DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicant’s Response, dated 29 July 2026, which papers have been made of record.
Claims 1-20 are currently presented for examination, of which claims 16-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-15, in the reply filed on 29 July 2026 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that “there exists considerable overlapping subject matter between the elected claims and the non-elected claims.” Applicant contends that any field of search for one group would necessarily overlap with the field of search for the other group. Applicant further asserts that “it would not be a serious burden on the Examiner to examine both the product claims and the method claims in this case.”
This is not found persuasive because mere overlap is not sufficient to obviate the basis for restriction. Mere assertion without evidence that there is alleged overlap between the groups does not overcome the basis for the distinction presented in the Office Action of 29 May 2026. Applicant’s assertions do not overcome the basis for examination burden presented in the Office Action of 29 May 2026.
Furthermore, Applicant cannot overcome the fact that searching the method is not required for the apparatus as claimed. To keep the groups together would be a burden to the examiner. Regarding Applicant's argument that examination of the entire application would not place a serious burden on the examiner, this is not found persuasive because Applicant has not provided any evidence or showing to support such a conclusion. Clearly, consideration of additional claims drawn to one or more distinct groups of inventions in diverse categories (product and methods) mandates different fields of search with the associated concomitant hundreds to thousands of patents and time consuming evaluation of those patents which gives rise to a sizeable burden on the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: There appears to be a typographical error at paragraph [0005] which recites “power moules” but likely should recite “power modules” instead.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 7-10
Claims 1-3 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent 11,350,545 to Yang et al. (hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a cold plate (10), comprising: additively manufactured integral components (see Col. 4, lines 12-20) layered together to form a unitary body (assembly; see Figs. 2-6), comprising: a cold plate body (adapters 14) having a region (at 41) on which a power module is disposable (intended use; electronic component 16, see Col. 3, lines 20-28) and defining a first interior channel (at lower surface 38; fins 40 define a channel within the complete assembly) extending across the region (at 41) in a first plane (mid-height plane coplanar with upper surface of 18 through body 18); a frame (12, 112) to support the cold plate body (12), the frame (12, 112) defining a second interior channel (channels 44, 48) communicative with the first interior channel (at fins 40) and extending along a periphery of the cold plate body (14) in the first plane (see Fig. 1); and a cooling boss (at locations 18) attached to the frame (12, 112) and defining a third interior channel (channels 46; see Fig. 3, understood at least to be positioned below bosses 18 and thus defined in relation thereto) communicative with the second channel (44, 48) and extending in a second plane transverse to the first plane (can define vertically extending plane parallel with section VIII; see Fig. 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 2, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Yang discloses that the additively manufactured integral component forming the unitary body further comprise: an inlet (24) defining an interior channel inlet (see Fig. 3) communicative with at least an upstream region of the first interior channel (channel at fins 40); and an outlet (26) defining an interior channel outlet (see Fig. 3) communicative with at least a downstream region of the first interior channel (channel at fins 40), wherein the inlet (24) and the outlet (26) further define a flow direction through the first, second, and third interior channel (see fluid flow 102).
Regarding claim 3, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 2, and further Yang discloses that the cold plate body comprises fins (40) extending through the first interior channel.
Regarding claim 7, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further Yang discloses that the second plane (vertically extending plane parallel with section VIII) is perpendicular to the first plane (mid-height plane coplanar with surface 18), and the cooling boss (at locations 18) comprises a lower part (body of member 18; see Fig. 2) below the first plane and an upper part above the first plane (plane coplanar with upper surface of 18).
Regarding claim 8, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 7, and further Yang discloses that the lower part and the upper part are laterally offset from one another (see Fig. 2; multiple bosses at locations 18, such at an upper part can be selected leftmost location 18 and lower part can be selected from rightmost location with respect to Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 7, and further Yang discloses that the lower part and the upper part (portions of boss members 18) each define U-shaped sections of the third interior channel (see Fig. 3; channel defined by fins having curved path through fins, multiple U-shaped portions can be defined thereof).
Regarding claim 10, Yang discloses the limitations of claim 7, and further Yang discloses that the cooling boss defines the third interior channel as a serpentine channel (see Fig. 3; channel defined by fins having curved path through fins, multiple U-shaped portions can be defined thereof).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 4-6
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2015/0361922 to Alvarez et al. (hereinafter “Alvarez”).
Regarding claim 4, Yang teaches the limitations of claim 3, and however Yang does not explicitly disclose that the fins comprise pin fins that are angled along the flow direction.
It is known in the art of heat exchangers to provide pin fins which are angled relative to a flow. For example, Alvarez teaches such.
Alvarez teaches a heat transfer plate (140) having a plurality of fins (116, 146) which extend in a flow direction (see Fig. 7). Alvarez teaches that at least some of its pins are pin fins (146; see paragraph [0036]) and illustrates the pin fins (146) being angled relative to the flow direction (see flow in and flow out arrows). Alvarez teaches that different fin arrangements may provide advantages in cooling operation, while being efficient and cost effective (see paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device taught by Yang to include conventional heat dissipation devices, such as pin fins, as taught by Alvarez. (See MPEP 2143(1)(C)). The resulting device would advantageously perform heat exchange in a predictable manner in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Thus, the combination of Yang and Alvarez teaches the limitations of claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Yang teaches the limitations of claim 3, however Yang does not explicitly disclose fin spacings of the pins differ at different locations along the flow direction.
However, it is known in the art of heat exchangers to provide fins which are have different fin spacings at different locations along the flow direction. For example, Alvarez teaches such.
Alvarez teaches a heat transfer plate (140) having a plurality of fins (116, 146) which extend in a flow direction (see Fig. 7). Alvarez teaches that at least some of its pins are pin fins (146; see paragraph [0036]) and illustrates the pin fins (146) having different spacings in the flow direction (see flow in and flow out arrows; spacing between pins 146 and pins 116 shown to vary towards flow-out direction). Alvarez teaches that different fin arrangements may provide advantages in cooling operation, while being efficient and cost effective (see paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device taught by Yang to include conventional heat dissipation devices, such as fins with varying spacing, as taught by Alvarez. (See MPEP 2143(1)(C)). The resulting device would advantageously perform heat exchange in a predictable manner in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Thus, the combination of Yang and Alvarez teaches the limitations of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches the limitations of claim 3, however Yang does not explicitly disclose that a fin spacing of the fins decreases along the flow direction.
It is known in the art of heat exchangers to provide fins in the assembly which have a decreasing spacing in the flow direction. For example, Alvarez teaches such.
Alvarez teaches a heat transfer plate (140) having a plurality of fins (116, 146) which extend in a flow direction (see Fig. 7). Alvarez teaches that at least some of its pins (116 and 146) having different spacings in the flow direction (see flow in and flow out arrows; spacing between pins 146 and pins 116 shown to vary towards flow-out direction). Spacing between the fins (116) nearest the flow-in inlet (see Fig. 7) are illustrated as being greater than spacing of the fins four rows further towards the flow out direction (see Fig. 7) Alvarez teaches that different fin arrangements may provide advantages in cooling operation, while being efficient and cost effective (see paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device taught by Yang to include conventional heat dissipation devices, such as fins with varying spacing, as taught by Alvarez. (See MPEP 2143(1)(C)). The resulting device would advantageously perform heat exchange in a predictable manner in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Thus, the combination of Yang and Alvarez teaches the limitations of claim 6.
Claims 11-15
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2017/0194878 to Jones et al. (hereinafter “Jones”).
Regarding claim 11, Yang discloses a cold plate assembly comprising: the cold plate according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the cold plate body (12, 112) has two or more regions on which power modules (electric components 16) are disposable, and the cooling boss (at 18) is provided as two or more cooling bosses (see Fig. 2) attached to the frame and respectively defining third interior channels (channels 46; see Fig. 3, understood to at least lie below cooling bosses at 18 and thus be defined thereby). Yang teaches a power module (16) disposed on a corresponding one of the two or more regions (at 18).
Yang does not explicitly disclose that the power modules include bus bar units disposed on a corresponding one of the two or more regions and a corresponding one of the two or more cooling bosses and a terminal block unit attached to a corresponding one of the two or more cooling bosses. Yang teaches its electronic component (16) may be a standard/commercial product or may be manufactured from a variety of semiconductors for a particular function (see Col. 3, lines 29-45).
It would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art to select a conventional electronic component, such as a power module having bus bars and a terminal block.
Jones teaches a conventional electronic device (see Figs. 10A-10H). Jones teaches an electronic device comprising a terminal block (121) and bus bars (see paragraph [0053]; busbars 111A, 111B). Jones teaches that its power modules (IGBT) may be connected to a cold plate or heat sink (see paragraph [0040])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to connect the cooling plate taught by Yang to a conventional electronic device, such as the terminal block device taught by Jones. (See MPEP 2143(1)(A)). The resulting assembly would predictably operate to transfer heat from the power generating components connected to the cold plate without modification of the principles of operation of Yang.
Thus, the combination of Yang and Jones teaches the limitations of claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, Yang discloses a cold plate assembly (see Fig. 2), comprising: additively manufactured integral components (see Col. 4, lines 12-20) layered together to form a unitary body (assembly; see Figs. 2-6), comprising: a cold plate body (adapters 14) having a power module region (at 41) and defining a first interior channel (at lower surface 38; fins 40 define a channel within the complete assembly) extending across the region (at 41) in a first plane (mid-height plane parallel to surface 28, through fins 40); a frame (12, 112) to support the cold plate body (12), the frame (12, 112) defining a second interior channel (channels 44, 48) communicative with the first interior channel (at fins 40) and extending along a periphery of the cold plate body (14) in the first plane (see Fig. 1); and a cooling boss (at locations 18) attached to the frame (12, 112) and defining a third interior channel (channels 46; see Fig. 3, understood to at least lie below cooling bosses at 18) communicative with the second channel (44, 48) and extending in a second plane transverse to the first plane (can define vertically extending plane parallel with section VIII; see Fig. 7 and 8). Yang further teaches a power module (16) disposed on the power module region (at regions 18), but does not explicitly disclose a bus bar or terminal block unit. Yang teaches its electronic component (16) may be a standard/commercial product or may be manufactured from a variety of semiconductors for a particular function (see Col. 3, lines 29-45).
It would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art to select a conventional electronic component, such as a power module having bus bars and a terminal block.
Jones teaches a conventional electronic device (see Figs. 10A-10H). Jones teaches an electronic device comprising a terminal block (121) and bus bars (see paragraph [0053]; busbars 111A, 111B). Jones teaches that its power modules (IGBT) may be connected to a cold plate or heat sink (see paragraph [0040])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to connect the cooling plate taught by Yang to a conventional electronic device, such as the terminal block device taught by Jones. (See MPEP 2143(1)(A)). The resulting assembly would predictably operate to transfer heat from the power generating components connected to the cold plate without modification of the principles of operation of Yang.
Thus, the combination of Yang and Jones teaches the limitations of claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Yang and Jones teaches the limitations of claim 12, and further Yang teaches that the power module (16) comprises a metal-oxide-semiconductor field effect transistor element (see Col. 3, lines 33-40).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Yang and Jones teaches the limitations of claim 12, and further Yang teaches that the cold plate body has two or more power module regions (at 18; see Fig. 2) and the cooling boss is provided as two or more cooling bosses (see Fig. 2) attached to the frame and respectively defining third interior channels (46; see Fig. 3), and the cold plate assembly further comprises: two or more power modules (16) respectively disposed on the two or more power module regions (see Fig. 2); a divider (see Fig. 5; unnumbered members in contact with bodies 16 and 18 and upper surface element 18 is positioned on) disposed on the cold plate body between the two or more power module regions (at 16). Jones teaches power modules having bus bar units (111A, 111B) such that one having ordinary skill in the art would reasonably understand that power modules having bus bars can be connected to the divider of the cold plate without modification of the principles of operation of Yang. It would be obvious to further modify the connecting interfaces of the cold plate of Yang to support the power module, including the bus bars, without modification of the principles of operation of the cold plate.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Yang and Jones teaches the limitations of claim 12, and further Yang teaches that the additively manufactured integral component forming the unitary body further comprise: an inlet (24) defining an interior channel inlet (see Fig. 3) communicative with at least an upstream region of the first interior channel (channel at fins 40); and an outlet (26) defining an interior channel outlet (see Fig. 3) communicative with at least a downstream region of the first interior channel (channel at fins 40), wherein the inlet (24) and the outlet (26) further define a flow direction through the first, second, and third interior channel (see fluid flow 102).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0398878 to Choobineh et al. teaches a cold plate assembly (see Fig. 8A) for use with an electronic device (10), defining a plurality of channels (106, 122, 124).
United States Patent Application Publication 2022/0250507 to Amante is directed to a cold plate assembly (see Fig. 5) having multiple fluid paths therein (see arrows of fluid movement in Fig. 5).
United States Patent Application Publication 2003/0230400 to McCordic teaches a cold plate assembly (60) for supporting an electronic device (86-93) and cooling the device in use.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRELL C. FORD whose telephone number is (313)446-6515. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM to 5:15 PM, Monday to Friday.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/DARRELL C FORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights