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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/31/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are moot. Applicant has amended the claims to recite new combinations of limitations.
Applicant' s arguments are directed at the amendment. Please see below for new grounds of rejection, necessitated by Amendment.
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.
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 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inagaki (US 20170234625 A1: Previously cited) in view of WANG (CN107544645A: Machine Translation is provided by Examiner).
Regarding claim 1, Inagaki teaches a flexible two-phase conversion heat transfer device (1: see Figure 2) comprising: a main body (2: see Figure 1) having two straight sections (7 and 8) and a bellows section (6) located between the two straight sections (see Figure 2), the bellows section (6) including multiple waved stripes (10-12) configured as multiple recessed/raised structures alternately formed on the main body (see Figure 2), each waved stripe having a waved stripe width (width of 10), the waved stripe widths being unequal to each other (Inagaki teaches in ¶ [0047] that “ As to the corrugated portion 6 having a helical shape, the width of the crest portion 10 is not particularly limited, and may be of a uniform width or an non-uniform width”) , the bellows section (6) having an equal or greater inner diameter than either of the two straight sections (see Figure 2 where inner diameter of 6 in sections 10 is equal to the inner diameter of 7 and 8) ; and
a chamber (3) enclosed in the main body (2), a working liquid being received in the chamber (see ¶ [0047]), a capillary structure body (4) being disposed in the chamber (3), the capillary structure body (4) including two first sintered capillary sections (4 that in sections 7 and 8: see ¶ [0065]) and a second capillary section (4 that in section 6), each of the first sintered capillary sections (4 that in sections 7 and 8) being positioned on the straight sections (7 and 8) respectively (see Figure 2), the second capillary section (4 that in section 6) being positioned on the bellows section (6), wherein the bellows section enables one end of the main body to flex up to 180 degrees, towards the other end of the main body (The recitations: “wherein the bellows section enables one end of the main body to flex up to 180 degrees, towards the other end of the main body” are considered to be statements of intended use. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claim, as is the case here; refer to MPEP 2114(II). In the instant case, Inagaki discloses all of the structural limitations as claimed and is thus capable of being employed in the manner claimed).
Inagaki does not specifically teach that the waved stripe widths being narrowest at a medial position of the bellows sections and increasing in width towards each of two opposite ends thereof and the second capillary section is woven, wherein each of the first sintered capillary sections is in capillary connection with the second woven capillary section and wherein the second woven capillary section has two ends respectively partially extending from the bellows section to the straight sections.
However, there is no evidence of record that establishes that having the waved stripe widths narrowest at a medial position of the bellows sections and increasing in width towards each of two opposite ends thereof and the second capillary section is woven would result in a difference in function of Inagaki’s heat device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the widths of Inagaki’s waved stripe and the type of the second capillary section, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being given the claimed configuration. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed configuration solves any stated problem and therefore there appears to be no criticality placed on the configuration as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify configuration Inagaki’s waved stripe to be narrowest at a medial position of the bellows sections and increasing in width towards each of two opposite ends thereof and the second capillary section is woven as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Moreover, it’s old and well known in the art for flexible heat pipes to have each of two capillary sections is in capillary connection with one capillary section and wherein the one capillary section has two ends respectively partially extending from the bellows section to the straight sections, as evidenced by WANG, see WANG’s Figure 3 where the flexible heat pipe (4) has two capillary sections (43) that are in capillary connection with one capillary section (412) and wherein the one capillary section (412) has two ends respectively partially extending from the bellows section (41) to the straight sections (44).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the flexible heat pipe of Inagaki with each of the first sintered capillary sections is in capillary connection with the second woven capillary section and wherein the second woven capillary section has two ends respectively partially extending from the bellows section to the straight sections., since as evidenced by WANG, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of allowing small movements of the wick in the bellows section with damaging or losing capillary connection with the straight sections.
Regarding claim 3, Inagaki further teaches wherein each waved stripe has a waved stripe leftmost side (left side of each one of 10) and a waved stripe rightmost side (right side of each one of 10: see Figure 2), the waved stripe width being defined between the waved stripe leftmost side and the waved stripe rightmost side (see Figure 2).
Regarding claim 4, Inagaki further teaches wherein a waved stripe gap (11) is defined as a shortest distance between each two adjacent waved stripes, and wherein the waved stripe gaps are equal to each other (Inagaki teaches in ¶ [0047] that “the width of the trough portion 11 is not particularly limited, and may be of a uniform width”).
Regarding claim 5, Inagaki further teaches wherein the waved stripes (10-12) are annular waved stripes (see Figure 2 and/or 7A).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inagaki (US 20170234625 A1: Previously cited) in view of WANG (CN107544645A: Machine Translation is provided by Examiner) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CHEN (CN 108225074 A: Machine Translation was previously provided by Examiner).
Regarding claim 2, Inagaki further teaches wherein each waved stripe (10) has a waved stripe bottom end and a waved stripe top end (see Figure 2), a waved stripe height ( height of 10) being defined between the waved stripe bottom end and the waved stripe top end (see Figure 2), the waved stripe heights being equal to each other (Inagaki teaches in ¶ [0047] that “the height of the crest portion 10 and the depth of the trough portion 11 are both not particularly limited, and may be of a uniform size”, see also Figure 2).
Inagaki does not teach the waved stripe bottom end being positioned in adjacency to an outer surface of the main body, the waved stripe top end being raised from the outer surface of the main body.
However, it’s old and well known in the art for flexible heat pipes to have bellows section with inner diameter greater than the inner diameter of the straight sections, as evidenced by CHEN, see in CHEN’s Figure 2 annotated by Examiner where each waved stripe (4) has a waved stripe bottom end (WBE) and a waved stripe top end (WTE), the waved stripe bottom end being positioned in adjacency to an outer surface (OS) of the main body, the waved stripe top end being raised from the outer surface of the main body, a waved stripe height (WSH) being defined between the waved stripe bottom end and the waved stripe top end, the waved stripe heights being equal to each other (see CHEN’s Figure 2 annotated by Examiner).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the inner diameter of Inagaki’s bellows section to have the waved stripe bottom end being positioned in adjacency to an outer surface of the main body, the waved stripe top end being raised from the outer surface of the main body, since as evidenced by CHEN, such provision was old and well-known in the art, and would provide the predictable benefit of increasing the heat distribution capacity by increasing the total volume of chamber.
PNG
media_image1.png
431
621
media_image1.png
Greyscale
CHEN’s Figure 2 annotated by Examiner
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHALED AL SAMIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-8685. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30AM~3:30PM, M-F (E.S.T.).
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.
/KHALED AHMED ALI AL SAMIRI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights