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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant previously elected Species A without traverse in the reply filed on 11/7/2025.
Status of Claims
The status of the claims as filed in the submission dated 4/13/2026 are as follows:
Claim 6 is cancelled;
Claims 12-13 are newly added;
Claims 1-5 and 7-13 are pending;
Claims 4 and 9-11 are withdrawn from consideration;
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8, and 12-13 are being examined.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Currently, no claim limitations invoke 112(f).
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)(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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka (US6360814B1, as cited in the IDS).
Re Claim 1. Tanaka teaches a boiling cooler (1) comprising:
a boiling part (2) including an accommodation space (6) to accommodate a refrigerant, a refrigerant gas outlet (9, 7) connected to the accommodation space, and a refrigerant liquid inlet (8, 7) connected to the accommodation space, wherein the boiling part is operable to boil a refrigerant by heat exchange with a heating element (4) (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33); and
a condensing part (3) including a refrigerant passage (13) communicating with the refrigerant gas outlet and the refrigerant liquid inlet, an external passage (space at 14) provided between the refrigerant passage and the boiling part to allow external fluid (i.e. ambient air) to flow therethrough, wherein the condensing part is operable to condense a refrigerant gas received from the refrigerant gas outlet by heat exchange with the external fluid (i.e. ambient air) and send a condensed refrigerant liquid to the refrigerant liquid inlet (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; The liquid refrigerant will boil in 2 and become a gas that passes through radiator 3, which will condense the refrigerant back to a liquid to complete the cycle), wherein
the boiling part includes a first wall (2b) to which the heating element is mounted; a second wall (2c) facing the first wall via the accommodation space and adjacent to the external passage (i.e. ambient air at the space 14); and a heat conductive portion (10) to connect the first wall to the second wall through the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33);
the refrigerant gas outlet is located at an upper portion of the accommodation space, and the refrigerant liquid inlet (8,7) is located at a lower portion of the accommodation space; the refrigerant is accommodated in the accommodation space such that a top of the refrigerant liquid is located at a height between the refrigerant gas outlet and the refrigerant liquid inlet in a non-operating state at room temperature with no heat input from the heating element; the boiling cooler further comprises, on an outer surface of the first wall, a first mount located below the top of the refrigerant liquid in the non-operating state and to which the heating element is mounted, and a second mount located above the top of the refrigerant liquid in the non-operating state and to which the heating element is mounted (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; Figure 4 illustrates the gas outlet is at the top and the liquid inlet is at the bottom. Figures 7-8 illustrates the liquid surface line varies. Additionally, the first and second mount is an abstract delineation that can be implemented on any part of the outer surface of 2b and does not require any specific structure for implementation. Thus, multiple “mounts” could be utilized as desired on surface 2b);
the heat conductive portion includes a first heat conductive portion (any portion of 10 on any location on the lower part of 2b) located below an upper end of the top of the refrigerant liquid and a second heat conductive portion (any portion of 10 on any location on the upper part of 2b) located above the upper end of the top of the refrigerant liquid, in a direction from the refrigerant liquid inlet toward the refrigerant gas outlet; the first heat conductive portion faces the first mount via the first wall; and the second heat conductive portion faces the second mount via the first wall (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; Figures 7-8 illustrates the liquid surface line varies. Additionally, the first and second heat conductive portion and mount is an abstract delineation that can be implemented on any part of the outer surface of 2b and does not require any specific structure for implementation. Thus, multiple “mounts” could be utilized as desired on surface 2b).
Re Claim 13. Tanaka teaches a boiling cooler (1) comprising:
a boiling part (2) including an accommodation space (6) to accommodate a refrigerant, a refrigerant gas outlet (9, 7) connected to the accommodation space, and a refrigerant liquid inlet (8, 7) connected to the accommodation space, wherein the boiling part is operable to boil a refrigerant by heat exchange with a heating element (4) (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33); and
a condensing part (3) including a refrigerant passage (13) communicating with the refrigerant gas outlet and the refrigerant liquid inlet, an external passage (space at 14) provided between the refrigerant passage and the boiling part to allow external fluid (i.e. ambient air) to flow therethrough, wherein the condensing part is operable to condense a refrigerant gas received from the refrigerant gas outlet by heat exchange with the external fluid (i.e. ambient air) and send a condensed refrigerant liquid to the refrigerant liquid inlet (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; The liquid refrigerant will boil in 2 and become a gas that passes through radiator 3, which will condense the refrigerant back to a liquid to complete the cycle), wherein
the boiling part includes a first wall (2b) to which the heating element is mounted; a second wall (2c) facing the first wall via the accommodation space and adjacent to the external passage (i.e. ambient air at the space 14); and a heat conductive portion (10) to connect the first wall to the second wall through the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33);
the heat conductive portion (10) is provided to extend in a flat plate-shaped manner from a lower end of the refrigerant liquid inlet to an upper end of the refrigerant gas outlet in a direction from the refrigerant liquid inlet toward the refrigerant gas outlet in the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; Ribs 10 are planar from the lower end to the upper end of the accommodation space).
Re Claim 2. Tanaka teaches the heat conductive portion (10) extends in a direction from the refrigerant liquid inlet toward the refrigerant gas outlet in the accommodation space, and includes a plurality of heat conductive portions in the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33).
Re Claim 3. Tanaka teaches the heat conductive portion includes a partition wall (10 is a wall) in the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33).
Re Claim 5. Tanaka teaches the heat conductive portion is provided from the refrigerant gas outlet to the refrigerant liquid inlet in the accommodation space (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33).
Re Claim 7. Tanaka teaches the refrigerant passage includes a partition plate (13 is a tube that separates the refrigerant passage from ambient) to partition the refrigerant passage from the external passage, a peripheral wall to define an outer periphery of the refrigerant passage, and a corrugated fin (14) integrated with the partition plate and the peripheral wall inside the refrigerant passage (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; All components are connected together and thus are interpreted as being integrated together).
Re Claim 8. Tanaka teaches the condensing part has a structure in which a flat plate-shaped first layer including the refrigerant passage and a flat plate-shaped second layer including a connection passage to allow the refrigerant passage and the boiling part to communicate with each other and the external passage are stacked; and the condensing part is stacked on the second wall of the boiling part and integrated with the boiling part (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; The condensing part 3 is composed of a plurality of layers 13 and 14 that are stacked together).
Re Claim 12. Tanaka teaches at the second mount, heat exchange occurs between a second heating element and the refrigerant liquid that has been lifted above the liquid level of the refrigerant liquid by the refrigerant gas (Figures 1-7; Column 4 lines 48-67, Column 5 lines 1-37, Column 6 lines 1-33; Figures 7-8 illustrates the liquid surface line varies).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 7 of the reply that “In particular, Tanaka neither discloses nor suggests a structure including a heat conductive portion to connect the first wall, to which the heating element is mounted, to the second wall that is adjacent to an external passage provided in the condensing part, as defined in amended claim 1. Rather, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka are provided at a different height relative to the radiator 3 and are not connected to the wall portion adjacent to the plural radiator fins 14 provided on the radiator 3. In other words, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka cannot transfer heat from the heating element to the radiator 3, so they do not function as the heat conductive portion defined in amended claim 1”. The ribs 10 of Tanaka connect the heat transfer surface of the first wall 2b to the second wall 2a, wherein the second wall 2a is connected to the radiator 3. Thus, it can be seen that Tanaka does disclose the heat conductive portions that can transfer heat from the first wall to the second wall. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Rather, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka are provided at a different height relative to the radiator 3 and are not connected to the wall portion adjacent to the plural radiator fins 14 provided on the radiator 3. In other words, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka cannot transfer heat from the heating element to the radiator 3, so they do not function as the heat conductive portion defined in amended claim 1”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues on pages 7-8 of the reply that “Further, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka are not provided for the purpose of transferring heat from the heating element to the radiator 3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art receives no motivation or suggestion to enlarge the radiator 3 or extend the ribs 10 to connect them, in the disclosed structure in Tanaka”. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Further, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka are not provided for the purpose of transferring heat from the heating element to the radiator 3. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art receives no motivation or suggestion to enlarge the radiator 3 or extend the ribs 10 to connect them, in the disclosed structure in Tanaka”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues on page 7 of the reply that “This is because Tanaka does not disclose any structure corresponding to the first heat conductive portion and the second heat conductive portion as defined in amended claim 1, and thus neither the first mount which faces the first heat conductive portion via the first wall nor the second mount which faces the second heat conductive portion via the first wall portion is disclosed or suggested in Tanaka”. Tanaka clearly illustrates a plurality of heat conductive portions 10 that extend between the first and second wall. Additionally, the first and second mount is an abstract delineation that can be implemented on any part of the outer surface of 2b and does not require any specific structure for implementation. Thus, multiple “mounts” could be utilized as desired on surface 2b. The applicant has failed to set forth any specific structural distinctions for the “mounts” and as such, will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation as outline above.
Applicant argues on page 8-9 of the reply that “Further, according to the structure as defined in amended claim 1, the heat applied to the first wall from the heating element can be transferred to the second wall via thermal conduction through the heat conductive portion, and can be released directly (without passing through the refrigerant) into the external fluid flowing through the external passage adjacent to the second wall. Consequently, even if the refrigerant liquid dries due to an increase in heat input, for example, the heat conductive portion connects the first wall and the second wall, allowing heat from the heating element to be directly released to the external fluid via the heat conductive portion. In other words, even if the refrigerant liquid dries, Applicant's system effectively functions as a heat sink by directly transferring heat from the heating element to the external fluid, thereby preventing a sudden drop in cooling performance caused by an increase in heat input”. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the entire italicized portion) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Nevertheless, Tanaka teaches a solid conduction path from the first wall to the second wall through the heat conductive portions. Thus, Tanka is capable of performing the recited functions. Therefore, the applicants’ argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 9 of the reply that “Applicant's invention thus achieves the unique benefit of "enabling efficient cooling of the heating elements while increasing the flexibility of their placement, and preventing a sudden drop in cooling performance." Tanaka neither discloses nor suggests the above beneficial effect achieved by amended claim 1. Thus, one of skill in the art receives no motivation to extend Tanaka in accordance with amended claim 1”. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “enabling efficient cooling of the heating elements while increasing the flexibility of their placement, and preventing a sudden drop in cooling performance”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues on page 10 of the reply that “The ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka extend from the vicinity of the liquid-refrigerant returning passage 8 to the vicinity of the header connection port 7. However, those ribs 10 do not extend all the way to the lower end of the liquid-refrigerant returning passage 8. In addition, the ribs 10 disclosed in Tanaka do not extend all the way to the upper end of header connection port 7. In other words, the structure disclosed in Tanaka provides for the ribs 10 only in the region extending from a position above the liquid-refrigerant returning passage 8 to a position below the header connection port 7”. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “all the way”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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 TRAVIS RUBY whose telephone number is (571)270-5760. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM-5PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/TRAVIS RUBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights