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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pp. 7-8 of the remarks the applicant argues that the combination of Byers and Monk do not provide for the amended limitation requiring that “…the system control is configured to compare a temperature associated with at least one of the one or more functional blocks to a threshold temperature, and adjust a current position of at least one of the two dampers and send signals to the two intake fans to change a speed of the two intake fans based on the temperature exceeding the threshold temperature” [claim 1 lines 12-15 or equivalent in claims 14 and 20]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Byers specifically discloses that “…in one example embodiment, if temperature sensors (e.g., mounted in major chips like microprocessors, or in exhaust streams) sense that the components in that path are running hot, an actuator causes a damper to open by a predictable, controlled amount, allowing more air through that specific air path” [paragraph 0018] and Monk discloses that “…each motor 42 may be a variable speed motor whereby the speed of the motor 42 may be selectively varied to vary the air flow capacity of its associated blower 40 to match the cooling demand” [column 4 lines 4-7]. Since the cooling demand is related to the temperature, in combination, Byers and Monk provide for the new limitations. For these reasons the rejections are maintained.
The applicant’s amendments overcome the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejections of claims 4-9, 17, and 20, therefore the rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byers et. al (US 2009/0097203 A1) in view of Monk e.t al (US 8,310,829 B2).
With respect to claim 1 Byers discloses a controlled cooling system for one or more functional blocks of a power system, comprising: two dampers [reference characters 440, 445, 450, 455, and 460] each connected to at least one of the one or more functional blocks [reference character 124, 122, and 195] of the power system; a pressurized intake plenum [reference character 130] comprising one or more walls and one or more openings, each damper aligned with one of the one or more openings [see Fig. 4, the dampers sit in the openings]; two intake fans [reference characters 150 in Figs. 1 and 4] in communication with the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more walls of the pressurized intake plenum; and a system control [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 “[t]he backplane 190, in one embodiment, is configured to provide power or instructions (e.g., control signals) to the servo damper…”], wherein the two intake fans are configured to force cooling air through the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more functional blocks of the power system via the two dampers [see Fig. 4]. Byers further disclose that the system control is configured to compare a temperature associated with at least one of the one or more functional blocks to a threshold temperature, and adjust a current position of at least one of the two dampers, specifically disclosing that “…in one example embodiment, if temperature sensors (e.g., mounted in major chips like microprocessors, or in exhaust streams) sense that the components in that path are running hot, an actuator causes a damper to open by a predictable, controlled amount, allowing more air through that specific air path” [paragraph 0018].
Byers does not disclose that the system control is configured to send signals to the two intake fans to change a speed of the two intake fans based on the temperature exceeding the threshold temperature.
Monk discloses an electronics chassis cooling system that includes fan motors [reference characters 40 and 42] and a controller [reference character 90] which controls variable frequency drives [reference character 44] that vary the speed of the fans [column 5 lines 43-46], where the speed of the fans are changed based on the cooling demand, specifically teaching that “…each motor 42 may be a variable speed motor whereby the speed of the motor 42 may be selectively varied to vary the air flow capacity of its associated blower 40 to match the cooling demand” [column 4 lines 4-7], where the cooling demand is related to the temperature.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by including a means to control the speed of the fans, as taught by Monk, in order to allow the system to minimize power consumption for a given required airflow by controlling the speed of the fans and the dampers in unison.
With respect to claim 2 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose a fan control system [reference characters 90 and 44 of Monk] and a flow control system [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 and 0018 of Byers] wherein the fan control system is configured to communicate with each of the intake fans and control a current speed of each of the intake fans based on the signals between the two intake fans, the system control, and the fan control system [see column 4 lines 43-46 of Monk].
With respect to claim 3 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose that the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers, wherein the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers and control a current position of each of the dampers based on the signals between the two dampers, the system control, and the flow control system [paragraph 0051 of Byers].
With respect to claim 10 Byers discloses one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks, the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks [see Fig. 4].
With respect to claim 11 Byers discloses that one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the pressurized intake plenum.
Byers does not disclose that the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the pressurized intake plenum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to move the dampers to the downstream end of the duct, so that the ducts are between the dampers and the plenum, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim(s) 14-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byers et. al (US 2009/0097203 A1) in view of Monk e.t al (US 8,310,829 B2) and further in view of Kendzia, III (US 11,690,195 B2).
With respect to claim 14 Byers discloses a controlled cooling system for one or more functional blocks of a power system, comprising: two dampers [reference characters 440, 445, 450, 455, and 460] each connected to at least one of the one or more functional blocks [reference character 124, 122, and 195] of the power system; a pressurized plenum [reference character 130] comprising one or more walls and one or more openings, each damper aligned with one of the one or more openings [see Fig. 4, the dampers sit in the openings]; two fans [reference characters 150 in Figs. 1 and 4] in communication with the pressurized plenum and the one or more walls of the pressurized; and a system control [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 “[t]he backplane 190, in one embodiment, is configured to provide power or instructions (e.g., control signals) to the servo damper…”], wherein the two intake fans are configured to force cooling air through the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more functional blocks of the power system via the two dampers [see Fig. 4].
Byers further disclose that the system control is configured to compare a temperature associated with at least one of the one or more functional blocks to a threshold temperature, and adjust a current position of at least one of the two dampers, specifically disclosing that “…in one example embodiment, if temperature sensors (e.g., mounted in major chips like microprocessors, or in exhaust streams) sense that the components in that path are running hot, an actuator causes a damper to open by a predictable, controlled amount, allowing more air through that specific air path” [paragraph 0018].
Byers does not disclose that the system control is configured to send signals to the two intake fans to change a speed of the two intake fans based on the temperature exceeding the threshold temperature.
Monk discloses an electronics chassis cooling system that includes fan motors [reference characters 40 and 42] and a controller [reference character 90] which controls variable frequency drives [reference character 44] that vary the speed of the fans [column 5 lines 43-46], where the speed of the fans are changed based on the cooling demand, specifically teaching that “…each motor 42 may be a variable speed motor whereby the speed of the motor 42 may be selectively varied to vary the air flow capacity of its associated blower 40 to match the cooling demand” [column 4 lines 4-7], where the cooling demand is related to the temperature.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by including a means to control the speed of the fans, as taught by Monk, in order to allow the system to minimize power consumption for a given required airflow by controlling the speed of the fans and the dampers in unison.
Additionally, Byers does not disclose that the plenum is an intake plenum, the fans are exhaust fans, or that the fans pull cooling air through the exhaust plenum.
Kendzia, III discloses a power semiconductor cooling system that includes fans [reference character 40] a duct [reference character 34] and a plenum [reference character 44]. Kendzia, III discloses that “[a]lthough it is possible for the fans 40 or auxiliary fans to blow air into the switching housing 30, it is preferable for the fans 40 to suck air out of the switching housing 30 and to be located in an exhaust portion 44 of the plenum 34” [column 3 lines 60-63] because it results in negative pressure being evenly spread within the housing [column 4 lines 4-5].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by reversing the direction of the fans so that the are exhaust fans and the plenum is an exhaust plenum, as taught by Kendzia, III, because negative pressure is preferable as it evenly spreads within the housing [column 3 lines 60 to column 4 line 5 of Kendzia, III].
With respect to claim 15 the combination of Byers, Monk, and Kendzia, III disclose a fan control system [reference characters 90 and 44 of Monk] and a flow control system [reference character 550 and paragraph 0051 of Byers], wherein the fan control system is configured to communicate with each of the exhaust fans and control a current speed of each of the exhuast fans based on the signals between the two exhaust fans, the system control, and the fan control system [see column 4 lines 43-46 of Monk].
With respect to claim 16 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose that the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers, wherein the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers and control a current position of each of the dampers based on the signals between the two dampers, the system control, and the flow control system [paragraph 0051 of Byers].
With respect to claim 18 Byers discloses one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks, the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks [see Fig. 4].
With respect to claim 19 Byers discloses that one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the pressurized exhaust plenum.
Byers does not disclose that the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the pressurized exhaust plenum.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
Claims 4-9, 12-13 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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, Steven B McAllister can be reached at 571-272-6785. 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights