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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 7/10/2024 has been fully considered and is attached hereto.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka et al. (US 7,463,495 – hereinafter, “Tanaka”).
With respect to claim 1, Tanaka teaches (In Fig 8A, 10E, 22, 23) a receptacle assembly (60) configured to receive and operably engage with a cable connector (20), the receptacle assembly comprising: a body (63) defining a first end (Adjacent 69) configured to at least partially receive a cable connector (20), a second end (End opposite the first end adjacent 69) configured to be received by a datacenter rack (81), a top surface (Top of 62) extending between the first end and the second end (See Fig 10E), and a bottom surface (Bottom of 61) extending between the first end and the second end opposite the top surface (See Fig 10E), wherein the bottom surface is configured to engage a printed circuit board (91, see Figs 22A, 22C); and a thermal dissipation device (120A) disposed on the bottom surface of the body (See Fig 22C), wherein the thermal dissipation device is configured to dissipate heat from the receptacle assembly to an external environment via the bottom surface (Col. 9, ll. 3-19).
With respect to claim 2, Tanaka further teaches in an instance in which the bottom surface is engaged with the printed circuit board, the thermal dissipation device is disposed between the bottom surface of the body and the printed circuit board (See Fig 22C).
With respect to claim 3, Tanaka further teaches that the thermal dissipation device (120A) comprises at least one conductive element (121A) disposed along the bottom surface of the body and at least one dissipation element (Body 121A is connected to) in engagement with the at least one conductive element, wherein the thermal dissipation device is configured to dissipate heat from the receptacle assembly via the bottom surface of the body through the at least one conductive element and the at least one dissipation element (Heat enters 121A via the body and then into 120A).
With respect to claim 4, Tanaka further teaches that the bottom surface of the body defines an opening (125), wherein the at least one conductive element is configured to be aligned with the opening (Col. 8, ll. 48-49, “When the heat sink 120 is further inserted, the projecting section 121 fits in the opening 125”, where, while this passage is referring to a different embodiment, given that the same element numbers are used in the embodiment shown in Figs 22-23 just with an extra designation of “A” thereafter, it is believed that Tanaka is also teaching that, for example 60D-4 has a similar opening that accepts a protrusion 121A so that 120A can sit flush against the bottom of the receptacle as shown in Fig 22C).
With respect to claim 5, Tanaka further teaches that the bottom surface of the body defines an opening (125), wherein the at least one conductive element is configured to be disposed within the opening (Col. 8, ll. 48-49, “When the heat sink 120 is further inserted, the projecting section 121 fits in the opening 125”).
With respect to claim 7, Tanaka further teaches that the at least one conductive element (121A) is configured to be disposed substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of the receptacle assembly (See Figs 22A and 23 which, together, discloses that 121A is substantially parallel to the length of 60).
With respect to claim 8, Tanaka further teaches that the at least one conductive element (121A) is configured to be disposed substantially perpendicular relative to the at least one dissipation element (See Figs 22A and 23 which, together, discloses that 121A is disposed is a direction that is perpendicular to 60 in that the minor length direction of 121A is perpendicular to the major length direction of 60)
With respect to method claims 13-18, the method steps recited in the claim are inherently necessitated by the device structure as taught by the Tanaka reference.
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 6, 11, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Lima (US 9,055,694).
With respect to claim 6, Tanaka teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein, in an instance in which the bottom surface of the body is engaged with the printed circuit board, the at least one dissipation element contacts the at least one conductive element and the printed circuit board.
Lima, however, teaches (In Fig 3) at least one dissipation element (214) contacts at least one conductive element (211) and a printed circuit board (260).
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 Lima with that of Tanaka such that, in Tanaka, the at least one dissipation element contacts the at least one conductive element and the printed circuit board, as taught by Lima, since doing so would allow heat to be moved into the circuit board and away from the body.
With respect to claim 11, Tanaka teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein, in an instance in which the bottom surface of the body is engaged with the printed circuit board, the at least one dissipation element is disposed within a recess defined in the printed circuit board.
Lima, however teaches a thermal dissipation device comprising at least one conductive element (210) and at least one dissipation element (268) the at least one dissipation element (268) is disposed within a recess defined in a printed circuit board (260).
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 Lima with that of Tanaka such that, in Tanaka, in an instance in which the bottom surface of the body is engaged with the printed circuit board, the at least one dissipation element is disposed within a recess defined in the printed circuit board, as taught by Lima, since doing so would all the heat to be moved to the opposite side of the circuit board and thus quickly away from the body.
With respect to method claim 20, the method steps recited in the claim are inherently necessitated by the device structure as taught by the Tanaka and Lima references.
Claims 9, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Weltsch et al. (US 10,856,055 – hereinafter, “Weltsch”).
With respect to claim 9, Tanaka teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein the at least one conductive element defines a recess, and wherein the at least one dissipation element is configured to be disposed within the recess.
Weltsch, however, teaches (In Fig 4) at least one conductive element (204) defines a recess, and wherein at least one dissipation element (210) is configured to be disposed within the recess (See Fig 4).
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 Weltsch with that of Tanaka such that, in Tanaka the at least one conductive element defines a recess, and wherein the at least one dissipation element is configured to be disposed within the recess, as taught by Weltsch, since doing so would reduce the height of the thermal dissipation device while allowing heat to move away from the body.
With respect to method claim 19, the method steps recited in the claim are inherently necessitated by the device structure as taught by the Tanaka and Weltsch references.
Claims 10, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Van Gaal (US 10,031,300).
With respect to claim 10, Tanaka teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein the at least one dissipation element is a heat pipe.
Van Gaal, however, teaches (In Fig 7) at least one dissipation element (30) is a heat pipe (Col. 9, l. 27).
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 Van Gaal with that of Tanaka such that, in Tanaka the at least one dissipation element is a heat pipe, as taught by Van Gaal since doing so would allow the at least one dissipation element to move larger quantities of heat.
With respect to claim 12, Tanaka teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest wherein the thermal dissipation devices is a heat pipe.
Van Gaal, however, teaches (In Fig 7) a thermal dissipation device (30) is a heat pipe (Col. 9, l. 27).
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 Van Gaal with that of Tanaka such that, in Tanaka the thermal dissipation device is a heat pipe, as taught by Van Gaal since doing so would allow the thermal dissipation device to move larger quantities of heat.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 10,746,948 to Huang et al. which teaches a cooling and heating structure for fiber optic transceiver; and
US 9,470,862 to Yoshizumi et al. which teaches an optical transmission device and manufacturing method thereof.
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 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 2841
Prosecution Insights