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, 502.02, 502.03.
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C in the reply filed 12/24/2025 is acknowledged. Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filled 12/24/2025, with respect to Election/Restriction Requirement dated 10/28/2025 has been fully considered, Claims 1-15 are withdrawn from further prosecution, and Claims 16-17 and 20 are prosecuted given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of specification.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the specification and drawings has overcome each and every specification and drawing objection previously set forth in non-final office action dated 01/29/2026, therefore the objections have been withdrawn.
The Applicant originally submitted Claims 1-20 in the application with claims 1-15 withdrawn from examination due to election/restriction requirement dated 12/24/2024, and with newly added Claims 21-22. In the present response, the Applicant amended Claims 16, 20 and 22, added new Claims 23-39 and cancelled Claims 1-15, 17-19 and 21. Accordingly, Claims 16, 20 and 22-39 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filled 01/30/2017, with respect to rejection of Claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive, therefore the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration a new ground of rejection has been set forth below necessitated by Applicant’s amendment to Claim 16.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the second surface covers an entire length of the heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing and the first surface covers less than the entire length of the heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing” in Claim 25 must be shown or the features canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended”. If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
The phrase " wing protrudes beyond the first and second surfaces of the thermally conductive housing" in Claim 27, renders the claim indefinite. The wing structures 407 as illustrated on Figs 4c and 4e are part of the thermally conductive housing (451/452), it is not clear how could wing protrude beyond surfaces of the thermally conductive housing, the both have the same surface. See; MPEP 2173.02.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 30-31, 35 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fang et al (US 2023/0089340).
Regarding Claim 30, Fang (In Fig 1) discloses an apparatus (100) comprising: a cold plate (10); and a vapor chamber (7), a body of the vapor chamber (7) to receive a liquid (water, ¶ 70, II. 13-14), the body (body of 7) having a first portion (portion of 7 over hanging 13) and a second portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8), the second portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8) protruding from the first portion (portion of 7 over hanging 13) and defining a wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8), the wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8) extending over at least a portion of the cold plate (10), (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 31, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 30, however Fang (In Fig 1) further discloses wherein a width of the wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8) is greater than a width of the first portion (portion of 7 over hanging 13) of the body (body of 7) of the vapor chamber (7), (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 35, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 30, however Fang (In Fig 1) further discloses wherein the wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8) is a first wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8) and the body (body of 7) of the vapor chamber (7) includes a third portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8), the third portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8) extending from the first portion (portion of 7 over hanging 13) of the body (body of 7) of the vapor chamber (7) opposite the second portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8), the third portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8) defining a second wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8), (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 37, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 30, however Fang (In Fig 1) further discloses wherein the apparatus (100) further including a thermal interface material (¶ 35, II. 1-4) between the wing (portions of 7 over hanging 8) and the portion of the cold plate (10), (Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 38, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 30, however Fang (In Fig 1) further discloses wherein the second portion (portions of 7 over hanging 8) of the body (body of 7) of the vapor chamber (7) is hollow, (Fig 1).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 16, 20, 22-23, 26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Barina et al (US 2013/0120926) in view of Meijer et al (US 2013/0194745).
Regarding Claim 16, Barina (In Fig 2) discloses a system (10) comprising:
a cold plate (40, 140) ; and
a thermally conductive housing (64/65) having a first surface and a second surface (Fig 2), the first surface of the thermally conductive housing (64/65) to thermally couple with first memory chips (24) disposed on a face of a dual in line memory module (DIMM) (20), the thermally conductive housing (64/65) having a wing (wings at both ends of 64/65), (Fig 2) at an end of the thermally conductive housing (64/65), the wing (wings at both ends of 64/65) to extend beyond an end of the DIMM (20), the wing to thermally couple with the cold plate (40, 41), (Fig 1), however Barina does not disclose wherein a heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing.
Instead, Meijer (In Figs 1, 6) teaches wherein a heat pipe (50) in the thermally conductive housing (68) between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing (68), (Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barina with Meiji with a heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing to benefit from dissipating heat from DRAM chips (Meijer ¶ 23, II. 12-17).
Regarding Claim 20, Barina in view of Meijer discloses the limitations of Claim 16, however Barina (In Figs 1-2) further discloses wherein the system (10) further including a clip (70) to press the DIMM (20) and the thermally conductive housing (64/65) together (Fig 2).
Regarding Claim 22, Barina in view of Meijer discloses the limitations of Claim 16, however Barina as modified does not disclose wherein the heat pipe includes: a first surface facing the first surface of the thermally conductive housing; and a second surface facing the second surface of the thermally conductive housing.
Instead, Meijer (In Figs 1, 6) further teaches wherein the heat pipe (50) includes: a first surface facing the first surface of the thermally conductive housing (68); and a second surface facing the second surface of the thermally conductive housing (68), (Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barina with Meiji with a heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing to benefit from dissipating heat from DRAM chips (Meijer ¶ 23, II. 12-17).
Regarding Claim 23, Barina in view of Meijer discloses the limitations of Claim 16, however Barina as modified does not disclose wherein the heat pipe is a first heat pipe and further including a second heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing.
Instead, Meijer (In Figs 1, 6) further teaches wherein the heat pipe (50) is a first heat pipe (50) and further including a second heat pipe (50) in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing (68), (Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barina with Meiji with the heat pipe being a first heat pipe and further including a second heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing between the first surface and the second surface of the thermally conductive housing to benefit from dissipating heat from DRAM chips (Meijer ¶ 23, II. 12-17).
Examiner Note; the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
See: St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bernis Co., 193: USPQ 8, see: MPEP 214404 section VI.
Regarding Claim 26, Barina in view of Meijer discloses limitations of Claim 16, however Barina (In Fig 2) further discloses wherein the end is a first end (first end of 64/65), the wing (wings at both ends of 64/65), (Fig 2) is a first wing (wings at both ends of 64/65), (Fig 2), and the thermally conductive housing (64/65) has a second wing (wings at both ends of 64/65), (Fig 2) at a second end (second end of 64/65) of the thermally conductive housing (64/65), (Fig 2).
Regarding Claim 28, Barina in view of Meijer discloses limitations of Claim 16, however Barina (In Fig 2) further discloses wherein the heat pipe (66) is to receive a liquid (¶ 18, II. 1-4).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Barina in view of Meijer and further in view of Tan et al (US 2021/0120670).
Regarding Claim 24, Barina in view of Meijer discloses limitations of Claim 23, however Barina as modified does not discloses wherein the first heat pipe has a first shape and the second heat pipe has a second shape at least partially different than the first shape of the first heat pipe.
Instead, Tan (In Fig 2a) teaches wherein the first heat pipe (207) has a first shape and the second heat pipe (207) has a second shape at least partially different than the first shape of the first heat pipe (207), (Fig 2a).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barina with Meiji and further with Tan with the first heat pipe having a first shape and the second heat pipe having a second shape at least partially different than the first shape of the first heat pipe to benefit from effectively spreading and conducting heat outside of the DIMM region, reducing profile ejector and design complexity (Tan ¶ 32, II. 1-8).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Barina in view of Meijer and further in view of Tan et al (US 2011/0182028 “Huang”).
Regarding Claim 29, Barina in view of Meijer discloses limitations of Claim 16, however Barina as modified does not discloses wherein the heat pipe is air filled and does not receive a liquid.
Instead, Huang (In Fig 2) teaches wherein the heat pipe (131) is air filled and does not receive a liquid (¶ 39, II. 1-6), (Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Barina with Meiji and further with Huang with the heat pipe being air filled and does not receive a liquid to benefit from effectively dissipating heat of electronic assemblies without refrigerant, providing a cooling system having merits of cheap, energy saving and environmentally friendly (Huang ¶ 21, II. 1-6).
Claims 32 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Fang in view of Barina.
Regarding Claim 32, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 30, however where Fang (In Fig 1) further discloses wherein the first portion (portion of 7 over hanging 13) of the body (body of 7) of the vapor chamber (7) is to face a portion of an electronic circuit board (3), however Fang does not disclose wherein the wing extending beyond an end of the electronic circuit board when the first portion of the body of the vapor chamber faces the portion of the electronic circuit board.
Instead Barina (In Fig 2) teaches wherein the wing (wings at both ends of 64/65) extending beyond an end of the electronic circuit board (20) when the first portion of the body of the vapor chamber (66), (¶ 17, II. 19-21) faces the portion of the electronic circuit board (20), (Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Fang with Barina with the wing extending beyond an end of the electronic circuit board when the first portion of the body of the vapor chamber facing the portion of the electronic circuit board to benefit from conducting heat from each DIMM to the mounting block (Barina ¶ 13, II. 12-15).
Regarding Claim 36, Fang discloses the limitations of Claim 35, however where Fang does not disclose wherein the cold plate is a first cold plate, and further including a second cold plate, the second wing extending over at least a portion of the second cold plate.
Instead, Barina (In Figs 1-2) teaches wherein the cold plate (40, 41) is a first cold plate (40, 41), and further including a second cold plate (40, 41), the second wing (wings at both ends of 64/65) extending over at least a portion of the second cold plate (40, 41), (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Fang with Barina with the cold plate being a first cold plate, and further including a second cold plate, the second wing extending over at least a portion of the second cold plate to benefit from conducting heat from each DIMM to the mounting block (Barina ¶ 13, II. 12-15).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25, 33-34 and 39 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, and if drawing objection has been resolved.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to Claim 25, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent Claim 25 and at least in part because Claim 25 recites, “the second surface covers an entire length of the heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing and the first surface covers less than the entire length of the heat pipe in the thermally conductive housing”.
With respect to Claim 33, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent Claim 33 and at least in part because Claim 33 recites,
“a thermal interface material and a leaf spring, the leaf spring coupled to the first portion of the body of the vapor chamber, the thermal interface material between the leaf spring and the first portion of the body of the vapor chamber”
With respect to Claim 39, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent Claim 39 and at least in part because Claim 39 recites, the second portion of the body of the vapor chamber defines a mass block.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of Claims 25, 33 and 39 are believed to render said Claims 25, 33 and 39 and all Claims dependent therefrom (Claim 34) patentable over the art of record.
The closest art of record is believed to be that of Barina et al (US 2013/0120926 – hereafter “Barina”).
While Barina Fig 2 teaches limitations of base Claim 16, however neither Barina nor any other art of record, either alone or in combination, teach or suggest above-mentioned limitation of Claims 25, 33 and 39.
Any comment 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 submission should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance”.
/
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 AMIR JALALI whose telephone number is (303)297-4308. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMIR A JALALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights