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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 8 is 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 8 contains the trademark/trade name COMSOL Multiphysics. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe finite element simulation calculation software and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-7, 9-18 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Li et al. (CN 101504689) in view of Tang et al. (US 2014/0262177 A1) discloses a design method for a radiator of a vehicle power module, wherein the radiator comprises: a heat dissipation substrate having a first surface (22) in proximity to the vehicle power module and a second surface distant from the vehicle power module; and a cooling tank which is located on a side of the second surface distant from the vehicle power module, wherein the cooling tank is provided with an interface in proximity to the second surface, and the second surface seals the interface, a side wall of the cooling tank is provided with a liquid inlet for an inflow of a cooling liquid and a liquid outlet for an outflow of the cooling liquid (implicitly disclosed in Li, however the structure is explicitly disclosed in Tank which discloses a tank and cold plates 202-206 which has an interface with substrate at cold plate cover 208 which is connected to power modules 104 where the tank has inlets 106 and an outlet 108), the heat dissipation substrate is provided with a plurality of pillars (21 in Li and pin fins 404 in Tang) extending from the second surface, the plurality of pillars extends into the cooling tank through the interface; the plurality of pillars form a pillar array (as seen in figure 2-3 of Li and figure 4 of Tang), the pillar array comprises a plurality of rows, the pillars in a same row are arranged on a same straight line, and a distance between two adjacent pillars in the same row is a first distance (d2 in figure 3 of Li, and as seen in figure 4 of Tang), the plurality of rows are parallel to each other, a distance between two adjacent rows is a second distance (d1 in figure 3 of Li and as seen in figure 4 of Tang), the plurality of pillars are cylindrical and have a radius R (as seen in figure 3 of Li). However the combination does not clearly disclose all of the claimed design limitations. While it is well known in the art to modify fin/pin structure to increase heat transfer and reduce pressure drop across the fins, the specific limitations claimed, of “fitting explicit functions of the temperature rise ΔTj and the pressure drop ΔPf with the first distance D1, the second distance D2 and the radius R as dependent variables according to the plurality of samples, through a response surface method; and determining the first distance D1, the second distance D2 and the radius R with an optimization objective that the temperature rise ΔTj and the pressure drop ΔPf are simultaneously minimized, through a multi-objective optimization.” While Li discloses optimization based on the spacing of the fins Li does not explicitly disclose the specific limitation of “fitting explicit functions of the temperature rise ΔTj and the pressure drop ΔPf with the first distance D1, the second distance D2 and the radius R as dependent variables according to the plurality of samples, through a response surface method, as Li is silent as to using a response surface method. The additional prior art does not appear to cure this deficiency. Therefore for at least these reason claim 1 presents grounds for allowable subject matter. Claims 2-7 and 9-18 would be allowable based on their dependency from claim 1.
Claim 8 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhou et al. (US 20230152047 A1), Stoltz et al. (US 20200404804 A1), Dangelo (US 20060231237 A1), Aihara et al. (US 5726495 A), and Bartilson (US 5083194 A) all disclose relevant heat exhcnage structures which disclose some or all of the structural limitations of the heat exchange structure, and some disclose related methods of designing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANS R. WEILAND whose telephone number is (571)272-9847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-3 EST and alternating Fridays.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/HANS R WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights