Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/619,668

ELECTRONIC ASSEMBLY AND SEMICONDUCTOR SWITCHING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 28, 2024
Examiner
MATEY, MICHAEL A
Art Unit
2835
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
451 granted / 567 resolved
+11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
593
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.6%
+10.6% vs TC avg
§102
37.1%
-2.9% vs TC avg
§112
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 567 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 1. In the event that 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 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 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. Claim(s) 1-4 & 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmi US2007/0247811 in view of Gandre et al. US5828549. Per claim 1 Ohmi teaches an electronic assembly (11, see fig.1), comprising: a circuit board (15); two or more heat sinks (16; [0041], see fig.3) disposed on said printed circuit board ([0022]), each of said heat sinks having a straight air duct section extending from an air inlet opening of said heat sink to an air outlet opening of said heat sink (see fig.1-4; [0019]-[0020]), through-hole-technology (THT) components (13) each having an outer side resting against an outside surface of a respective one of said heat sinks (see fig.2-4) and having connecting pins secured in said circuit board (see fig.2-4); and a fan (18) disposed to generate an air stream to enter the air inlet opening of a respective said heat sink that is located at a beginning of said row, and to flow through the air duct (see fig.3; [0019]-[0020]). Ohmi does not explicitly teach said heat sinks being disposed in a row, one behind another, and spaced apart from each other by intermediate spaces, with said air duct sections lying in a straight line and forming an air duct. Gandre et al. however discloses heat sinks (26a & 26b) being disposed in a row, one behind another (see fig.1-4), and spaced apart from each other by intermediate spaces (see fig.1-4), with said air duct sections lying in a straight line and forming an air duct (see fig.1-4). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the heat sinks disposed in a row one behind another and spaced apart from each other by intermediate spaces as taught by Gandre et al. in the electronic assembly of Ohmi, because enables a greater air mass to flow through the ducts to effectively cool the THT component attached to the heat sink, thus ensuring proper cooling and operation of the electronic assembly. Per claim 2 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. teaches the electronic assembly according to claim 1, wherein a minimum distance between said heat sinks is selected to ensure sufficient flashover resistance in dependence on a potential difference between mutually adjacent said heat sinks (see fig.1-4). Per claim 3 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. teaches the electronic assembly according to claim 1, wherein a free space (S, see fig.4) is formed between at least one of said heat sinks (16) and said circuit board (15), and at least one electronic component (26) is arranged in said free space (see fig.4). Per claim 4 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. teaches the electronic assembly according to claim 3, wherein said at least one electronic component (26) has a surface-mounted device (SMD) component (see fig.4). Per claim 11 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. teaches a semiconductor switching device, comprising an electronic assembly according to claim 1 ([0021], “switching device”). Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmi US2007/0247811 in view of Gandre et al. US5828549 as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Ma et al. US12302528. Per claim 5 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. teaches the electronic assembly according to claim 1, Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. does not explicitly teach at least one electrically insulating sealing element mounted in the intermediate space between two adjacent heat sinks, wherein the two adjacent heat sinks are a first heat sink and a second heat sink; and said at least one electrically insulating sealing element mounted between said first and second heat sinks being configured to reduce flow losses of the air stream generated by the fan in the intermediate space between the air duct section of said first heat sink and the air duct section of said second heat sink. Ma et al. however discloses at least one sealing element (27) mounted in the intermediate space between two adjacent heat sinks (see fig.1-3; col.3, line 22-25), wherein the two adjacent heat sinks are a first heat sink (23) and a second heat sink (24, see fig.1-2); and said at least one electrically insulating sealing element mounted between said first and second heat sinks being configured to reduce flow losses of the air stream generated by the fan in the intermediate space between the air duct section of said first heat sink and the air duct section of said second heat sink (see fig.1-3). Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. and Ma et al. discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for an electrically insulating sealing element. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have a sealing element as taught by Ma et al. in the electronic assembly of Ohmi and Gandre et al. and also make the sealing element be electrically insulating, because it ensures that the first and second heat sinks are securely attached together without loss of air flow from the first heat sink to second heatsink and also ensures that there is no electrical short, thus enabling an effective cooling and operation of the THT component, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416; see also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied Indus. of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331. Per claim 6 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. and Ma et al. teaches the electronic assembly according to claim 5, wherein said at least one electrically insulating sealing element mounted between said first and second heat sinks is configured to substantially prevent flow losses of the air stream generated by the fan in the intermediate space between the air duct section of said first heat sink and the air duct section of said second heat sink (see fig.1-3). Per claim 7 Ohmi in view of Gandre et al. and Ma et al. discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the electronic assembly according to claim 5, wherein at least one of the sealing elements is made of plastic. . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to make the sealing element be of plastic, because it ensures that the first and second heat sinks are securely attached together without loss of air flow from the first heat sink to second heatsink and also ensures that there is no electrical short due to the insulating properties of the plastic, thus enabling an effective cooling and operation of the THT component, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416; see also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied Indus. of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331. Allowable Subject matter 2. Claims 8-10 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. Claim 8, includes allowable subject matter because of the electronic assembly according to claim 1, wherein the air duct formed by said heat sinks is formed with openings to enable an actuating shaft running perpendicular to the air duct to be inserted through said openings. Claims 9-10 depends on claim 8, therefore allowable for the same reason. Email Communication 3. 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. Conclusion 4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schwab US2007/0215329 discloses an electric device, including a casing, an electric circuit with a heat generating component and at least one fan, the heat generating component being in thermal contact with a wall portion of the casing, the casing including a double wall portion with an inner wall portion and an outer wall portion defining an air duct between the inner wall portion and the outer wall portion. Peterson et al. US2002/0170905 discloses A heat sink for cooling a component, the heat sink comprising: a tubular body having an interior surface and an exterior surface, at least a portion of the exterior surface being substantially flat; and a plurality of internal fins extending from the interior surface of the tubular body, the plurality of internal fins being generally symmetric around a center line of the tubular body; wherein the substantially flat portion of the tubular body contacts the component to remove heat from the component. Applicants are directed to consider additional pertinent prior are included on the Notice of References Cited (PTOL 892) attached herewith. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A MATEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5 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 GANDHI can be reached at 5712723740. 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. /MICHAEL A MATEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591280
THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR AN INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592550
HEAT DISSIPATION STRUCTURE, HIGH-VOLTAGE DISTRIBUTION BOX, BATTERY, AND ELECTRICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585315
FAN ENCLOSURE WITH ADJUSTABLE SIDE VENTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588161
Server Information Handling System with Reversible Airflow Fan System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588174
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.2%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 567 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