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 1/11/2024, 9/2/2025 have been fully considered and are attached hereto.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-4, 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites, “the arrangement direction” “the length of the portion of the heat transfer member” and “the length of the second region” all of which lack antecedent basis. It appears the claim should be changed to recite, “an arrangement direction” “a length of a portion of the heat transfer member” and “a length of the second region”.
Claim 8 recites, “the housing” which lacks antecedent basis. It appears it should be changed to read, “a housing”.
Claims 3-4 are objected to since they depend from claim 2 and inherit the deficiencies therein.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claim 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 18, 20, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kita (US 10,842,015).
With respect to claim 1, Kita teaches (In Figs 1-3) an electronic device (1) comprising: a substrate (10) including a hole (17); an electronic component (15) disposed on one surface (Top surface) of the substrate (See Fig 1, 15 has terminal 20 disposed on the top surface of 10); a heat emitting body (16) disposed (indirectly) on an other surface (Bottom surface) of the substrate (10, see Fig 2); and a heat transfer member (13) disposed between the electronic component (15) and the heat emitting body (16, see Fig 2), wherein the hole includes a first region (17A) into which a portion of the heat transfer member is inserted and a second region (17B) having a smaller width than does the first region (See Fig 3).
With respect to claim 2, Kita further teaches an arrangement direction (Fig one, direction of positive X) of the first region (17A) and the second region (17B) is referred to as a first direction, a length of a portion of the heat transfer member (13) is longer than a length of the second region (17B) with respect to a second direction (Positive Y direction in Fig 1) perpendicular to the first direction (See Fig 1, 13 in the Y direction has a length which is longer than the length of 17B).
With respect to claim 3, Kita further teaches that the substrate (10) includes a circuit pattern electrically connected to the electronic component (Col. 5, ll. 6-9, “The plurality of terminals 15B include a terminal 19 that is connected to the metal member 14 fixed to the busbar 12, and a terminal 20 that is connected to a conductive path (not shown) printed on the circuit board 10.”).
With respect to claim 5, Kita further teaches that a step being-protruded more inward than other regions is disposed on an inner surface of the hole (17, see Fig 3).
With respect to claim 6, Kita further teaches an insulating pad disposed between the heat emitting body (16) and the heat transfer member (13, Col. 5, ll. 16-20, “The upper surface of the heat sink 16 is formed as a flat surface, and is in indirect surface contact with the busbars 11 and 12 and the metal members 13 and 14 via the insulating heat dissipation sheet (not shown).”).
With respect to claim 8, Kita further teaches a surface (Top surface) of the heat emitting body (16) facing the substrate (10) is an inner surface of a housing that forms an external shape of the electronic device (1).
With respect to claim 18, Kita teaches (In Figs 1-3) an electronic device comprising: a substrate (10) including a hole (17); an electronic component (15) disposed on one side (Top side) of the substrate; a heat emitting body (16) disposed (indirectly) on an other surface (Bottom surface) of the substrate (10); and a heat transfer member (13) disposed between the electronic component (15) and the heat emitting body (16, see Fig 2), wherein the heat transfer member penetrates the substrate (See Fig 2), and wherein one side surface of the heat transfer member is spaced apart from one side surface of the hole of the substrate in a first direction (See Fig 2, the side surface of 13A is spaced apart from the side surface of 17 in the X direction).
With respect to claim 20, Kita further teaches a step protruded more inward than other regions is disposed on an inner surface of the hole (17, see Fig 3).
With respect to claim 21, Kita further teaches an insulating pad disposed between the heat emitting body (16) and the heat transfer member (13, Col. 5, ll. 16-20, “The upper surface of the heat sink 16 is formed as a flat surface, and is in indirect surface contact with the busbars 11 and 12 and the metal members 13 and 14 via the insulating heat dissipation sheet (not shown).”).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim et al. (US 2008/0198557 – hereinafter, “Lim”).
With respect to claims 18-19, Lim teaches (In Fig 7) an electronic device comprising: a substrate (44) including a hole (43); an electronic component (40) disposed on one side (Top side) of the substrate; a heat emitting body (42) disposed on an other surface (Side surface) of the substrate (44); and a heat transfer member (46) disposed between the electronic component (40) and the heat emitting body (42, see Fig 7), wherein the heat transfer member penetrates the substrate (See Fig 7), and wherein one side surface of the heat transfer member is spaced apart from one side surface of the hole of the substrate in a first direction (See Fig 7 which shows a gap between the sidewall of the substrate and a sidewall of the heat transfer member), wherein a circuit pattern (47) to which leads (45) of the electronic component are coupled is formed on an outside of the hole on a surface of substrate (See Fig 7).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita.
With respect to claims 7 and 22, Kita teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 18 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest the limitations of claims 7 and 22.
The Examiner hereby takes Official Notice of the conventionality of a heat emitting body which includes a plurality of heat dissipation fins protruded from an outer surface of the heat emitting body.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the heat emitting body of Kita have a plurality of heat dissipation fins protruded from an outer surface of the heat emitting body since doing so would increase the surface area of the heat emitting body thus allowing the body to release more heat to atmosphere.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita in view of Berg et al. (US 4,731,693 – hereinafter, “Berg”).
With respect to claim 11, Kita teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above and further teaches wherein the heat transfer member (13) includes: a body portion (13b); and a protruded portion (13a) extended from the body portion to be disposed in the hole (17) of the substrate and connected to the electronic component (See Fig 2).
Kita fails to specifically teach or suggest that the body portion has a length greater than a length of the hole with respect to a first direction.
Berg, however, teaches a heat transfer member (30) with a body portion (Fig 1, longer base portion of 30) that has a length greater than a length of a hole (22) with respect to a first direction (Positive X direction in Fig 1).
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 Berg with that of Kita such that, in Kita the body portion of the heat transfer member has a length greater than a length of the hole with respect to a first direction, as taught by Berg, since doing so would increase the area of the heat transfer member thus allowing the heat transfer member to conduct more heat away from the electronic component.
With respect to claim 12, Kita as modified by Berg teaches the limitations of claim 11 as per above and Kita further teaches that the heat emitting body (16) and the substrate (10) are spaced apart by the body portion (13B, see Fig 2).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita in view of Berg and further in view of Morelock (US 6,657,866).
With respect to claim 13, Kita as modified by Berg teaches the limitations of claim 11 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein a first distance from one end of the protruded portion to one end of the body portion is greater than a second distance from an other end of the protruded portion to an other end of the body portion.
Morelock, however, teaches (In Fig A below) a heat transfer member (22) which has a first distance from one end of a protruded portion to one end of a body portion which is greater than a second distance from an other end of the protruded portion to an other end of the body portion.
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 Morelock with that of Kita as modified by Berg, such that modified Kita includes a first distance from one end of the protruded portion to one end of the body portion is greater than a second distance from an other end of the protruded portion to an other end of the body portion, as taught by Morelock, since doing so would allow for a portion of the heat transfer member to extend under the substrate to provide additional cooling to the substrate (See Fig C below which shows how Kita would be modified in view of Morelock). It is further noted that changes in size/shape have been held to be obvious1.
PNG
media_image1.png
361
553
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
512
813
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kita in view of Berg and further in view of Azar (US 5,920,458).
With respect to claim 17, Kita as modified by Berg teaches the limitations of claim 11 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest that a thickness of the protruded portion is the same as a thickness of the substrate.
Azar, however, teaches (In Fig 2) a heat transfer member (26) which has a thickness of a protruded portion (28) that is the same as a thickness of a substrate (12, see Fig 2).
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 Azar with that of Kita such that, in Kita a thickness of the protruded portion slightly reduced to match the thickness of the substrate and, consequently the thickness of the base is slightly increased, so as to keep the overall thickness of the heat transfer member the same since doing so would allow for the base to provide better support to the component.
Further it has been held that mere changes in size are obvious2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 14-16 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.
With respect to claim 4, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 4 and at least in part because claim 4 recites, “wherein when the length of the second region in a first direction is L1 and the separation distance between the second region and the circuit pattern with respect to the first direction is L2, L1:L2=2:1 is satisfied”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 4 are believed to render said claim 4 patentable over the art of record.
With respect to claim 14, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 14 and at least in part because claim 14 recites, “wherein an area of the body portion having the second distance overlaps the second region of the hole”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 14 are believed to render said claim 14 patentable over the art of record.
With respect to claim 15, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 15 and at least in part because claim 15 recites, “wherein the body portion is soldered to the substrate, and wherein the electronic component is soldered to a surface of the protruded portion”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 15 are believed to render said claim 15 patentable over the art of record.
With respect to claim 16, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 16 and at least in part because claim 16 recites, “wherein a pad to which the body portion is soldered is disposed on a surface of the substrate”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 16 are believed to render said claim 16 patentable over the art of record.
None of the cited art teaches or suggests the above limitations of claims 4, 14-16 and/or Kita cannot be modified to achieve the claimed structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11,497,142 to Hellstrӧm which teaches a surface mounted heat buffer; and
US 2018/0326924 to Haraguchi which teaches a circuit assembly and electrical junction box.
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
1 In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); Gardner v.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984); In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
2 In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); Gardner v.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984);