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’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 10-11, 13-15, 21, 23-25, 27-28, 32and 34-38 and Species B and Sub-Species AB, claims 10-11, 13-15, 21, 23-25, 27-28, 32 and 34-38 in the reply filed on 12/3/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: there appears to be a typographical error and “between them adjacent nanostructures” should read “between the adjacent nanostructures”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11, 13, 14, 15, 21, 23, 25, 27-28 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 11 and 13 recites the limitation "the interstitial space" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since an interstitial space was not previously positively recited.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the resistance to energy transport" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since it was not previously positively recited.
Claims 15 and 25 recite the limitation "the group consisting of " in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 21, 25, 27-28 and 38 recite the limitation "The multilayered or multitiered structure of claim 16" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim since claim 16 is cancelled. These claims will not be examined with prior art for examination purposes since it is unclear if these should be cancelled as well. Claim 38 depends from claim 28 which also depends from claim 16 which is cancelled.
The term “pressure sensitive” in claims 21 and 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sensitive” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear if sensitive is referring to a breaking point, a melting point, some sort of feeling or some other kind of sensitive to pressure.
The term “thermally activatable” in claim 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “activatable” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what activatable is defining.
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 10-11, 13-15, 23, 32 and 34-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inoue et al. (US Publication No.: 2019/0002284 hereinafter “Inoue”).
With respect to claim 10, Inoue discloses a multilayered or multitiered structure (Fig. 1b) comprising: at least a first layer or tier comprising a carbon nanotube array or sheet (Fig. 1b, first carbon nanotube layer 3b and Para 0104 & 0125), and at least a second layer or tier comprising a carbon nanotube array (Fig. 1b, second layer 3a), wherein the carbon nanotubes of the array or sheet of the first layer or tier at least partially interdigitate the carbon nanotubes of the array or sheet of the second layer or tier to form the multilayered or multitiered structure (Fig. 1b 10 is multilayered structure with 11, sheets 3, 1 and protruding fin layer); wherein the multilayered or multitiered structure is a thermal interface material (TIM)(Para 0009); and wherein the thermal interface material comprises an adhesive (Para 0009, 0045-0048 and 0050-0055).
With respect to claim 32, Inoue discloses a device comprising a multilayered or multitiered structure (Fig. 1b) comprising at least a first layer or tier comprising a carbon nanotube array or sheet (Fig. 1b, first carbon nanotube layer 3b and Para 0104 & 0125), and at least a second layer comprising a carbon nanotube array (Fig. 1b, second layer 3a), wherein the carbon nanotubes of the array or sheet of the first layer or tier at least partially interdigitate the carbon nanotubes of the array or sheet of the second layer or tier to form the multilayered or multitiered structure (Fig. 1b 10 is multilayered structure with 11, sheets 3, 1 and protruding fin layer), and wherein the multilayered or multitiered structure comprises a coating material present in at least some of the interstitial space between the carbon nanotubes, on the surfaces of the carbon nanotubes, or both, of the at least first and second layers or tiers of the multilayered or multitiered structure (Para 0029-0032, 0050-0055 thermosetting resin is on the CNT); wherein the multilayered or multitiered structure is a thermal interface material (TIM) )(Para 0009); and wherein the thermal interface material comprises an adhesive (Para 0009, 0045-0048 and 0050-0055).
With respect to claim 11, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 10 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses further comprising a coating material on at least some of the interstitial space between the carbon nanotubes, the surfaces of the carbon nanotubes, or both of the first and second array forming the multilayered or multitiered structure (Para 0029-0032, 0050-0055 thermosetting resin is on the CNT).
With respect to claim 13, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 11 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses wherein at least some of the interstitial space between the carbon nanotubes, the surfaces of the carbon nanotubes, or both of the first and second array forming the multilayered or multitiered structure is infiltrated with the coating material which is solidified within the carbon nanotube arrays (Para 0029-0032, 0050-0055 thermosetting resin is solidified on the CNT).
With respect to claim 14, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 11 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses the intended use limitation of the coating material reduces the resistance to energy transport between them adjacent nanostructures, carbon nanotubes, of the carbon nanotube array or sheets present between the two or more layers or tiers (Para 0016, 0020, 0026, 0028).
With respect to claim 15, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 11 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses wherein the two or more layers or tiers are bonded by a coating material selected from the group consisting of an adhesive and a phase change material (Para 0029-0032, 0050-0055 thermosetting resin is solidified on the CNT).
With respect to claims 23 and 34-35, Inoue discloses the structure of claims 10 and 32 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses wherein the adhesive comprises a combination of a pressure sensitive adhesive (as per claim 34) and a thermally activatable adhesive (Para 0501-0507).
With respect to claims 36-37, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 32 as discussed above. Inoue also discloses wherein the multilayered or multitiered structure further comprises a dielectric layer present within the multilayered or multitiered structure (as per claim 36) wherein the dielectric layer is a ceramic insulating material (as per claim 27)(Para 0111-0112, 0230, 0311 ceramic sheets or a ceramic plate).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Chung (US Patent No.: 6,399,175).
With respect to claim 24, Inoue discloses the structure of claim 21 as discussed above. Inoue is silent to the thermal interface material has an adhesion strength of up to about 1,000 psi.
Chung teaches a thermos plastic adhesive that has an adhesion strength of up to 1,000 psi (Col. 22, lines 20-23). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the coating material in the thermal interface material of Inoue to be a thermoplastic with an adhesion strength of up to 1,000 psi as taught by Chung to have a desired material properties and a more rigid structure (Col. 22, lines 15-23).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE E ROJOHN III whose telephone number is (571)270-5431. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571)272-1184. 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.
/CLAIRE E ROJOHN III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763