DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Objections
The objections to claims 1-11 are withdrawn in view of the amendments thereto.
Examiner’s Note
It is noted that the Official Notice taken by the Examiner in the previous rejection has not been traversed and therefore a heat spreader which comprises a vapor chamber is taken as admitted prior art (See: MPEP 2144.03(c)).
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, 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 12, 13, 15, 16, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2024/0194614 – hereinafter, “Kim”) in view of Schroeder et al. (US 2018/0146569 – hereinafter, “Schroeder”) and further in view of Leigh et al. (US 10,874,032 – hereinafter, “Leigh”).
With respect to claim 12, Kim teaches (In Figs 1, 2, 4, and 18) a solid state drive (10) adapted for rack-mounting in an electronic equipment rack (1200, see Fig 18), in which the SSD is configured for slideable mounting within an SSD-receiving volume in the rack (See Fig 18, the SSD’s (10) are slid into 1200), the SSD comprising: a printed circuit board (120); a plurality of heat-producing semiconductors (131, 133, 135, 137) disposed on the printed circuit board, the semiconductors including NAND flash memory (¶ 0040); a heat spreader (111, 112), the heat spreader being in thermal contact with one or more of the heat-producing semiconductors (See Fig 4), the heat spreader including an externally-facing thermal interface (See Fig 4); a connector (161) providing electrical connections to the printed circuit board and having a mateable portion for removable engagement with a corresponding rack-mounted connector (1210, see Fig 18).
Kim fails to specifically teach or suggest a user-operable latching mechanism that is operable to apply force to an opposing surface in the rack to cause sliding motion of the SSD within the rack to seat the mateable portion of the connector with the rack-mounted connector to establish power and data circuits to the printed circuit board, wherein the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated.
Schroeder, however, teaches a user-operable latching mechanism (14) that is operable to apply force to an opposing surface in a rack (16) to cause sliding motion of an SSD (12) within the rack (16) to seat a mateable portion of a connector (¶ 0062, “a connector of the captured storage device 12”) with a rack-mounted connector (¶ 0062, “with a connector of the circuit board 20 shown in FIG. 1”) to establish power and data circuits to a printed circuit board (See Figs 6-7, the latching mechanism cam (50) presses against rack portion locking member (72) which helps to connect the mating connectors of the SSD and rack).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schroeder with that of Kim, such that, Kim includes a user-operable latching mechanism that is operable to apply force to an opposing surface in the rack to cause sliding motion of the SSD within the rack to seat the mateable portion of the connector with the rack-mounted connector to establish power and data circuits to the printed circuit board, as taught by Schroeder, since doing so would allow for secure mechanical and electrical attachment of the SSD within the rack of Kim.
With respect to the limitations regarding the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated,
Leigh teaches wherein a thermal interface (Top surface of 723) of a heat spreader (723) provides a thermal conduction path for a heat-producing semiconductor (722) to an external liquid-cooled coldplate (631) that is disposed in a rack (3) when corresponding connectors of an electronic device (700) and the rack are seated (See Fig 5B, when 724 and 602 are seated, the cold plate contacts the thermal interface of 700).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Leigh with that of Kim such that, in Kim the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated, as taught by Leigh, since doing so would provide additional cold plate cooling to the SSD mounted within the rack of Kim.
With respect to claim 13, Kim further teaches a thermal interface material (171, 173) disposed between the heat-producing semiconductors (131, 133, 135, 137) and the heat spreader (111, 112, see Fig 4).
With respect to claim 15, Kim further teaches that the plurality of heat-producing semiconductors (131, 133, 135, 137) is disposed across both sides of the printed circuit board (120, see Fig 4) and the heat spreader (111, 112) comprises multiple components distributed on both sides of the printed circuit board over the heat-producing semiconductors (See Fig 4).
With respect to claim 16, Kim as modified by Schroeder and Leigh teach the limitations of claim 12 as per above but fail to specifically teach or suggest that the heat spreader comprises a vapor chamber.
A heat spreader which comprises a vapor chamber is taken as admitted prior art (See the above Examiner’s Note).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the heat spreader of Kim comprise a vapor chamber since doing so would allow for the heat spreader of Kim to accept more heat than the currently disclosed heat spreader.
With respect to claim 20, Kim teaches (In Figs 1, 2, 4, and 18) a solid state drives (10) each SSD comprising: a printed circuit board (120); a plurality of heat-producing semiconductors (131, 133, 135, 137) disposed on the printed circuit board, the semiconductors including NAND flash memory (¶ 0040); a connector (161) having a mateable portion for removable engagement with a corresponding rack-mounted connector (1210, see Fig 18), in which the matable portion is exposed externally (See Fig 1); a heat spreader (111, 112), the heat spreader being in thermal contact with one or more of the heat-producing semiconductors (See Fig 4), the heat spreader including a thermal interface (Exterior surfaces of 111, 112) that is at least partially exposed from the SSD;
Kim fails to specifically teach or suggest a liquid-cooling system, comprising: a liquid-cooled coldplate; a rack to which the coldplate is moveably mounted, the rack providing receiving slots for each of a plurality of slideably removably mountable solid state drives (SSD), and a user-operable latching mechanism that is operable to apply force to the SSD-receiving slot to cause sliding motion of the SSD within the SSD-receiving slot to seat the mateable portion of the connector with the rack-mounted connector to establish power and data circuits to the printed circuit board, wherein the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to the coldplate when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated; a fluid distribution system having an interface to a liquid-cooling system; and fluid couplers disposed on the coldplate connecting the coldplate to the fluid distribution system.
Schroeder, however, teaches a user-operable latching mechanism (14) that is operable to apply force to a receiving slot (Slot in a rack (16) where 12 resides) to cause sliding motion of a drive (12) within the receiving slot to seat a mateable portion of a connector with a rack-mounted connector to establish power and data circuits to the printed circuit board (See Figs 6-7, the latching mechanism cam (50) presses against rack portion locking member (72) which helps to connect the mating connectors of the SSD and rack).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schroeder with that of Kim, such that, Kim includes a user-operable latching mechanism that is operable to apply force to the SSD-receiving slot to cause sliding motion of the SSD within the SSD-receiving slot to seat the mateable portion of the connector with the rack-mounted connector to establish power and data circuits to the printed circuit board, as taught by Schroeder, since doing so would allow for secure mechanical and electrical attachment of the SSD within the rack of Kim.
With respect to the limitations a liquid-cooling system, comprising: a liquid-cooled coldplate; a rack to which the coldplate is moveably mounted, the rack providing receiving slots for each of a plurality of slideably removably mountable solid state drives (SSD) wherein the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to the coldplate when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated; a fluid distribution system having an interface to a liquid-cooling system; and fluid couplers disposed on the coldplate connecting the coldplate to the fluid distribution system, Leigh teaches a liquid-cooling system, comprising: a liquid-cooled coldplate (631 + 633); a rack (3) to which the coldplate is moveably mounted, the rack providing receiving slots (604) for each of a plurality of slideably removably mountable devices (700) wherein a thermal interface (Top surface) of a heat spreader (723) provides a thermal conduction path for a heat-producing semiconductor (722) to the coldplate when a corresponding connector (724) of the device (700) and rack (601) are seated (See Fig 5B); a fluid distribution system (634) having an interface to a liquid-cooling system (Col. 9, ll. 11-23); and fluid couplers (635) disposed on the coldplate (631 + 633) connecting the coldplate to the fluid distribution system (See Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Leigh with that of modified Kim, such that modified Kim includes a liquid-cooling system, comprising: a liquid-cooled coldplate; a rack to which the coldplate is moveably mounted, the rack providing receiving slots for each of a plurality of slideably removably mountable solid state drives (SSD) wherein the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to the coldplate when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated; a fluid distribution system having an interface to a liquid-cooling system; and fluid couplers disposed on the coldplate connecting the coldplate to the fluid distribution system, as taught by Leigh, since doing so would provide additional cold plate cooling to the SSD mounted within the rack of Kim.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Schroeder in view of Leigh and further in view of Isaacs et al. (US 2016/0262270 – hereinafter, “Isaacs”).
With respect to claim 14, Kim as modified by Schroeder and Leigh teach the limitations of claim 12 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest that the heat spreader comprises multiple discrete components, different components adapted to interface with heat-producing semiconductors having different stand-off heights with respect to the printed circuit board.
Isaacs, however, teaches (In Fig 3B) a heat spreader (312) which comprises multiple discrete components (320’, 320’’), different components adapted to interface with heat-producing semiconductors (305’, 305’’) having different stand-off heights with respect to a printed circuit board (302, ¶ 0041, “As depicted in FIG. 3C, in one or more assembled implementations, each heat transfer element 320, 320′, 320″ has a thickness or height appropriate for the space between the respective electronic component 305, 305′, 305″ (for which enhanced cooling is to be provided), and the inner surface 313 of thermally conductive cover 312.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Isaacs with that of Kim such that, in Kim the heat spreader comprises multiple discrete components, different components adapted to interface with heat-producing semiconductors having different stand-off heights with respect to the printed circuit board, as taught by Isaacs, since doing so would allow for components which may be of different heights to be able to better thermally communicate with an outside of the SSD.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Schroeder in view of Leigh and further in view Leigh et al. (US 10,765,038 – hereinafter, “Leigh-038”).
With respect to claim 19, Kim further teaches that the heat spreader (111, 112) encloses the printed circuit board and heat-producing semiconductors (See Fig 4), and in which the SSD has a form factor for slideable motion relative to surfaces forming an SSD-receiving volume in the rack (Fig 18 discloses that the SSD’s are provided in a rack and thus has a form factor for slidable motion relative to the rack).
Kim fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein the form factor complies with specifications promulgated by the EDSFF (Enterprise and Datacenter Standard Form Factor).
Leigh-038, however, teaches an SSD wherein the form factor complies with specifications promulgated by the EDSFF (Enterprise and Datacenter Standard Form Factor)(Col. 5, ll. 41-51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Leigh-038 with that of Kim, such that the form factor of Kim complies with specifications promulgated by the EDSFF (Enterprise and Datacenter Standard Form Factor), as taught by Leigh-038, since doing so would allow for the SSD of Kim to conform with a particular standard thus allowing the SSD to work with standardized racks and chassis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 7, 9-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
See p. 16 of the non-final office action.
Claims 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
See p. 17 of the non-final office action.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
With respect to the Applicant’s remarks to claim 12 that, “As discussed for example in paragraphs [0044] and [0056], the primary objective of the system disclosed in Kim is to provide a comprehensive electromagnetic interference (EMI) and electrostatic discharge (ESD) shield by creating a continuous electrical path between a semiconductor chip, a grounded connection pad, and the outer case using unit shielding structures. These unit shielding structures must "surround" the semiconductor chip to be effective.
The liquid cooling system as disclosed in Leigh requires a cold plate 630 to make direct physical and thermal contact with the top surface of a pluggable module 700.
Integrating a liquid cooling system including a cold plate as disclosed in Leigh into a system as disclosed in Kim would require removing or significantly altering the very "shielding structures" that define Kim's invention. If the cold plate is placed on top of a semiconductor chip 131 of Kim, it would physically obstruct the shielding structures from surrounding the semiconductor chip 131 and contacting the upper wall of case 110 as Kim requires. Thus, the proposed modification would make the system disclosed in the primary reference Kim unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, by destroying the intended EMI/ESD protection function of the primary reference Kim.
In light of in re Gordon discussed above, where it was decided that "if the proposed modification would render the prior art invention being modified unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, then there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification", it is therefore similarly submitted that there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification.” (bold emphasis added) (Present remarks page 11) the Examiner respectfully notes that the Examiner’s proposed modification to Kim does not involve removing or significantly altering the very shielding structures that define Kim’s invention. Rather, as stated in the previous and present rejections to claim 1, the Examiner proposed modifying Kim such that, “in Kim the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated”. That is, Kim would be modified such that an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack would come into contact with, for example, the upper surface of the heat spreader (111) and thus the cold plate would not physically obstruct the shielding structures from surrounding the semiconductor chip and contacting the upper wall of the case, as alleged.
Accordingly, the proposed modification to Kim is not believed to render Kim unsatisfactory for its intended purpose and the previous rejection to claim 12 is maintained.
With respect to the Applicant’s further remarks to claim 12 that, “As discussed in paragraph [0065] of Kim, shielding structures 141 are characterized by an elastic body designed to provide a "restoring force" that ensures electrical contact between the substrate 120 and the case 110.
The system disclosed in Leigh requires a pivoting support 621 and an engagement mechanism that moves a cold plate 630 into an engaged position via an arc-like motion.
In the compact internal environment of the SSD case 110 of Kim, for example as illustrated in FIG. 2, the presence elastic shielding structures 141, which are distributed around respective semiconductor chips 131 and occupy the vertical space between the substrate 120 and the case 110, would act as physical barriers to the mechanical movement of a pivoting support as disclosed in the system of Leigh.
Accordingly, it is respectfully submitted that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that modifying the primary reference Kim to include a mechanical linkage as disclosed in Leigh would make the system disclosed in the primary reference Kim unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, by removing essential shielding components in the SSD case 110 of Kim.
In light of in re Gordon discussed above, where it was decided that "if the proposed modification would render the prior art invention being modified unsatisfactory for its intended purpose, then there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification", it is therefore similarly submitted that there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification.” (bolded emphasis added) (Present remarks page 12) the Examiner respectfully notes that the Examiner’s proposed modification to Kim does not involve removing essential components in the SSD case of Kim’s invention. Rather, as stated in the previous and present rejections to claim 1, the Examiner proposed modifying Kim such that, “in Kim the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated”. That is, Kim would be modified such that an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack would come into contact with, for example, the upper surface of the heat spreader (111) and thus the shielding structures (141) would not act as physical barriers and would not need to be removed, as alleged.
Accordingly, the proposed modification to Kim is not believed to render Kim unsatisfactory for its intended purpose and the previous rejection to claim 12 is maintained.
With respect to the Applicant’s remarks to claim 12 that, “In the present case, Kim discloses, for example as shown in FIG. 18, a data storage apparatus 1000 including a rack 1200 on which a a plurality of SSD apparatuses 10 are mounted, and a plurality of cooling fans 1300. Further, as shown in FIG. 3 each SSD apparatus 10 includes a plurality of slits 149 and accommodation spaces SP1 and SP2. As specifically disclosed in paragraph [0047] of the reference, a cooling fan (for example the cooling fans 1300 of FIG. 18), generates "airflow for colling the SSD apparatus10." The reference further states that
the airflow generated by the cooling fan flows between the first accommodation space SP1 and the second accommodation space SP2 through the slits 149 of the first shielding structure 140, and the first semiconductor chips 131 in the first accommodation space SP1 may be cooled by the airflow generated by the cooling fan.
Therefore, the system disclosed in Kim uses a plurality of fans to generate air flow to air cool the SSD apparatus 10.
Column 3, lines 7-23 of Leigh specifically indicates that air-cooling is often "suboptimal" and "insufficient," specifically proposing liquid cooling to replace forced-air systems
It is respectfully submitted that here is no motivation to combine these references because Kim's design is optimized for the very air-cooling system that Leigh aims to replace. Modifying Kim to include Leigh's cold plate would change the principle of operation of the primary reference Kim, by eliminating the need for Kim's specific "gapped" shielding design intended to facilitate airflow, rendering Kim's specific structural choices moot.
In light of in re Ratti discussed above, where it was decided that if "the proposed modification or combination of the prior art would change the principle of operation of the prior art invention being modified, then the teachings of the references are not sufficient to render the claims prima facie obvious", it is therefore similarly submitted that there is no suggestion or motivation to make the proposed modification.” (bolded emphasis added) (Present remarks pages 12-13) the Examiner respectfully notes that the Examiner’s proposed modification to Kim does not involve eliminating the need for Kim’s specific gapped shielding design intended to facilitate airflow. Rather, as stated in the previous and present rejections to claim 1, the Examiner proposed modifying Kim such that, “in Kim the thermal interface of the heat spreader provides a thermal conduction path for the heat-producing semiconductors to an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack when the corresponding connectors of the SSD and rack are seated”. That is, Kim would be modified such that an external liquid-cooled coldplate that is disposed in the rack would come into contact with, for example, the upper surface of the heat spreader (111) and thus the gapped shielding design intended to facilitate airflow would not need to be eliminated, as alleged.
Accordingly, the proposed modification to Kim is not believed to change the principle of operation thereof and the previous rejection to claim 12 is maintained.
With respect to the Applicant’s remarks to claim 20 that, “Independent claim 20 includes limitations similar to those of independent claim 12 as discussed above. Accordingly, it is submitted that independent claim 20 is additionally patentable over the combination of Kim, Schroeder, and Leight [sic] within the meaning of 35 USC § 103. (Present remarks page 13) the Examiner notes the above response with respect to claim 12.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZACHARY M PAPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2201. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am - 6pm EST.
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, Jayprakash N Gandhi can be reached at 571-272-3740. 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.
/ZACHARY PAPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835