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 .
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-10, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaikh (US 2021/0022266 A1), in view of Liu (US 2011/0174474 A1).
Claime 1: Shaikh discloses a vapor chamber for an electronic device, the vapor chamber (FIG.2) comprising:
a first panel (212);
a second panel (213); and
a wall (214) extending between the first panel (212) and the second panel (213) to separate the vapor chamber into a first section (211) and a second section (211) between the first panel (212) and the second panel (213),
Shaikh discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose the wall including insulation.
However, Liu teaches the wall including insulation (paragraph [38]: insulating layer formed on inner walls of chamber 2) for the purpose of avoiding corrosion caused by potential difference between different matters (paragraph [32]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Shaikh to include the wall including insulation as taught by Liu in order to avoid corrosion caused by potential difference between different matters.
Claime 3: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first section (211) has a first wicking structure (interior surfaces of walls 213 include wick material 224) and the second section (211) has a second wicking structure (interior surfaces of walls 213 include wick material 224) different than the first wicking structure (paragraph [32]: hybrid wick proposal using wick portions having different porosities based on equation given).
Claime 5: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first panel (212) and the second panel (213) are metal (paragraph [28]) and the wall is plastic (paragraph [28]).
Claime 6: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first section (211) has a first wicking structure (interior surfaces of walls 213 include wick material 224) and a working fluid and the second section (211) has a dry second wicking structure (interior surfaces of walls 213 include wick material 224) (paragraph [32]: hybrid wick proposal using wick portions having different porosities based on equation given).
Claime 7: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first wicking structure and the second wicking structure are different types of wicking structures (paragraph [31] [32]: wick material includes sintered metal and another type of material, wick material in two regions 224a/224b having two different wick; hybrid wick proposal using wick portions having different porosities based on equation given).
Claime 8: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first section is to provide a first thermal cooling capability and the second section is to provide a second thermal cooling capability, the second thermal cooling capability different than the first thermal cooling capability (see Table 3; PL1/PL2) .
Claime 9: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the wall is a first wall (214), the vapor chamber further including a second wall (214) coupled to the first wall (214), the second wall (214) including the insulation (Liu, paragraph [38]: insulating layer formed on inner walls of chamber 2), and the first wall and the second wall separating the vapor chamber into the first section (211), the second section (211), and a third section (211).
Claime 10: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first section (211) has a first surface area (inherent) and the second section (211) has a second surface (inherent) different than the first surface area (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, surface areas being different is interpreted as one area is greater than the other) (It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize a first surface area greater than a second surface as a matter of design choice, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claime 16: Shaikh discloses an electronic device (FIG.1) comprising:
a first heat generating component (106);
a second heat generating component (108); and
a multi-sectional vapor chamber (212/213) including:
a first section (211) coupled to the first heating generating (106) component;
a second section (211) coupled to the second heat generating component (108)(to clarify, based on broadest reasonable interpretation, stack 100/200 made of multiple layers which they stacked together forming a structure); and
Shaikh discloses the claimed limitations in claim 16, but fails to disclose a thermal insulation wall separating the first section and the second section.
However, Liu teaches a thermal insulation wall separating the first section and the second section (paragraph [38]: insulating layer formed on inner walls of chamber 2; FIG.2 shows multiple chambers separated by walls) for the purpose of avoiding corrosion caused by potential difference between different matters (paragraph [32]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Shaikh to include a thermal insulation wall as taught by Liu in order to avoid corrosion caused by potential difference between different matters.
Claime 17: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the first section (211) has a first cooling capacity and the second section (211) has a second cooling capacity different than the first cooling capacity (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, a first cooling capacity and a second cooling capacity being different is interpreted as one has higher cooling capacity than the other) (It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize a first cooling capacity and a second cooling capacity in order to enhance cooling of the device, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claime 18: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the first heat generating component (106) is to consume a first amount of power and the second heat generating component (108) is to consume a second amount of power different than the first amount of power (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, a first amount of power and a second amount of power being different is interpreted as one has higher consumption than the other) (It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize a first amount of power and a second amount of power in order to enhance power consumption of the device, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claime 19: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the first heat generating component (106) has a first temperature limit and the second heat generating component (108) has a second temperature limit different than the first temperature limit (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, a first temperature limit and a second temperature limit being different is interpreted as one temperature limit higher than the other one) (It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize a first temperature limit and a second temperature limit in order to enhance heat transfer, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claime 20: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the insulation wall (Liu, insulating layer formed on inner walls of chamber 2; FIG.2) is to impede heat exchange between the first section and the second section (functional language/intended use).
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaikh (US 2021/0022266 A1), in view of Inagaki (US 2019/0219219 A1).
Claime 11: Shaikh discloses an apparatus comprising:
a first vapor chamber (211);
a second vapor chamber (211); and
an insulation fence coupling the first vapor chamber (211) to the second vapor chamber (211).
Shaikh discloses the claimed limitations in claim 11, but fails to disclose an insulation fence coupling the first vapor chamber to the second vapor chamber.
However, Inagaki teaches an insulation fence coupling the first vapor chamber to the second vapor chamber (part 73 used as insulation fence) (paragraph [76]: part 73 made of metal mesh, coarse mesh including porous body used to improve heat insulating) for the purpose of improving heat insulating performance (paragraph [76]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Shaikh to include an insulation fence coupling the first vapor chamber to the second vapor chamber as taught by Inagaki in order to improve heat insulating performance.
Claime 12: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the first vapor chamber (211) is at a first height (inherent), and the second vapor chamber (211) is at a second height (inherent) different than the first height (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, one height is longer than other one. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize a second height different than the first height as a matter of design choice, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claime 13: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 12, wherein the insulation fence (Inagaki, 73) includes a plurality of apertures (Inagaki, to clarify, mesh materials and porous body have apertures or openings in them) to allow airflow from beneath the first vapor chamber to above the second vapor chamber (functional language).
Claime 14: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the insulation fence (Inagaki, 73) inhibits thermal crosstalk between the first vapor chamber and the second vapor chamber (Inagaki, paragraph [76]: part 73 made of metal mesh, coarse mesh used to improve heat insulating).
Claime 15: Shaikh as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the first vapor chamber (211) has a first thickness and the second vapor chamber (211) has a second thickness different than the first thickness (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, one thickness is thicker than other one. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Shaikh to optimize has a second thickness different than the first thickness as a matter of design choice, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Note that no criticality for the limitations claimed - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaikh (US 2021/0022266 A1), in view of Liu (US 2011/0174474 A1), and in view of Evert (WO 2013092394 A2).
Claime 2: Shaikh as modified further fails to disclose wherein the insulation includes an evacuated tube.
However, Evert teaches the insulation includes an evacuated tube (vacuum tube 2.2/2.1 is thermally insulated; see paragraph [62]) for the purpose of transferring thermal energy very efficiently (paragraph [48]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Shaikh to include the insulation includes an evacuated tube as taught by Evert in order to transfer thermal energy very efficiently.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaikh (US 2021/0022266 A1), in view of Liu (US 2011/0174474 A1), and in view of Chen (US 2022/0015265 A1).
Claime 4: Shaikh as modified further fails to disclose wherein the first section has a first working fluid and the second section has a second working fluid different than the first working fluid.
However, Chen teaches the first section (114) has a first working fluid (141) and the second section (131) has a second working fluid (142) different than the first working fluid (142 is a vaporized working fluid and 141 is liquefied working fluid) for the purpose of promoting heat transfer of the heat dissipating components thus improving performance (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Shaikh to include the first section has a first working fluid and the second section has a second working fluid different than the first working fluid as taught by Chen in order to promote heat transfer of the heat dissipating components thus improving performance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure which is relevant to cooling system using heat pipes:
Zhou (US 2022/0053634 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm 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, Len Tran can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
