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 without traverse of claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 12/10/2025
is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/17/2023 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 11/17/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "second panel". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claim 3 only recites “a panel” without indicating the panel is a “second panel.”
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liang (US 2024/057285).
Regarding claim 1, Liang teaches a refrigerant circulation device (1, Fig. 2, [0019]) comprising: a first housing (10, Fig. 2, [0019]) including a first opening (11, Fig. 2, [0020]); a protrusion (121, Fig. 2, [0020]) protruding from the first housing; and a pump (30, Fig. 2, [0019]) that is movable in a first direction in an internal space of the first housing through the first opening and is mounted at a mounting position that is a position of one side in the first direction relative to the first opening in the internal space (30, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0019]); wherein the pump includes a first stopper (421, Fig. 7, Fig. 8, [0029], [0030]) that is movable between a first position that does not overlap with the protrusion in one side of the first direction (421 and 121, Fig. 8, [0030]) and a second position that overlaps with the protrusion in one side of the first direction and is on one side in the first direction relative to the protrusion (421 and 121, Fig. 7, [0029]).
Regarding claim 2, Liang teaches the first stopper is movable to contact with the protrusion while in the second position (421 and 121, Fig. 7, [0029]).
Regarding claim 3, Liang teaches the pump further includes:
a second housing (31, Fig. 2, [0021]) including a panel on another side in the first direction (See annotated figure below); and
a lever (40, Fig. 7, [0023]) supported on the panel rotatably about a shaft (44, Fig. 7, [0025]) along a second direction intersecting the first direction (See annotated figure below claim 4 rejection); and
the first stopper (421, Fig. 7, [0025]) is provided around the shaft in the lever (Fig. 7, [0025]).
PNG
media_image1.png
420
670
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Liang teaches the lever further includes a second stopper movable between a third position not overlapping with the protrusion in the first direction (See annotated figures below) and a fourth position overlapping with the protrusion in the first direction and on the another side in the first direction relative to the protrusion (See annotated figures below);
the second stopper:
is positioned in the fourth position when the first stopper is in the first position (See annotated figures below);
is positioned in the third position when the first stopper is in the second position (See annotated figures below); and
is movable to contact with the protrusion on the another side in the first direction relative to the protrusion (See annotated figures below) when the pump is in the mounting position (Fig. 8 vs Fig. 9, [0030], prior to the plug-in pump being driven to outwardly move, the plug-in pump is not yet released from the plugged/”mount” status but has the rotary arms in the position shown in Fig. 8) and in the fourth position (See annotated figures below).
PNG
media_image2.png
364
600
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
360
650
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Liang teaches a first fixing tool to fix the lever (40, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0024]) to the second panel when the second stopper is at the third position (310, Fig. 1, Fig. 2, [0024]).
Regarding claim 6, Liang teaches a second fixing tool to fix the panel of the pump to the first housing (See annotated figures below).
PNG
media_image4.png
358
552
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
372
578
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Liang teaches the first housing includes:
a wall partitioning the internal space (15, Fig. 4, [0028]); and
a pair of guide rails (14, Fig. 4, [0027]) provided on the wall to guide the second housing in the first direction.
Regarding claim 8, Liang teaches the pair of guide rails (14, Fig. 4, [0027]) oppose each other in a third direction intersecting with the first direction (See annotated figure below); and
an interval in the third direction between the pair of guide rails is widest at a first end and a second end in the first direction (See annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image6.png
469
738
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Liang teaches the protrusion (121, Fig. 2) protrudes inward of the first opening (11, Fig. 2) relative to an edge (12, Fig. 2) of the first opening in the first housing (10, Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ye (US 2021/0274680).
Regarding claim 11, Ye teaches a refrigerant circulation device (1, Fig. 4, [0029]) comprising:
a housing (10, Fig. 4, [0029]) including a first opening (Fig. 4, [0030], opening to plug/unplug fluid driving module from the casing);
a pump (141, Fig. 4, [0034]) mounted in the housing through the first opening (Fig. 4); and
a display assembly (17, Fig. 4, [0040]) that is provided in the housing to display a screen (Fig. 4, [0040]).
Regarding claim 12, Ye teaches the refrigerant circulation device is accommodated in a rack (2, Fig. 6, [0031]);
the rack includes a wall (device is a part of rack cooling system; therefore, rack also includes wall of device) partitioning an internal space opened through a second opening (See annotated figure below); and
the first opening and the display assembly face a same direction as the second opening (See annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image7.png
620
882
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang (US 2024/057285).
Regarding claim 9, Liang teaches the pump includes a suction port and a discharge port (a pump inherently has an inlet by suction and outlet for discharging); and
the refrigerant circulation device further includes a receiving portion (21, Fig. 2, [0021], 22, Fig. 2, [0022]).
Liang does not teach the receiving portion to receive the refrigerant below the suction port and the discharge port.
However, Liang teaches that the pump is made for a cooling distribution unit to perform as a liquid cooling heat dissipating module ([0002], [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the receiving portion to receive the refrigerant below the suction port and the discharge port as Liang teaches the pump is made for a cooling distribution unit using liquid cooling and because the only connection between the machine case and the pump (Fig. 1) are through the moveable joint (32, 33, Fig. 2, [0021], [0022]) and fixed joint/connector (21, 22, Fig. 2, [0021], [0022]). Additionally, because Liang teaches the structure as claimed, the same structure of Liang should be able to perform the function as claimed by inherency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to An Bach Phan whose telephone number is (571)272-7244. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3 ET.
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 at (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 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.
/A.B.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763