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 .
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 21-32 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the primary reference Doerr (US 2023/0335451) being used in the current rejection based upon Applicant’s amendments to the claims limiting the shape to a serpentine configuration.
Applicant argues
Applicant believes that claim 31, referring to "the first body portion is embodied without joints" is adequately described, at for example, paragraph [0019] of the specification as originally filed. (Applicant’s remarks if 9/29/25, p. 8)
Sine the application discloses multiple embodiments, this portion of paragraph [0019] appears to be referring to the embodiment shown in fig. 7 of a monolithically construction, and not to the embodiment of fig. 6 that is currently being claimed.
Objections to the Claims, Specification and Drawings
There is a lack of correspondence between the claimed subject matter, the detailed written description, the summary of invention and the drawings as to
Claim 32, line 1-2 requires “the body is embodied monolithically.” The term "monolithically" is understood as “in a single, unified, unbroken, or solid form”. How can the body be embodied as monolithically when claim 21, line 14 requires “the body is composed of two block parts” which is illustrated in fig. 6.
Claim Objections
Claims 21-32 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21, line 5, “part” should be “a part”;
Claim 21, line 8, “serpentine -shaped” should be “serpentine-shaped”;
Claim 25, line 3, “the coolant” should be “the gaseous coolant”;
Claim 29, line 3, “the heat source” lacks antecedent basis; and
Claim 30, line 2, “crosssection” should be “cross-section”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 24-25, 28, and 31 are 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(s) 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.
a. Claim 24, line 2 requires “at least one further said body.” Claim 24 appears to be supported by figures 13 and 14 that illustrate a plurality of bodies 2, each having a circular shape. However claim 21, lines 3-4 from which claim 24 dependent thereon requires “a body . . . hav[ing] a serpentine configuration.” Therefore, the embodiment of amended claim 24 requiring “a serpentine configuration” in combination with “at least one further said body” is a new embodiment that was not disclosed when the instant application was originally filed; and
b. Claim 28, lines 2-4 require “the first body portion being connected to a terminating part to itself in such a way to define a ring-shaped body.” Claim 28 appears to be supported by figure 13 that illustrates a terminating portion 23, that with the first body portion 21 and the terminating part 23 form a ring-shaped body. However claim 21, lines 3-4 from which claim 28 depends thereon requires “a body . . . hav[ing] a serpentine configuration.” Therefore, the embodiment of amended claim 28 requiring “a serpentine configuration” in combination with “a ring-shaped body” is a new embodiment that was not disclosed when the instant application was originally filed;
c. Regarding Claim 31, The originally filed internation application did not include the limitation of “the body is composed of two block parts, with parts of the channel being arranged on a boundary area of the two block parts, respectively.” This limitation was added by the Article 34 amendment dated 6/27/23.
Therefore based upon the construction of the body being composed of “two block parts”, it is impossible for “the first body portion is embodiment without joints” because the embodiment of fig. 6 is being claimed, where there is a joint between the two 24’s.. The Examiner considers where the two blocks 24 are mated together to be a joint.
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 21-32 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 21, line 12 requires “different channels” and line 3 requires “internally closed channels.” Since “different channels” does not have antecedence in “internally closed channels,” are these the same or different channels?
Claim 22, line 2; and Claim 30, lines 1-2, “the channel” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 21 requires “channels” which is plural which claims 22 and 30 require “channel” which is singular; and
Claim 28, lines 2-4 requires “the first body portion being connected to a terminating part to itself in such a way to define a ring-shaped body.” What does “to itself” means? If “the first body portion being connected to a terminating part,” what is connected to “itself”?
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 of this title, 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 21-23, 26, 27, and 29-32 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doerr (US 2023/0335461) and Asfia (US 2008/087406).
With respect to Claim 21, Doerr teaches a heat pipe heat sink operating as a pulsating heat pipe (¶[0010], l. 15), the heat pipe heat sink comprising: a body (fig. 1, 5) comprising more than one internally closed (¶[0020], l. 7) channels (fig. 2, 53) which have a serpentine configuration (see fig. 1) and in which a fluid is arranged such that part of the fluid is present in gaseous form (¶[0044], l. 3), said body comprising a first body portion (5) which is embodied as serpentine-shaped; and a coolant (¶[0047], l. 3), flowing along a surface (see fig. 1) of the first body portion, wherein portions of different channels (53s) are arranged parallel (see fig. 2) to one another, and the body formed at bending positions (fig. 1, 52) into the serpentine shape. Doerr fails to disclose and wherein the body is composed of two block parts, with parts of the channels being arranged on a boundary area of the two block parts. Asfia teaches disclose the body is composed of two block parts (fig. 6A, 24s), with parts (26) of the channel (18) being arranged on a boundary area (mating surfaces of 24s) of the two block parts. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat pipe heat sink of Doerr with the two block parts of Asfia for the purpose of allowing for a complex shaped configuration of the channel to be machined into each of two block parts before the two block parts are joined together.
With respect to Claim 22, Doerr further teaches the body has a cross-section (¶[0038], ll. 1-2, cross-section of 5 is shown in fig. 2) which is oriented at a right angle to the channel in the first body portion and has a same dimension over an uninterrupted length of at least 80% (see fig. 2) of an overall length of the body along the channel. Doerr and Asfia fail to specifically disclose that has a same dimension over an uninterrupted length of at least 80% of an overall length of the body along the channel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to for the uninterrupted length to be any length including at least 80% to allow the vapor bubbles to be pumped smoothly within the channel, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
The requirement for “a same dimension over an uninterrupted length of at least 80% of an overall length of the body along the channel” is presented with a dependent claim, and therefore is not considered a critical characteristic of the invention by the very fact that it is not included with an independent claim. If this is a critical characteristic, can Applicant furnish evidence that the invention that 80% is critical to operation of the invention.
With respect to Claims 23, 26, 27, and 29-32, Doerr further teaches cooling fins (6s) arranged on the first body portion (claim 23), a heat source (101; ¶[0003], ll. 7-8,); and a baseplate (2) connected to the body (5) in a thermally conductive manner (see fig. 1) and designed for connecting (see fig. 1) to the heat source (claim 26), the heat source is arranged at an edge (fig. 1, bottom edge of 2) of the baseplate (claim 27), said body comprising a second body portion (2) which has a level surface (fig. 1, bottom surface of 2) for connection to the heat source (101) (claim 29), the channel has a cross-section with a minimum dimension in a range of 0.5 mm to 5 mm (¶[0038], l. 10, 0.001 m=1 mm) (claim 30), the first body portion is embodied without joints (see figs. 1 and 2, as best understood since claim 21 is requiring a two-block construction) and the body is embodied monolithically (see fig. 1 and 2, as best understood since claim 21 is requiring a two-block construction) (claim 32).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J HOFFBERG whose telephone number is (571) 272-2761. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached on (571) 272-3740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
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.
RJH 10/14/2025
/ROBERT J HOFFBERG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835