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 § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans.
Regarding claim 1, Evans discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1, thermal cycler apparatus 100) comprising:
a thermal transfer block configured to receive a well plate having a plurality of wells (Fig. 6, base plate 140, well block 110, sample plate 80, sample wells 82; Col. 2, lines 45-48, FIG. 1 shows a sample plate 80 with sample wells 82 ready to be positioned on a well block 110 of a thermal cycler apparatus 100 such that each sample well 82 is positioned in a well 120 of well block 110),
wherein the thermal transfer block comprises a base and a plurality of protrusions arranged on a first side of the base in a configuration such that each of the plurality of wells is received between a set of adjacent protrusions (Fig. 6, base plate 140, wells 120, upper conical sidewall 122, transitional sidewall 124, lower cylindrical sidewall 126, bottom 128; Fig. 6 of Evans depicts the sample walls 82 to be received within the protrusions that make up wells 120; Further, the well block 110 of Evans has the same structure as the claimed thermal transfer block 110 and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed), and
wherein each protrusion of the set of adjacent protrusions has a surface that substantially matches a portion of an outer surface of each well that is received between the set of adjacent protrusions (Fig. 6 of Evans depicts the protrusions (upper conical sidewall 122, transitional sidewall 124, lower cylindrical sidewall 126, bottom 128) of the wells 120 to have surfaces that substantially match a portion of an outer surface of each sample well 82 that is received in the wells 120); and
a cooling block disposed in contact with a second side of the base of the thermal transfer block (Fig. 1, heat sink 180; Col. 2, lines 55-60, FIG. 3 and FIG. 6 show a sample 90, illustratively for PCR, in each sample well 82 and the components of the embodiment of the thermal cycler apparatus shown at 100 including a well block 110, a base plate 140, a layer of adhesive 150, a peltier device 160, another layer of adhesive 170 and a heat sink 180),
wherein the cooling block comprises a heat sink having a plurality of fins immersed in a fluid for cooling (See annotated Fig. 2 of Evans below, heat sink 180 is depicted with a plurality of fins B which are cooled via air from a fan B; Further, Fig. 2 at least implies the depicted fan B is immersing the plurality of fins A in a fluid, air, for cooling of the heat sink 180 since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
PNG
media_image1.png
642
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Evans
Regarding claim 2, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the surface of a protrusion of the set of adjacent protrusions and the outer surface of the received well have matching contour surfaces so as to maximize heat transfer between the two surfaces (Fig. 6 of Evans depicts at least upper conical sidewall 122 of the wells 120 and the sidewall 84 of the well samples 2 to have matching contour surfaces so as to maximize heat transfer between the two surfaces; Further, it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans.
Regarding claim 3, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 2 (see the rejection of claim 2 above).
Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein between about 30% and about 95% of the outer surface area of the received well is in thermal contact with surfaces of the set of adjacent protrusions.
However, the amount of the outer surface area of the received well samples in thermal contact with surfaces of the set of adjacent protrusions of the well block is a result effective variable as recognized by the teachings of Evans (Col. 5-6, lines 52-3, An average well 120′ of well block 110′, as shown in FIG. 7, is close to the height of sample well 82 and illustratively has a depth of about 0.5 inches-0.6 inches for a 96-well plate. Such a well block allows sample well 82 to be filled with a large sample volume and also mitigates against the effects of a heated lid that may be at a static temperature. Most embodiments illustrated in this disclosure, including in FIGS. 1-6, 8-17, 20-22, and 25, have a depth of well 120, L.sub.3, that is shorter, illustratively only about 0.3 inches for a 96-well plate. An advantage of this configuration is a decrease in the incidence of sidewall condensation, particularly during cooling. Due to reduced well height relative to a convention well, another advantage of this configuration is a decrease in well block mass relative to prior art configuration, which increases the thermal cycling rate. It is understood that the choice of height of the wells of the well block depends on the specific application and that either configuration may be used with the various embodiments disclosed herein). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify protrusions of the wells 120 of Evans wherein between about 30% and about 95% of the outer surface area of the received well is in thermal contact with surfaces of the set of adjacent protrusions since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05, Section II, Paragraph A).
Regarding claim 4, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 3 (see the modification of the reference used in the rejection of claim 3 above).
Evans does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the plurality of protrusions has a length of along the protrusion that matches a depth of a fluid chemical in each well such that the fluid chemical contained within each well, from a top surface of the fluid chemical to a bottom of the well, is in thermal contact with the matching contour surfaces of the set of adjacent protrusions.
However, the length of the protrusions of the well block in contact with the well samples is a result effective variable as recognized by the teachings of Evans (Col. 5-6, lines 52-3, An average well 120′ of well block 110′, as shown in FIG. 7, is close to the height of sample well 82 and illustratively has a depth of about 0.5 inches-0.6 inches for a 96-well plate. Such a well block allows sample well 82 to be filled with a large sample volume and also mitigates against the effects of a heated lid that may be at a static temperature. Most embodiments illustrated in this disclosure, including in FIGS. 1-6, 8-17, 20-22, and 25, have a depth of well 120, L.sub.3, that is shorter, illustratively only about 0.3 inches for a 96-well plate. An advantage of this configuration is a decrease in the incidence of sidewall condensation, particularly during cooling. Due to reduced well height relative to a convention well, another advantage of this configuration is a decrease in well block mass relative to prior art configuration, which increases the thermal cycling rate. It is understood that the choice of height of the wells of the well block depends on the specific application and that either configuration may be used with the various embodiments disclosed herein). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify protrusions of the wells 120 of Evans wherein each of the plurality of protrusions has a length of along the protrusion that matches a depth of a fluid chemical in each well such that the fluid chemical contained within each well, from a top surface of the fluid chemical to a bottom of the well, is in thermal contact with the matching contour surfaces of the set of adjacent protrusions since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05, Section II, Paragraph A).
Regarding claim 5, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the cooling block further comprises:
a thermo-electric cooling (TEC) module disposed between the thermal transfer block and the heat sink, wherein the TEC module is configured to regulate a temperature or a range of temperature of the well plate via the thermal transfer block so as to maintain each of the plurality of wells at the temperature or within the range of temperature (Fig. 6 of Evans depicts Peltier device 160 to be disposed between base plate 140 and heat sink 180; Col. 6, lines 51-65, As shown in FIGS. 24-25 twenty-four Peltiers 160 are used, although it is understood that more or fewer Peltiers 160 may be used, depending on the desired application. Illustratively, for a 96-well plate, between 4 and 96 Peltiers may be used, with zones of 24 wells if 4 Peltiers are used, down to zones of one well, with each Peltiers controlling an individual well. In one illustrative embodiment, each Peltiers device 160 is individually driven. Illustratively, the Peltiers 160 are not in series nor parallel. Such may be used to provide greater well-to-well uniformity, for example by heating the exterior Peltiers to a slightly higher temperature, thus reducing the issue of cooler maximum temperatures in the exterior wells, particularly in the corner wells. Individually driven Peltiers 160 also may be used to provide for a temperature gradient across the plate; Further, the teachings of Evans which disclose controlling a temperature gradient across the plate at least imply the Peltier 160 is configured to regulate a temperature or a range of temperature of the well plate via the thermal transfer block so as to maintain each of the plurality of wells at the temperature or within the range of temperature since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01); Further, the Peltier 160 of Evans has the same structure as the claimed TEC module and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans in view of Isoshima et al. (US), hereinafter Isoshima.
Regarding claim 6, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 5 (see the modification of the reference used in the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the cooling block further comprises a temperature detector (Fig. 26, temperature detectors 167).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose the temperature detector to be a thermistor configured for measuring and controlling of the TEC module.
Isoshima teaches a thermistor configured for measuring and controlling of the TEC module (Fig. 1, temperature sensor 8; Pg. 3, paragraph 32, A value of a current or a voltage applied to the thermoelectric conversion unit 3 is adjusted according to an output of the temperature sensor 8 and the temperature control block 2 is controlled according to a designated temperature; Pg. 7, paragraph 77, As the temperature sensor 8, for example, a thermocouple, a thermistor, a platinum resistance temperature detector, or the like is used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Evans as modified to substitute the generic temperature detector disclosed in Evans as modified for Isoshima’s thermistor configured for measuring and controlling of the TEC module for the predictable result of making system decisions based on real-time sensor data.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans in view of Jones (US Patent No. 6,341,490), hereinafter Jones.
Regarding claim 7, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Evans does not disclose further comprising:
an insulation element disposed around the thermal transfer block.
Jones teaches further comprising:
an insulation element disposed around the thermal transfer block (Fig. 3, thermally insulating jacket 32, peripheral flange 34, thermal transfer comb 70, base panel 72; Col. 3, lines 29-35, In accordance with the invention a thermal transfer comb 70 transfers heat to or from the wells 28. The comb 70 includes a generally flat base panel 72 and numerous upstanding pins 74. The base panel 72 is received upon the upper face 38 and within the peripheral flange 34 of the jacket 32 and is in contact with the upper surfaces of the Peltier effect modules 42).
Evans fails to teach an insulation element disposed around the thermal transfer block, however Jones teaches that it is a known method in the art of temperature control of well plates to include an insulation element disposed around the thermal transfer block. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Jones and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans in view of Inazuka et al. (JP H11294890), hereinafter Inazuka.
Regarding claim 8, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the thermal transfer block is a first thermal transfer block and the cooling block is a first cooling block (Fig. 6, base plate 140, well block 110, heat sink 180), further comprising:
a second thermal transfer block thermally isolated from the first thermal transfer block (Col. 4-5, lines 65-13; FIG. 12 corresponds with the embodiment shown in FIGS. 1-6 and shows all of the components of a single zone. Apparatus 100 has a well block 110 that comprises a plurality of 4-well zones, wherein each 4-well zone comprises a first pair of wells 120 and a second pair of wells 120, and wherein each first pair of wells 120 and each second pair of wells 120 are respectively over a first base plate and a second base plate such that one peltier device 160 provides for heat transfer for one 4-well zone. Each peltier device 160 heats or cools a pair of base plates 140 via adhesive 150 to heat or cool the sample in the four sample wells via each bottom 128 and side walls 122 of the four wells 120. Heat sink 180 is thermally connected to peltier device 160 via adhesive 170. It is understood that the 4-well zone is illustrative only, and that each zone may comprise various other numbers of wells).
However, Evans does not disclose a second cooling block in contact with the second thermal transfer block, the second cooling block electrically isolated from the first cooling block.
Inazuka, teaches a plurality of cold heat source elements each which include separate Peltier elements and heat sinks, each cold heat source element being separated by a unit plate (Fig. 4, unit plate 11, cold source unit 10, heat sinks 3 and 4, Peltier element 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Evans to include a second cooling block in contact with the second thermal transfer block, the second cooling block electrically isolated from the first cooling block as taught by Inazuka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to significantly improve cooling efficiency attributed to Peltier elements by arranging a cold source module as combination of the Peltier elements and heat sinks to build a cold source unit by combining a plurality of the cold source modules (Inazuka, Abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 9 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 8 above), wherein the first cooling block is maintained at a first temperature or within a first preset range of temperatures and the second cooling block is maintained at a second temperature or within a second preset range of temperatures, wherein the first temperature is different from the second temperature and/or the first preset range of temperatures is different from the second preset range of temperatures (Evans, Col. 4-5, lines 65-13; FIG. 12 corresponds with the embodiment shown in FIGS. 1-6 and shows all of the components of a single zone. Apparatus 100 has a well block 110 that comprises a plurality of 4-well zones, wherein each 4-well zone comprises a first pair of wells 120 and a second pair of wells 120, and wherein each first pair of wells 120 and each second pair of wells 120 are respectively over a first base plate and a second base plate such that one Peltier device 160 provides for heat transfer for one 4-well zone. Each Peltier device 160 heats or cools a pair of base plates 140 via adhesive 150 to heat or cool the sample in the four sample wells via each bottom 128 and side walls 122 of the four wells 120. Heat sink 180 is thermally connected to Peltier device 160 via adhesive 170. It is understood that the 4-well zone is illustrative only, and that each zone may comprise various other numbers of wells; Further, the teachings of Evans at least imply the plurality of Peltiers 160, which would control the temperature of the first cooling block and the second cooling block as modified as described herein, can be individually controlled to different temperature ranges since it has been held in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01)). Further, the limitations of claim 9 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 8 above.
Claims 10-12, 14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (US Patent No. 11,376,599), hereinafter Evans in view of Yin (US 20190041104), hereinafter Yin.
Regarding claim 10, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Evans does not disclose wherein the cooling block comprises a chamber with an inlet for introducing the fluid into the chamber for cooling the heat sink and an outlet for removing the fluid that passes through the plurality of fins of the heat sink.
Yin teaches wherein the cooling block comprises a chamber with an inlet for introducing the fluid into the chamber for cooling the heat sink and an outlet for removing the fluid that passes through the plurality of fins of the heat sink (Fig. 1, heat exchanger structure 1, main body 11, first space 111, first opening 112, second opening 113, heat dissipation structures 1221; Fig. 2, cooling fluid 2; Pg. 2, paragraph 24, The heat of the hot face 122 of the cooing chip 12 is conducted to the heat dissipation structures 1221. Then, the cooling fluid 2 in the first space 111 of the main body 11 heat-exchanges with the heat dissipation structures 1221 to cool the heat dissipation structures 1221. The cooling efficiency provided by the cold face 121 of the thermoelectric cooling chip 12 is better than the cooling efficiency of an ordinary water-cooling heat dissipation device. Therefore, as a whole, the heat dissipation efficiency is greatly enhanced).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the heat sink 10 of Evans of claim 1 with the cooling block disclosed by Yin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification the heat dissipation efficiency is greatly enhanced.
Regarding claim 11, Evans discloses the apparatus of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
However, Evans does not disclose wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink are arranged such that the fluid flows along the plurality of fins.
Yin teaches wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink are arranged such that the fluid flows along the plurality of fins (Fig. 1, heat exchanger structure 1, main body 11, first space 111, first opening 112, second opening 113, heat dissipation structures 1221; Fig. 2, cooling fluid 2; Pg. 2, paragraph 24, When dissipating the heat, the cooling fluid 2 flows through the first opening 112 into the first space 111. Then, the cooling fluid 2 flows through the second opening 113 out of the first space 111 to leave the main body 11… The heat of the hot face 122 of the cooing chip 12 is conducted to the heat dissipation structures 1221. Then, the cooling fluid 2 in the first space 111 of the main body 11 heat-exchanges with the heat dissipation structures 1221 to cool the heat dissipation structures 1221. The cooling efficiency provided by the cold face 121 of the thermoelectric cooling chip 12 is better than the cooling efficiency of an ordinary water-cooling heat dissipation device. Therefore, as a whole, the heat dissipation efficiency is greatly enhanced).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the heat sink 10 of Evans of claim 1 with the cooling block disclosed by Yin. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification the heat dissipation efficiency is greatly enhanced.
Regarding claim 12, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the plurality of fins extend away from the thermal transfer block and wherein the fluid is introduced via the inlet into the chamber such that the fluid flows along the plurality of fins before exiting the chamber via the outlet (Yin, Pg. 2, paragraph 24, When dissipating the heat, the cooling fluid 2 flows through the first opening 112 into the first space 111. Then, the cooling fluid 2 flows through the second opening 113 out of the first space 111 to leave the main body 11. The cold face 121 of the thermoelectric cooling chip 12 is in direct contact with the heat source 3 to absorb the heat of the heat source 3 and cool the heat source 3. The heat of the hot face 122 of the cooing chip 12 is conducted to the heat dissipation structures 1221. Then, the cooling fluid 2 in the first space 111 of the main body 11 heat-exchanges with the heat dissipation structures 1221 to cool the heat dissipation structures 1221. The cooling efficiency provided by the cold face 121 of the thermoelectric cooling chip 12 is better than the cooling efficiency of an ordinary water-cooling heat dissipation device. Therefore, as a whole, the heat dissipation efficiency is greatly enhanced). Further, the limitations of claim 12 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 14, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is parallel to the plurality of fins of the heat sink (Fig. 2 of Yin depicts the heat dissipation structures 1221 is arranged within the main body 11 such that the first opening 112 is parallel to the heat dissipation structures 1221). Further, the limitations of claim 14 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 19, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above), wherein the inlet is arranged at a first side of the chamber and the outlet is arranged at a second side, wherein the second side is opposite the first side or perpendicular to the first side (Fig. 2 of Yin depicts first opening 112 and second opening 113 to be disposed on opposite sides of the main body 11). Further, the limitations of claim 19 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 19, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the heat sink is arranged at a first side of the chamber and one of the inlet or the outlet is arranged at a second side of the chamber opposite the first side.
Yin teaches another embodiment of the heat exchange structure wherein the heat sink is arranged at a first side of the chamber and one of the inlet or the outlet is arranged at a second side of the chamber opposite the first side (Fig. 8, heat exchanger structure 1, main body 11, first space 111, first opening 112, second opening 113, heat dissipation structures 1221; Further, annotated Fig. 8 of Yin below depicts the heat dissipation structures 1221 to be arranged at a first side C and first opening 112 to be arranged at a second side D opposite of first side C).
Evans fails to teach wherein the heat sink is arranged at a first side of the chamber and one of the inlet or the outlet is arranged at a second side of the chamber opposite the first side, however Yin teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the heat sink is arranged at a first side of the chamber and one of the inlet or the outlet is arranged at a second side of the chamber opposite the first side. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Yin and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
PNG
media_image2.png
512
860
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8 of Yin
Claims 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans as modified by Yin as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US Patent No. 10,526,188).
Regarding claim 13, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is perpendicular to the plurality of fins of the heat sink.
Kim discloses wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is perpendicular to the plurality of fins of the heat sink (Fig. 7, connectors 232, partitions 231; Fig. 8, cold water tank 20, water inlet 221, water outlet 222; Further, Fig. 7-8 of Kim depicts the water inlet 221 to be perpendicular to at least the connectors 232 and depict the flow of the water to be perpendicular to the water inlet 221; Col. 8, lines 12-31, Referring to FIG. 7, the internal flow channel 23 may include a plurality of partitions 231 extending in a horizontal direction and provided to be spaced apart from each other in a vertical direction and a plurality of connectors 232 extending in a vertical direction and connecting two mutually adjacent partitions 231. The plurality of connectors 232 may be alternately provided at a front end and a rear end of each of the partitions 231 to connect the plurality of partitions 231. Each of the plurality of partitions 231 may have a communication hole, such as, e.g., a passageway or gap, 233 formed at a left end portion or a right end portion thereof. The plurality of partitions 231 may prevent water from flowing in an upward direction and may guide a flow of water in a leftward or rightward direction. The communication hole 233 may allow an upper flow channel and a lower flow channel partitioned by the plurality of partitions 231 to communicate with each other to guide water to flow from the lower flow channel to the upper flow channel).
Evans fails to teach wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is perpendicular to the plurality of fins of the heat sink, however Kim teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is perpendicular to the plurality of fins of the heat sink. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Kim and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Regarding claim 15, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is oriented at an angle to the plurality of fins of the heat sink.
Kim discloses wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is oriented at an angle to the plurality of fins of the heat sink (Fig. 7, connectors 232, partitions 231; Fig. 8, cold water tank 20, water inlet 221, water outlet 222; Further, Fig. 7-8 of Kim depicts the water inlet 221 to be perpendicular to at least the connectors 232 and depict the flow of the water to be perpendicular to the water inlet 221; Col. 8, lines 12-31, Referring to FIG. 7, the internal flow channel 23 may include a plurality of partitions 231 extending in a horizontal direction and provided to be spaced apart from each other in a vertical direction and a plurality of connectors 232 extending in a vertical direction and connecting two mutually adjacent partitions 231. The plurality of connectors 232 may be alternately provided at a front end and a rear end of each of the partitions 231 to connect the plurality of partitions 231. Each of the plurality of partitions 231 may have a communication hole, such as, e.g., a passageway or gap, 233 formed at a left end portion or a right end portion thereof. The plurality of partitions 231 may prevent water from flowing in an upward direction and may guide a flow of water in a leftward or rightward direction. The communication hole 233 may allow an upper flow channel and a lower flow channel partitioned by the plurality of partitions 231 to communicate with each other to guide water to flow from the lower flow channel to the upper flow channel).
Evans fails to teach wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is oriented at an angle to the plurality of fins of the heat sink, however Kim teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the heat sink is arranged within the chamber such that the inlet is oriented at an angle to the plurality of fins of the heat sink. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Kim and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans as modified by Yin as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Chen (US Patent No. 12,004,323).
Regarding claim 16, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for an entire height of the chamber forming parallel channels of fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet.
Chen teaches wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for an entire height of the chamber forming parallel channels of fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet (Fig. 1D, housing 11, partition walls 14, inflow channel 114, intermediate flow channel 11, outflow channel 115; Col. 4, lines 37-50, A number of the partition walls 14 is three, the partition walls 14 located on two sides further divide the interior of the housing 11 into an intermediate flow channel 116 located between the inflow channel 114 and the outflow channel 115; the partition wall 14, which divides the inflow channel 114 and the intermediate flow channel 116, has the passage 140 formed on the side away from liquid inlet port 12; the partition wall 14, which is located on the center of the intermediate flow channel 116, has the passage 140 formed on the side adjacent to the liquid inlet port 12; the partition wall 14, which divides the intermediate flow channel 116 and the outflow channel 115, has the passage 140 formed on the side away from liquid inlet port 12).
Evans fails to teach wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for an entire height of the chamber forming parallel channels of fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet, however Chen teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for an entire height of the chamber forming parallel channels of fluid flow from the inlet to the outlet. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Chen and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Regarding claim 17, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for a portion of a height of the chamber forming semi-parallel channels of fluid flow between the inlet and the outlet.
Chen teaches wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for a portion of a height of the chamber forming semi-parallel channels of fluid flow between the inlet and the outlet (Fig. 1D, housing 11, flow guiding walls 15, inflow channel 114, intermediate flow channel 11, outflow channel 115; Col. 5, lines 33-47, The flow guiding walls 15 and the protruding strips 141, 151 greatly increase the solid-liquid heat exchange areas, the multi-layered protruding strips 141, 151 of can distribute the coolant to absorb the heat of the partition wall 14, the flow guiding wall 15 and the protruding strips 141,151 without affecting the flow velocity of the coolant, gaps (about 0.1 millimeter to 1.0 millimeter) between the tops of the flow guiding walls 15 and the heat dissipating walls 112 and gaps (about 0.1 millimeter to 1.0 millimeter) between front ends of the protruding strips 141,151 and the side wall 113 allow the split coolant concurrently pass through the differently located flow guiding walls 15 and protruding strips and absorb the heat thereof, so that the coolant evenly and sufficiently absorb the heat in the housing 11).
Evans fails to teach wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for a portion of a height of the chamber forming semi-parallel channels of fluid flow between the inlet and the outlet, however Chen teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the plurality of fins of the heat sink extend from a top surface of the chamber for a portion of a height of the chamber forming semi-parallel channels of fluid flow between the inlet and the outlet. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Chen and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Regarding claim 18, Evans as modified discloses the apparatus of claim 10 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 10 above).
However, Evans as modified does not disclose wherein the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a same side of the chamber.
Chen teaches wherein the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a same side of the chamber (Fig. 1A, liquid inlet port 12, liquid outlet port 13, side wall 113; Col. 3-4, lines 67-1, The liquid inlet port 12 and the liquid outlet port 13 are formed on the side wall 113).
Evans fails to teach wherein the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a same side of the chamber, however Chen teaches that it is a known method in the art heat dissipation of thermoelectric modules to include wherein the inlet and the outlet are arranged on a same side of the chamber. This is strong evidence that modifying Evans as claimed would produce predictable results (i.e. improved heat transfer capabilities). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Evans by Chen and arrive at the claimed invention since all claimed elements were known in the art and one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no changes in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded the predictable result of improved heat transfer capabilities.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Howell et al. (US Patent No. 9,492,825) discloses a similar apparatus for temperature control of a well plate.
Hong et al. (US 20120240597) discloses a similar apparatus for temperature control of a well plate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 October 02nd, 2025
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763