Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/516,788

POWER SUPPLY DEVICE WITH A HEAT GENERATING COMPONENT

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 21, 2023
Examiner
PAPE, ZACHARY
Art Unit
2835
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Panasonic Intellectual Property Management Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
792 granted / 1094 resolved
+4.4% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1127
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
46.5%
+6.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§112
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1094 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Email Communication Applicant is encouraged to authorize the Examiner to communicate via email by filing form PTO/SB/439 either via USPS, Central Fax, or EFS-Web. See MPEP 502.01, 502, 502.05. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed 11/21/2023, 5/14/2025 have been fully considered and are attached hereto. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,864,362. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: With respect to claim 1, claim 1 of the ‘362 reference recites (recitations of the ‘362 reference in parentheses) a power supply apparatus comprising (Cl. 1, verbatim): a first heating member (Verbatim); a case having a box shape with one surface open, the case being configured to house the first heating member (Verbatim); a circuit board (Verbatim); a second heating member connected to the circuit board (Verbatim); a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member (Nearly verbatim); and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member including a first portion disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case, and a second portion disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing (Nearly verbatim), wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member (Verbatim). With respect to claims 2-11, claims 2-11, respectively, of the ‘362 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 12, claim 12 of the ‘362 reference recites the limitations therein with minor changes thereto. With respect to claims 13-15, claims 13-15, respectively, of the ‘362 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claims 16-19, claims 16-19, respectively, of the ‘362 reference recites the limitations therein nearly verbatim. Claims 16-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 8, and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,330,742. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: With respect to claim 16, claim 1 of the ‘742 reference recites (recitations of the ‘742 reference in parentheses) a power supply apparatus comprising (Verbatim): a first heating member (Verbatim); a case having a box shape with one surface open, the case being configured to house the first heating member (Nearly verbatim); a circuit board (Verbatim); a second heating member connected to the circuit board (Verbatim); a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member (Verbatim); and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case (Verbatim), the heat transfer member disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case (Nearly verbatim), wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member (Verbatim), and wherein the heat transfer member is disposed in contact with a wall surface of the heat dissipation housing such that the heat transfer member is thermally connected to the heat dissipation housing (“wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member, and wherein when disposed in contact with a wall surface of the heat dissipation housing, the heat transfer member dissipates the heat of the first heating member and the second heating member” where, here, the ‘742 reference permits two scenarios, i) where the heat transfer member is in contact with a wall surface of the housing, and ii) where the heat transfer member is not in contact with a wall surface of the housing. Scenario i) anticipates the last 3 lines of claim 16.). With respect to claim 17, claim 5 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 18, claim 8 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 19, claim 9 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 12-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5, 8-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,330,742 in view of Nomura et al. (US 8,907,758 – hereinafter, “Nomura”). With respect to claim 1, claim 1 of the ‘742 reference recites (recitations of the ‘742 reference in parentheses) a power supply apparatus comprising (Cl. 1, verbatim): a first heating member (Verbatim); a case having a box shape with one surface open, the case being configured to house the first heating member (Verbatim); a circuit board (Verbatim); a second heating member connected to the circuit board (Verbatim); a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member (Nearly verbatim); and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member including a first portion disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case (Verbatim), wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member (Verbatim). The ‘742 reference fails to specifically recite that the heat transfer member includes a second portion disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing. Nomura, however, teaches a case (4) with a first heating member (1) therein and a heat transfer member (40) mounted to the case and in contact with a heat dissipation housing (Cooling base, Col. 2, ll. 27-38). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nomura with that of the ‘742 reference, such that the heat transfer member has a second portion disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing, as taught by Nomura, since doing so would enhance heat release performance of the power supply apparatus (Nomura: Col 2, ll. 35-38). With respect to claim 2, claims 1-2 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein nearly verbatim. With respect to claim 3, claim 3 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein nearly verbatim. With respect to claim 5, claim 5 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein nearly verbatim. With respect to claim 7, claim 8 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein nearly verbatim. With respect to claim 8, claim 9 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 12, claim 1 of the ‘742 reference recites (recitations of the ‘742 reference in parentheses) a power supply apparatus comprising (Cl. 1, verbatim): a first heating member (Verbatim); a case having a box shape with one surface open, the case being configured to house the first heating member (Verbatim); a circuit board (Verbatim); a second heating member connected to the circuit board (Verbatim); and a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member (Nearly verbatim); and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case (nearly verbatim), wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member (Verbatim). The ‘742 reference fails to specifically recite that the heat transfer member disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing. Nomura, however, teaches a case (4) with a first heating member (1) therein and a heat transfer member (40) mounted to the case and in contact with a heat dissipation housing (Cooling base, Col. 2, ll. 27-38). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nomura with that of the ‘742 reference, such that the heat transfer member has a second portion disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing, as taught by Nomura, since doing so would enhance heat release performance of the power supply apparatus (Nomura: Col 2, ll. 35-38). With respect to claim 13, claim 5 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 14, claim 8 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. With respect to claim 15, claim 9 of the ‘742 reference recites the limitations therein verbatim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-19, pending approved Terminal Disclaimers, are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: With respect to claims 1-11, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in independent claim 1 and at least in part because claim 1 recites, “a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member; and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member including a first portion disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case, and a second portion disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing”. The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 1 are believed to render said claim 1 and all claims dependent therefrom patentable over the art of record. With respect to claims 12-15, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in independent claim 12 and at least in part because claim 12 recites, “a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member; and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case, and disposed in contact with the heat dissipation housing”. The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 12 are believed to render said claim 12 and all claims dependent therefrom patentable over the art of record. With respect to claims 16-19, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in independent claim 16 and at least in part because claim 16 recites, “a heat dissipation housing configured to house the case, the circuit board, and the second heating member, and to dissipate heat of the first heating member and the second heating member; and a heat transfer member having a thermal conductivity higher than a thermal conductivity of the case, the heat transfer member disposed in contact with a first outer surface of the case, wherein the second heating member is disposed in contact with the heat transfer member, and wherein the heat transfer member is disposed in contact with a wall surface of the heat dissipation housing such that the heat transfer member is thermally connected to the heat dissipation housing”. The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 16 are believed to render said claim 16 and all claims dependent therefrom patentable over the art of record. While Abe as modified by Nix teaches some of the limitations of claims 1, 12 and 16 as per the previous rejection to claim 6 in parent application 17/072,917 (See, pp. 3-4 of the Non-Final office action dated 9/27/2021), neither Abe nor Nix nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest all the limitations of claims 1, 12, and 16. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY M PAPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2201. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am - 6pm EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash N Gandhi can be reached at 571-272-3740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ZACHARY PAPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 21, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Mar 30, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594654
COLD PLATE REMOVAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591166
Thermal-Control System for a Security Camera
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588162
ENHANCED FLUID REPLACEMENT STRUCTURES FOR USE IN IMMERSION COOLING TANKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588166
THERMALIZATION ARRANGEMENT AT CRYOGENIC TEMPERATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581617
IMMERSION LIQUID-COOLING SYSTEM AND METHOD, AND SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+19.9%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1094 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month