, see figs. 14 and paragraph 102).
In regards to claim 9, Shelnutt discloses a method of deflecting fluid leakages (immersion tank 400 with liquid return/deflection system 440, see figs. 4-5, 8; and paragraphs 71-72) in a liquid-cooled rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (racks of solid state (SSD), hard disk (HDD) drives 125, 410, 510 and servers 200, 300, see figs. 4-5, which are cooled by liquid 412, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 66-67), comprising:
partially submerging an electronic device (servers 200, 300 partially submerged in cooling liquid, see figs. 4-5) of the rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (figs. 4-5 and 8), within a first cooling liquid (cooling liquid, figs. 4-5) contained by an immersion case (immersion cooling tanks, figs. 4-5), the electronic device comprising electronic components (SSD, HDD 125, see figs. 4-5);
mounting a liquid cooling block (cooling system 460, 860, see figs. 4-5 and 8, through which cooling liquid flows, see paragraph 71) above the electronic device (460, 860 mounted above 200, 300, SSD and HDD, see figs. 4-5 and 8) to be in direct thermal contact with the electronic components (heat transferred from servers and drives to the cooling fluid in cooling system 460 and 860, see paragraphs 71 and 126-130, wherein the rising vapor from the server and HDDs come in contact with cooling block tubes 460, see paragraphs 70-71), the liquid cooling block incorporating an internal conduit (pipes 467 and 867s, see figs. 4-5 and 8) to accommodate the circulation of a channelized cooling liquid (cooling fluid in pipes 467, 867) to absorb and extract thermal energy from the electronic components (cooling fluid in pipes 467, 867 absorbs heat energy, see paragraphs 71, 86, 91-92 and 140); and
fixedly attaching a deflection unit to the immersion case assembly (see (deflection surface 440 and collection system 545, see figs. 4-5), the deflection unit configured to shield (by surface 440) the electronic device from being in contact with leaking channelized cooling liquid by diverting channelized cooling liquid leaking from the cooling block away from the electronic components (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545, prevent condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5; since the deflection unit 440, 545 are directly below the cooling bock 460, the deflection unit 440, 545 are fully capable of diverting all fluid including the leaking fluid away from the electronic components, see paragraphs 71-72). In addition, the deflection unit includes an overhanging structure (see below annotated fig. 5).
However, Shelnutt does not explicitly teach that the cooling block is mounted on the electronic device.
Moon teaches an immersion tank system (100) including a first coolant liquid (30) and a cooling block (20) mounted on the electronic device (20 on 89, see fig. 7B and paragraph 46), where electronic components (86) of the electronic device (89) are immersed in the first liquid coolant (see paragraph 46 and figs. 7). In addition, Moon discloses that the deflection unit comprises an overhanging structure (mounting hardware plate 15, which overhangs the width of electronic plates 10, see fig. 1A and paragraphs 32, 34).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly of Shelnutt by providing a cooling block on the electronic device based on the teachings of Moon in order to improve heat transfer between the channelized cooling liquid and the electronic device because contact between the cooling and heating surfaces improves heat transfer by conduction.
PNG
media_image1.png
740
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shelnutt also does not explicitly teach that the deflection structure attaches to the liquid pipes/block.
However, Delia teaches electronic equipment enclosure (526) with cooling heat exchanger (500), and fluid shield tray (400, 200) coupled to the supply and return pipes (122, 124) of the cooling heat exchanger (see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 27-28), wherein, the fluid shield tray (400, 200) directs leaked fluid to the bottom of the enclosure (see paragraphs 26-27). In addition, Delia teaches that the fluid shield (200) is fixed to the barrier (204) and overhangs from the barrier (see fig. 2); and the shield (200) guides the leaked fluid into drain channel (206, see paragraph 26).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly or method of Shelnutt as modified by providing the deflection unit structure that is fixedly attached to the liquid cooling block of the electronic device of the assembly of Shelnutt based on the teachings of Delia for the advantage of protecting the electronic devices from receiving leaking channelized liquid from above racks by directly attaching the deflection unit to the source of fluid flow at the cooling heat exchanger or liquid cooling block and to prevent shutting down the electronic computing devices for maintenance due leaking channelized liquid.
In regards to claim 12, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses
accommodating the liquid-cooled rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (see liquid-cooled assemblies 400, 500, figs. 4-5) in a system (rack-based server system, see paragraph 53), the rack system being configured to accommodate a plurality of liquid-cooled rack-mounted electronic assemblies (plurality of immersion tanks with plurality of electronic devices in horizontal order, see fig. 8 and paragraphs 53, 122) on horizontal racking shelve (base panel 810, fig. 8); wherein the rack system comprising a plurality of fluid leakage deflection arrangements (plurality of rack systems with cooling and immersion tanks, see fig. 8 and paragraphs 65-67). In addition, Moon teaches that the rack system (racks 200 with immersion system 100) being arranged so as to accommodate a bottom and a top rows of immersion cases (stacked bottom and top row immersion cases 100 within rack 200, see fig. 2) disposed on top of one another (see fig. 2), the deflection units (mounting plates 15 of each cooling system 100, see figs. 1-3) of the immersion cases of the bottom row being arranged (above the electronic devices 10 of the immersion stack 100 located at the bottom of the stack 200, see figs. 3 and 1-2) so as to deflect leaking liquid emanating from the immersion cases of the top row (leaking fluid would be directed away from electronic devices 10 due to the top mounting plate 15 above the bottom row of electronic devices 10, see figs. 1-3). Moon also teaches that the deflection unit comprises an overhanging structure fixedly attached to an upper portion of the electronic device (mounting hardware plate 15, which overhangs the width of electronic plates 10, see fig. 1A and paragraphs 32, 34).
In regards to claim 15-17, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses one or more sensors (conductivity strip sensor 530, fluid level sensor 535, see fig. 5; and temperature sensor, see paragraph 104), disposed within the immersion case (see fig. 5), and configured to measure a level of at least one physical/chemical property of the first cooling liquid to detect a presence of a leaking liquid in the immersion case (fluid leakage detection system, see paragraph 102) and further configured to provide signals reporting the same (see step 710 where sensor data is monitored, fig. 7); and incorporating a power controller (processor 150, controller 140, fig. 1; processing device, see paragraphs 103-104; controller 2650) communicatively coupled to a power distribution unit (PDU) (controller 140 coupled to PDU 145, paragraph 59; PDU 425, see fig. 4; also see controller 2650 communicatively coupled to PDU 425, fig. 26) that supplies electric power to the rack-mounted electronic processing assembly (via 415, see paragraph 75 and fig. 1) and is communicatively coupled to the one or more sensors (sensors coupled to controller, see figs. 1, 26), the electrical power controller configured to receive, assess, and execute commands based on the reported signals from the one or more sensors (see fig. 7; paragraphs 102-104 and 243-244).
In addition, Shelnutt further discloses that the upon assessing the received reporting signals, the electrical power controller executes commands (see fig. 7 and paragraphs 100-102) based on the assessment of reported signals, the power controller:
(i) transmitting a normal operations message based on the reported property levels being within an acceptable threshold level (detected conditions not requiring maintenance at step 712 fig. 7, wherein the controller continues normal operation and further monitors the sensor data at step 710, see fig. 7);
(ii) transmitting a maintenance check message based on the reported property levels being close to a limit of the acceptable threshold level (alternative limitations that are not required by the claim; however, Shelnutt discloses performing control operation at step 714, to maintain equilibrium state if detected conditioners require maintenance or control at step 712, see fig. 7); and
(iii) transmitting an alert shutdown message to disconnect the electrical power supplied by the PDU to the rack-mounted assembly (automatic power shutoff and transmission of notification, see paragraph 102) based on the reported property levels exceeding the acceptable threshold level (power shutoff or notification issued in response to detected conditions above high level threshold, see figs. 14 and paragraph 102).
Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelnutt et al. in view of Moon and Delia as applied to claim 3 above and further in view of Park (US 2020/0064024 A1).
In regards to claim 5, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further discloses that the overhanging structure comprises an angular linear cross-sectional profile (see angular liner profile of liquid deflection system 440, figs. 4-5) configured to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545 (deflection unit), prevent all the condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5).
However, Shelnutt is silent about the curved profile of the deflection plate.
Park discloses a curved round lower plate (240, 2700, see paragraph 38, 53-54) disposed below heat exchanger (200, fig. 10) to downwardly divert leaking condensate from the heat exchanger (see paragraphs 53-54).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly or method of Shelnutt as modified by providing an overhanging structure comprising a curved cross-sectional profile to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device based on the teachings of Park in order to disperse the collecting condensate to avoid corrosion due to stagnation of the condensate (see paragraph 54, Park).
Claim 10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelnutt et al. in view of Moon and Delia as applied to claim 9 above and further in view of Shelnutt (US 2017/0181329 A1) herein after referred as Shelnutt329'.
In regards to claim 10, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9 and further discloses that the deflection unit includes an overhanging structure (see below annotated fig. 5). Also Moon further discloses that the deflection unit comprises an overhanging structure fixedly attached to an upper portion of the electronic device (mounting hardware plate 15, which overhangs the width of electronic plates 10, see fig. 1A and paragraphs 32, 34). In addition, Delia teaches that the fluid shield (200) is fixed to the barrier (204) and overhangs from the barrier (see fig. 2); and the shield (200) guides the leaked fluid into drain channel (206, see paragraph 26).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly or method of Shelnutt as modified by providing the deflection unit structure with an overhang that is fixedly attached to the liquid cooling block of the electronic device of the assembly of Shelnutt based on the combined teachings of Moon and Delia for the advantage of protecting the electronic devices from receiving leaking channelized liquid from above racks by directly attaching the deflection unit to the source of fluid flow at the cooling heat exchanger or liquid cooling block and to prevent shutting down the electronic computing devices for maintenance due leaking channelized liquid.
However, Shelnutt does not explicitly teach that the deflection unit includes grooved channels to divert fluid leak.
Shelnutt329’ teaches that the deflection unit (junction plate 632 of the stacked pipe covers 602, 630, see figs. 6) incorporates grooved channels (liquid passing cavities 616 near interconnected junction 632, see figs. 6 and paragraph 71) on an upper surface of the bottom rack (see fig. 6F) to facilitate the diverting of the fluid leaks away (diverting the fluid to the bottom of the rack 614, see paragraph 71).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly of the method of Shelnutt as modified by providing the deflection unit structure that incorporates grooved channels on an upper surface thereof to facilitate the diverting of the fluid leaks away from the electronic components based on the teachings of Shelnutt329’ in order to quickly and efficiently direct leaked fluid away from the stack of electronic devices and to the facility drain line (see paragraph 71, Shelnutt329’).
In regards to claim 14, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10 and further discloses that the overhanging structure comprises an angular linear cross-sectional profile (see angular liner profile of liquid deflection system 440, figs. 4-5) configured to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545 (deflection unit), prevent all the condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5).
Claim 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelnutt et al. in view of Moon and Delia and Shelnutt329' as applied to claim 10 above and further in view of Park (US 2020/0064024 A1).
In regards to claim 13, Shelnutt as modified teaches the limitations of claim 10 and further discloses that the overhanging structure comprises an angular linear cross-sectional profile (see angular liner profile of liquid deflection system 440, figs. 4-5) configured to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device (liquid return system 440 and collection system 545 (deflection unit), prevent all the condensed liquid from falling onto the top surfaces of servers, SSD and HDD drives, see figs. 4-5 and paragraphs 71-72 and 97, which would also prevent leaking channelized cooling liquid from being in contact with the HDD and SSD drives, see fig. 5).
However, Shelnutt is silent about the curved profile of the deflection plate.
Park discloses a curved round lower plate (240, 2700, see paragraph 38, 53-54) disposed below heat exchanger (200, fig. 10) to downwardly divert leaking condensate from the heat exchanger (see paragraphs 53-54).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the deflection unit of the fluid leakage deflection arrangement of the electronic processing assembly or method of Shelnutt as modified by providing an overhanging structure comprising a curved cross-sectional profile to downwardly divert leaking channelized cooling liquid away from the electronic device based on the teachings of Park in order to disperse the collecting condensate to avoid corrosion due to stagnation of the condensate (see paragraph 54, Park).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1-4 of Remarks, filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 9 under 35 USC 103 over Shelnutt in view of Moon have been fully considered and are persuasive regarding claim amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Shelnutt in view of Moon and further in view of Delia.
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 MERAJ A SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-3027. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 9:00-1:00 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached on 571-270-7740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MERAJ A SHAIKH/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763