DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the claim amendments filed 9/17/26, with respect to rejections over Porter et al., US 4,805,420, and Rifkin et al., US 3,909,678 have been fully considered and are persuasive. As a result, these rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see the claim amendments filed 9/17/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) over Tuttle have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13 remain allowed over the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-11, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuttle, US 10/834,853, in view of Amo et al., US 2017/0365536, and Lim et al., KR 2019-0054301.
Concerning claim 1, Tuttle (figure 2) teaches a liquid immersion-cooled power module comprising:
an enclosure 224;
an insulating liquid 222 filling the enclosure 224;
a substrate 210 disposed inside the enclosure 224, including an electrical circuit to be electrically connected (column 3, lines 3-10); and
a chip 208 disposed on the substrate 210 inside the enclosure 224 such that the insulating liquid 222 directly contacts the chip 208 and so as to exchange heat with the chip 208, the chip 208 being an electrically connectable element (column 3, lines 3-10).
Tuttle fails to teach the substrate 210 having a plurality of cooling fins in thermal contact with the insulating liquid.
Amo (figure 3c) teaches a substrate 389 having a plurality of cooling fins 371 in thermal contact with the insulating liquid 121.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the cooling fins of Amo in the invention of Tuttle because Amo teaches it exchanges heat generated by the semiconductor module with the refrigerant (paragraph 0059). A skilled artisan knows that the increased surface area provided by the cooling fins increases rate of heat exchange. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Tuttle, which fails to teach a material for the substrate, fails to teach the substrate is a plate comprising a metal material.
Lim, on page 3, paragraph 5 of the translation, teaches the semiconductor device 21 is mounted on a circuit pattern 23 formed of a metal material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the metal circuit pattern of Lim as the substrate in the invention of Tuttle because Lim teaches it is a conventionally known and used substrate material. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In claim 3, Tuttle (figure 2) teaches a support body 202 inside the enclosure 224 and connected to the substrate 210 to fix the substrate 210 inside the enclosure 224.
Regarding claim 4, Amo (figure 3c) teaches the plurality of cooling fins 371 are on a first side of the substrate 389, a second side of the substrate, or on both the first side and the second side of the substrate.
With respect to claim 5, though Tuttle, which teaches circulating through a thermal control system (column 6, lines 1-6), fails to specifically teach the enclosure 224 comprises an inlet and an outlet connecting from an outside to an inside to circulate the insulating liquid, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use an inlet/outlet to circulate in the invention of Tuttle because an inlet/outlet is a conventionally known and used way to circulate. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
As to claim 6, though Tuttle fails to teach the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a straight line, and the substrate is positioned on the straight line inside the enclosure between the inlet and the outlet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Tuttle because this configuration is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In re claim 7, though Tuttle fails to teach the inlet and the outlet of the enclosure are connected to a flow path through which the insulating liquid flows, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Tuttle because this configuration is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Concerning claim 8, though Tuttle fails to teach a pump in the flow path to flow the insulating liquid in through the inlet and out through the outlet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a pump in the invention of Tuttle because a pump is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Pertaining to claim 9, Tuttle (column 6, lines 1-6) teaches a cooler inside or outside the enclosure and configured to cool the insulating liquid.
In claim 10, Tuttle (figure 2) teaches the substrate 210 is vertically disposed in the enclosure, and though Tuttle fails to teach the cooler is located on an outer top surface or an inner top surface of the enclosure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Tuttle because this configuration is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 11, Tuttle (figure 2) teaches a liquid immersion-cooled power module, the power module comprising:
an enclosure 224;
an insulating liquid 222 filling the enclosure 224;
a plurality of substrates 210 disposed inside the enclosure 224, including an electrical circuit to be electrically connected (column 5, lines 3-10);
a connection body 202 electrically connecting the plurality of substrates 210 to each other; and
a plurality of chips 208 disposed on the plurality of substrates 210 such that the insulating liquid 222 directly contacts the plurality of chips 208/242 so as to exchange heat with the plurality of chips 208, each chip 208 being an electrically connectable element (column 5, lines 3-10).
Tuttle fails to teach each substrate 3 having a plurality of cooling fins in thermal contact with the insulating liquid.
Amo (figure 3c) teaches a substrate 389 having a plurality of cooling fins 371 in thermal contact with the insulating liquid 121.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the cooling fins of Amo in the invention of Tuttle because Amo teaches it exchanges heat generated by the semiconductor module with the refrigerant (paragraph 0059). A skilled artisan knows that the increased surface area provided by the cooling fins increases rate of heat exchange. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Tuttle, which fails to teach a material for the substrate, fails to teach the substrate is a plate comprising a metal material.
Lim, on page 3, paragraph 5 of the translation, teaches the semiconductor device 21 is mounted on a circuit pattern 23 formed of a metal material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the metal circuit pattern of Lim as the substrate in the invention of Tuttle because Lim teaches it is a conventionally known and used substrate material. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
As to claim 15, Tuttle (figure 2) teaches a support body 202 inside the enclosure 224 and connected to the substrate 210 to fix the substrate 210 inside the enclosure 224.
In re claim 16, Amo (figure 3c) teaches the plurality of cooling fins 371 are on a first side of the substrate 389, a second side of the substrate, or on both the first side and the second side of the substrate.
Concerning claim 17, though Tuttle, which teaches circulating the insulating liquid (column 6, lines 1-6), fails to teach the enclosure 224 comprises an inlet and an outlet connecting from an outside to an inside to circulate the insulating liquid, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use an inlet/outlet in the invention of Tuttle because they are the conventionally known and used way to circulate. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Pertaining to claim 18, though Tuttle fails to teach the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a straight line, and the substrate is positioned on the straight line inside the enclosure between the inlet and the outlet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Tuttle because this configuration is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In claim 19, though Tuttle fails to teach a pump in the flow path to flow the insulating liquid in through the inlet and out through the outlet, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a pump in the invention of Tuttle because a pump is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 20, Tuttle (column 6, lines 1-6) teaches a cooler inside or outside the enclosure and configured to cool the insulating liquid.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art teach various aspects of the invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A ZARNEKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Matt Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/DAVID A ZARNEKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891 6/13/26
