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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 5, 2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the combination of the limitations “in a cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, part of the second region of the heat conductive layer has an open region in which the heat conductive layer is not formed” and “wherein in the cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, the heat conductive layer covers an entire circumference of an outer surface of the water path member” as required by claim 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed June 5, 2026. Claims 1 and 6 are amended. Claims 7 and 8 are cancelled. The Examiner notes that claims 1-4, 6, and 9-11 are examined.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 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.
With respect to claim 6, the limitation “wherein in the cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, the heat conductive layer covers an entire circumference of an outer surface of the water path member” contradicts the limitation “in a cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, part of the second region of the heat conductive layer has an open region in which the heat conductive layer is not formed” of claim 1 upon which claim 6 depends. The limitation recited in claim 6 appears to direct to the embodiment of Fig. 6, while the limitation newly amended into claim 1 appears to direct to the embodiment of Fig. 10.
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 1-2, 4-6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (US 2007/0085197 A1) in view of Yamauchi (US 2019/0371705 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Arai teaches in Fig. 11:
A heating element cooling structure comprising;
a heating element (combination of semiconductor element 11 and radiator plate 150);
a water path member (cooler 30 with coolant flow passages 31) through which a refrigerant flows (Para. 134 “31 that permit the flow of coolant medium”);
and a heat conductive layer (insulation member 2F, para. 51, “insulation member 2F is formed in a configuration to surround an outer periphery of the cooler 30”, para. 206, insulation film may be an aluminum nitride film) covering an outer surface of the water path member (cooler 30),
the heat conductive layer (2F, made of aluminum nitride) is formed of a material having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the water path member (30, made of aluminum) (the thermal conductivity of aluminum nitride is 321 W/(m K) the thermal conductivity of aluminum is 237 W/(m K)),
wherein the heat conductive layer includes a first region formed on the outer surface, of the water path member, close to the heating element (see annotated Fig. 11 below),
and a second region formed on the outer surface, of the water path member, away from the heating element (see annotated Fig. 11 below),
the first region and the second region of the heat conductive layer are continuously formed (region is continuous, with side portions connecting the top and bottom), and
the water path (30) member having the outer surface covered with a heat conductive layer (2F) abuts one surface of the heating element (abuts top surface of 150 which is included in the heating element with 11)
Arai fails to teach:
in a cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, part of the second region of the heat conductive layer has an open region in which the heat conductive layer is not formed,
and the heat conductive layer is not formed at a longitudinal end of the water path member.
Yamauchi teaches an analogous structure in which a sealing member (30) surrounds a water cooling device (10b). The sealing member of Yamauchi is analogous to the heat conductive layer of Arai as both elements surround and protect the water path member of their respective devices. Yamauchi teaches that it is known for control terminals to pass through a gap in the sealing member. Modifying Arai by Yamauchi to include the control terminals teaches:
in a cross section that passes through the heating element (semiconductor element 20 of Yamauchi, analogous to 11 of Arai) and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member (10B of Yamauchi, analogous to 30 of Arai), part of the second region of the heat conductive layer (2F of Arai, which has an analogous structure 30 of Yamauchi) has an open region in which the heat conductive layer is not formed (Yamauchi does not form the sealing member where the control terminals 57 and 58 are formed),
and the heat conductive layer is not formed at a longitudinal end of the water path member (see Fig. 1 of Yamauchi, para. [0043] “The circumference of the first cooling device 10a and the second cooling device 10b is substantially entirely covered with a sealing member 30, excluding the regions around the open ends”)).
PNG
media_image1.png
349
495
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Arai discloses the claimed invention except for the open portion of the heat conductive layer that seals the water cooler. Yamauchi teaches that it is known to form gaps in the layers surrounding the water cooler in order to accommodate control terminals as set forth In para. [0043]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to create the layers around the water cooler with an open area for the purpose of connecting the semiconductor device to a control substrate through the water cooler and to modify Arai such that the heat conductive layer is not formed at the longitudinal end for the purpose of enabling the water path to connect to a water source. See MPEP 2144.
With respect to claim 2, Arai further teaches:
wherein a linear expansion coefficient of the heat conductive layer (2F, aluminum nitride, linear expansion coefficient = 5.3) is smaller than a linear expansion coefficient of the water path member (30, aluminum, linear expansion coefficient = 23).
With respect to claim 4, the seventh embodiment of Fig. 11 of Arai teaches all limitations of independent claim 1 upon which claim 4 depends. Fig. 11 of Arai fails to teach:
wherein the water path member having the outer surface covered with a heat conductive layer is provided at a top and bottom surface of the heating element.
The ninth embodiment of Fig. 14 of Arai teaches:
wherein the water path member (coolers 30H) is provided at a top and bottom surface of the heating element (11).
Modifying the seventh embodiment of Arai with the ninth embodiment of Arai so that the coolers are on both sides of the heating element teaches:
wherein the water path member (30 of Fig. 11) having the outer surface covered with a heat conductive layer (2F of Fig. 11) is provided at both surfaces of the heating element (top and bottom surface, as shown in Fig. 14).
Fig. 11 of Arai discloses the claimed invention except for the water path member on both sides of the heating element. Fig. 14 of Arai teaches that it is known to put water path members on both sides of the heating element. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Fig. 11 of Arai with the teaching of Fig. 14 of Arai, since Arai states in para. 172 that such a modification would result in increased cooling efficiency of the semiconductor insulation structure. See MPEP 2144.
With respect to claim 6, Arai further teaches:
wherein in a cross section that passes through the heating element and is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the water path member, (cross section shown in Fig. 11),
the heat conductive layer covers an entire circumference of an outer surface of the water path member (2F completely surrounds 30)
With respect to claim 9, Arai further teaches:
A power conversion device comprising the heating element cooling structure according to claim 1, wherein
the heating element (11 and 150) is a semiconductor module (semiconductor element 11 plus radiator plate 150) including a semiconductor element (11) that performs a power conversion (para. 97, semiconductor module may incorporate a power integrated circuit), and wherein
a heat dissipation surface of the semiconductor module (top surface of 11) is in thermal contact with the heat conductive layer (2F) via a heat conduction member (radiator plate 150).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (US 2007/0085197 A1) in view of Yamauchi (US 2019/0371705 A1) as applied to claim 2 above and further Miyazaki (JP 2006339271 A).
With respect to claim 3, Arai/Yamauchi teaches all limitations of claim 2 upon which claim 3 depends. Arai/Yamauchi further teaches:
the water path member (30, cooler made of aluminum) is made of a material containing aluminum.
Arai/Yamauchi fails to teach:
wherein the heat conductive layer is made of a material containing copper
Miyazaki teaches in Fig. 2:
wherein the heat conductive layer (layer comprising the dimension adjusting member 4 and insulator 5 on either side of cooling tube 3) is made of a material containing copper as a main component (dimension adjustment member 4 consists of copper plates)
Arai/Yamauchi discloses the claimed invention except for the material of the heat conductive layer. Miyazaki teaches that it is known to include copper plates between the insulation material and the cooling tube to form the heat conductive layer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a copper plate in the heat conductive layer as taught by Miyazaki, since states at para 3 that such a modification would improve cooling efficiency and provide shielding of electromagnetic waves. See MPEP 2144.
Claims 10-11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (US 2007/0085197 A1) and Yamauchi (US 2019/0371705 A1) as applied to claim 9 above in view of Emori (JP 2016015466 A).
With respect to claim 10, Arai/Yamauchi teaches all limitations of claim 9 upon which claim 10 depends. Arai/Yamauchi fails to teach:
the semiconductor module includes a plurality of semiconductor modules, and wherein
the heat conductive layer includes a region overlapping the heat dissipation surface of each of the plurality of semiconductor modules, and extends along a longitudinal direction of the water path member.
Emori teaches in Figs. 1 and 8:
the semiconductor module (semiconductor modules 8) includes a plurality of semiconductor modules (8-1 and 8-2), and wherein
the heat conductive layer (insulating substrate 11 which includes bonding materials 3B-1 and 3B-2, metal members 4-1 and 4-2, and ceramic plate 5) includes a region overlapping the heat dissipation surface of each of the plurality of semiconductor modules (region that includes 11-1 and 11-2 overlaps 8-1 and 8-2), and extends along a longitudinal direction of the water path member (extends along Y1).
Aria discloses the claimed invention except for use of multiple modules that overlap the heat dissipation surface. Emori discloses that it is known in the art to provide multiple semiconductor modules in the semiconductor modules. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cool multiple semiconductor modules with the same cooler. See MPEP 2144.
With respect to claim 11, Arai/Yamauchi teaches all limitations of claim 9 upon which claim 11 depends. Arai/Yamauchi fails to teach:
the semiconductor module includes a plurality of semiconductor modules, and wherein
the heat conductive layer is formed in a region overlapping the heat dissipation surface of each of the plurality of semiconductor modules, and is not formed in a region between the plurality of semiconductor modules.
Emori teaches in Figs. 1 and 8:
the semiconductor module (semiconductor modules 8) includes a plurality of semiconductor modules (8-1 and 8-2), and wherein
the heat conductive layer (insulating substrate 11 which includes bonding materials 3B-1 and 3B-2, metal members 4-1 and 4-2, and ceramic plate 5) is formed in a region overlapping the heat dissipation surface of each of the plurality of semiconductor modules (11-1 overlaps 9-1, 11-2 overlaps 8-2), and is not formed in a region between the plurality of semiconductor modules (gap between 11-1 and 11-2 between 8-1 and 8-2).
Arai/Yamauchi discloses the claimed invention except for use of multiple modules that overlap the heat dissipation surface with a region between the modules where the heat dissipation is not formed. Emori discloses that it is known in the art to provide multiple semiconductor modules in the semiconductor modules and a gap in the heat dissipation surface between the modules. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cool multiple semiconductor modules with the same cooler while also electrically insulating the modules from each other. See MPEP 2144.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON MICHAEL WEGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7647. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30 AM - 5 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, Jacob Choi can be reached at (469) 295-9060. 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.
/A.M.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JACOB Y CHOI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights