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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are moot. Applicant has amended the claims to recite new combinations of limitations. Applicant's arguments are directed at the amendment. Please see below for new grounds of rejection, necessitated by Amendment.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 44, 48, 51-54, and 66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DELANO (US 20180156545 A1: previously cited) in view of Kasai (US 20110005724 A1).
Regarding claim 44, DELANO teaches a main body sheet for a vapor chamber in which a working fluid is filled (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner: also see ¶¶ [0012, 0013]),
the main body sheet comprising:
a first main body surface;
a second main body surface provided on an opposite side to the first main body surface (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner);
a frame (see DELANO’s Figure 1 (frame) annotated by Examiner);
a space that is provided on the first main body surface, is provided inside the frame, and is filled with the working fluid (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner and cf. DELANO’s Figure 1 (frame) annotated by Examiner: also see ¶¶ [0012, 0013]);
an outer periphery provided on the frame in a plan view (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner and cf. DELANO’s Figure 1 (frame) annotated by Examiner); and
a retracted portion that is provided on the outer periphery and is retracted toward the space beyond the outer periphery in the plan view (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner and cf. DELANO’s Figure 1 (frame) annotated by Examiner), wherein the retracted portion is positioned to not overlap with the space along a thickness direction (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the retracted portion is positioned to not overlap with the space along a thickness direction).
DELANO does not teach the retracted portion is positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction.
However, it’s old and well known for vapor chambers’ main body sheet to have retracted portion that is positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction, as evidenced by Kasai, see Kasai’s Figure 16 (B) & (C) and cf. Figure 17 where a retracted portion (702a, 702b, 802a, or 3a) is positioned to not overlap with any space provided in the airtight chamber of the vapor chamber and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction (see ¶ [0073]).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the main body sheet of DELANO with the retracted portion is positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction, since as evidenced by Kasai, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of simplifying the sealing method of the vapor chamber.
PNG
media_image1.png
960
1034
media_image1.png
Greyscale
DELANO’s Figure 1 (frame) annotated by Examiner
DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner
PNG
media_image2.png
974
988
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 48, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the retracted portion has a retracted edge extending from the outer periphery in a sectional view along the thickness direction (Z direction: see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner: see Kasai’s Figure 16 (B) & (C) and cf. Figure 17 where (702a, 702b, 802a, or 3a) a retracted edge extending from the outer periphery in a sectional view along the thickness direction), and
the retracted edge includes a first retracted edge (1st RE) extending from the first main body surface toward the second main body surface, a second retracted edge (2nd RE) extending from the second main body surface toward the first main body surface, and a step connection edge (SCE) connecting the first retracted edge with the second retracted edge (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where SCE is connecting the 1st RE with the 2nd RE: Examiner notes that DELANO’s retracted portion as modified by Kasai would result to be positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction).
Regarding claim 51, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the outer periphery has a pair of first side edges (1st SE) extending in a first direction (width direction : see Figure 1) and a pair of second side edges (2nd SE) extending in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in the plan view (Y direction: see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner), and the retracted portion is retracted from each of the pair of first side edges and the pair of second side edges (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the retracted portion is retracted from each of the pair of first side edges. Also see where the retracted portion is also retracted from the pair of second side edges forming a gap in each of the second side edges: Examiner notes that DELANO’s retracted portion as modified by Kasai would result to be positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction).
Regarding claim 52, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the outer periphery has a pair of first side edges (1st SE) extending in a first direction (width direction : see Figure 1) and a pair of second side edges (2nd SE) extending in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction in the plan view (Y direction: see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner), and the retracted portion is retracted from at least one of the pair of first side edges (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the retracted portion is retracted from each of the pair of first side edges: Examiner notes that DELANO’s retracted portion as modified by Kasai would result to be positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction).
Regarding claim 53, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the retracted portion is retracted from one of the pair of first side edges and is also retracted from one of the pair of second side edges (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the retracted portion is retracted from each of the pair of first side edges. Also see where the retracted portion is also retracted from the pair of second side edges forming a gap in each of the second side edges: Examiner notes that DELANO’s retracted portion as modified by Kasai would result to be positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction).
Regarding claim 54, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the retracted portion is retracted from a part of the pair of first side edges (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the retracted portion is retracted from the part of the first side edges, i.e. lower part of the first side edge: Examiner notes that DELANO’s retracted portion as modified by Kasai would result to be positioned to not overlap with any space provided on the first main body surface and filled with the working fluid, along a thickness direction).
Regarding claim 66, DELANO as modified further teaches wherein the space includes every space that is provided on the first main body surface inside the frame and is filled with the working fluid; and an innermost edge of the retracted portion that is most retracted toward the space is on an outer side of an outermost edge of the space, so that the innermost edge of the retracted portion is closer to the outer periphery than the outermost edge of the space is (see Kasai’s Figure 16 (B) & (C) and cf. Figure 17 where the innermost edge of (702a, 702b, 802a, or 3a) is on an outer side of an outermost edge of the space, so that the innermost edge of (702a, 702b, 802a, or 3a) is closer to the outer periphery than the outermost edge of the space is).
Claims 55 and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DELANO (US 20180156545 A1: previously cited) in view of Kasai (US 20110005724 A1).
Regarding claim 55, DELANO teaches a vapor chamber (30) comprising: the main body sheet for the vapor chamber according to claim 44 (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner: Examiner interprets the claim recitations and the references back to base claim 44 are merely used by applicant as a means for not writing out all of the limitations of claim 44); and a first sheet (sheet of 32) laminated on the first main body surface and covering the space (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the sheet of 32 is laminated on the first main body surface and covering the space).
Regarding claim 56, DELANO further teaches further comprising a second sheet (sheet of 34) laminated on the second main body surface (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the sheet of 34 is laminated on the second main body surface), wherein the space extends through from the first main body surface to the second main body surface (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner), and the second sheet covers the space on the second main body surface (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where the sheet of 34 covers the space on the second main body surface).
Claim 57 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DELANO (US 20180156545 A1: previously cited) in view of Kasai (US 20110005724 A1).
Regarding claim 57, DELANO teaches an electronic apparatus (10: see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner) comprising: a housing (housing of 10); a device (14) accommodated in the housing (see DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner); and the vapor chamber (30) according to claim 55 in thermal contact with the device (see in DELANO’s Figure 1 annotated by Examiner where 30 is in thermal contact with 14).
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 KHALED AL SAMIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-8685. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30AM~3:30PM, M-F (E.S.T.).
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 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.
/KHALED AHMED ALI AL SAMIRI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763