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, 502.02, 502.03.
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 06/18/2024 has been fully considered and is attached hereto.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “801” has been used in the drawings (Fig 8), however specification does not mention it.
Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “801” has been used in the drawings (Fig 8), however disclosure does not mention it.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended”. If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following lack of antecedent informalities:
● In Claim 10, line 9, “direct fluid” is changed to read - - direct the fluid - -.
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 1-2, 5-7 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Monsef et al (US 7,092,254).
Regarding Claim 1, Monsef (In Fig 7) discloses a mini personal computer (PC) (cellular phone, Col 10, II. 6-9), comprising:
a housing (714);
at least one heat-generating structure (706) coupled with the housing (714), (Fig 8); and
a cooling system (700) including at least one active cooling cell (716), the at least one heat-generating structure (706) being coupled with the cooling system (700), (Fig 8), the at least one active cooling cell (716) being configured to utilize vibrational motion to drive a fluid (fluid, Col 4, II. 30-37) for transferring heat from the at least one heat-generating structure (707), (Col 4, II. 30-37) the cooling system being coupled with and contained by the housing (714), (Fig 7).
Regarding Claim 2, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef (In Fig 7) further discloses wherein the at least one heat-generating structure (706) includes a processor (Col 4, II. 42-48).
Regarding Claim 5, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef (In Fig 7) further discloses wherein the housing (714) includes at least one aperture (710, 712) that allows the fluid (fluid, Col 4, II. 30-37) to flow through the housing (714), (Fig 7).
Regarding Claim 6, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef (In Fig 7) further discloses wherein the at least one aperture (710, 712) includes an inlet vent (710) on a first surface of the housing (714) and an exit vent (712) on a second surface of the housing (714), (Fig 7).
Regarding Claim 7, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef (In Fig 7) further discloses wherein the at least one active cooling cell (716) further includes at least one cooling element (piezoelectric transducer, Col 2, II. 42-45) configured to undergo the vibrational motion when driven (Col 2, II. 56-58), (Fig 7).
Regarding Claim 12, Monsef (In Fig 7) discloses a method, comprising:
driving a cooling element (piezoelectric transducer, Col 2, II. 42-45) of an active cooling cell (716) in a cooling system (700) to induce a vibrational motion at a frequency (Col 4, II. 31-38), the cooling system (700) being in a mini personal computer (PC) (cellular phone, Col 10, II. 6-9) including a housing (714), at least one processor (Col 3, II. 14-19) coupled with the housing (714), (Fig 7), and the cooling system (700), the cooling system (700) including at least one active cooling cell (716), the at least one processor (Col 3, II. 14-19) being thermally coupled with the cooling system (700), (Fig 7), the at least one active cooling cell (716) being configured to utilize vibrational motion to drive a fluid (Col 4, II. 31-35) for transferring heat from the at least one processor (Col 3, II. 14-19), (Fig 7), the cooling system (700) being coupled with and contained by the housing (714), (Fig 7).
Regarding Claim 13, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 12, however Monsef (In Fig 7) further discloses wherein the frequency corresponds to a resonant frequency (Col 4, II. 51-54) for the cooling element (piezoelectric transducer, Col 2, II. 42-45).
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 of this title, 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Monsef et al (US 7,092,254) in view of Samadiani et al (US 2016/0085277).
Regarding Claim 3, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 2, however Monsef does not disclose wherein the processor is a reduced instruction set processor.
Instead, Samadiani (If Fig 9) teaches wherein the processor (910) is a reduced instruction set processor (¶ 160, II. 7-10).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Samadiani with the processor is a reduced instruction set processor to benefit from sufficiently cooling which otherwise may cause failure of device due to temperature of the device exceeding a maximum rated temperature which can come at a great cost in terms of speed, efficiency and expense (Samadiani ¶ 4, II. 1-8).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Monsef et al (US 7,092,254) in view of Ganti et al (US 2021/0185853).
Regarding Claim 4, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef does not disclose wherein the cooling system is activated in response to at least one of processor being turned on and a temperature reaching or exceeding a threshold.
Instead, Ganti (In Figs 7A and 12) teaches wherein the cooling system (710) is activated in response to at least one of processor being turned on and a temperature reaching or exceeding a threshold (¶ 106, II. 17-26).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Ganti with the cooling system being activated in response to at least one of processor being turned on and a temperature reaching or exceeding a threshold to benefit from efficiently dissipating heat from heat-generating structure and improving the performance of the device utilizing the cooling system (Ganti ¶ 52, II. 1-18).
Claims 8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Monsef in view of Yalamarthy et al (US 2021/0176894).
Regarding Claim 8, Monsef discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Monsef does not disclose wherein the at least one active cooling cell further includes a top plate having at least one inlet and an orifice plate having a plurality of orifices therein, the at least one cooling element being between the top plate and the orifice plate, the vibrational motion of the at least one cooling element drawing the fluid into the at least one inlet and driving the fluid through the plurality of orifices such that the fluid has a speed of at least thirty meters per second after exiting at least one of the plurality of orifices.
Instead, Yalamarthy (In Fig 1A) teaches wherein the at least one active cooling cell (100) further includes a top plate (110) having at least one inlet (112) and an orifice plate (130) having a plurality of orifices (132) therein (Fig 1A), the at least one cooling element (120) being between the top plate (110) and the orifice plate (130), (Fig 1A), the vibrational motion of the at least one cooling element (120) drawing the fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) into the at least one inlet (112) and driving the fluid through the plurality of orifices (132) such that the fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) has a speed of at least thirty meters per second after exiting at least one of the plurality of orifices (132), (¶ 32, II. 4-9), (Fig 1A).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Yalamarthy with the at least one active cooling cell further including a top plate having at least one inlet and an orifice plate having a plurality of orifices therein, the at least one cooling element being between the top plate and the orifice plate, the vibrational motion of the at least one cooling element drawing the fluid into the at least one inlet and driving the fluid through the plurality of orifices such that the fluid having a speed of at least thirty meters per second after exiting at least one of the plurality of orifices to benefit from improving performance of the device utilizing the cooling system, suitable for use in smaller and/or mobile devices (Yalamarthy ¶ 52, II. 13-17).
Regarding Claim 10, Monsef (In Fig 7) discloses a mini personal computer (PC), (cellular phone, Col 10, II. 6-9), comprising:
a housing (714) having an inlet (710) and an exit vent (712);
at least one processor (Col 3, II. 14-19); and
a cooling system (700) including at least one active cooling cell (716), the at least one processor (Col 3, II. 14-19) being thermally coupled with the cooling system (700), (Fig 7), the cooling system (700) being coupled with and contained by the housing (714), (Fig 7), however Monsef does not disclose where each of the at least one active cooling cell including a top plate having at least one inlet therein, a bottom plate having a plurality of orifices therein, and a cooling element between the top plate and the bottom plate, the cooling element being configured to utilize vibrational motion when driven to draw a fluid into each of the at least one active cooling cell via the at least one inlet, direct fluid toward the bottom plate, and drive the fluid through the plurality of orifices such that the fluid has a speed of at least thirty meters per second after leaving the plurality of orifices, the fluid for transferring heat from the at least one processor.
Instead, Yalamarthy (In Fig 10A) teaches where each of the at least one active cooling cell (1000A) including a top plate (1010) having at least one inlet (1012) therein (Fig 10A), a bottom plate (1030) having a plurality of orifices (1032) therein (Fig 10A), and a cooling element (1020) between the top plate (1010) and the bottom plate (1030), (Fig 1A), the cooling element (1020) being configured to utilize vibrational motion when driven to draw a fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) into each of the at least one active cooling cell (10001A) via the at least one inlet (1012), direct fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) toward the bottom plate (1030), and drive the fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) through the plurality of orifices (1032) such that the fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) has a speed of at least thirty meters per second after leaving the plurality of orifices (132), (¶ 32, II. 4-9), (Fig 10A), the fluid (¶ 32, II. 1-7) for transferring heat from the at least one processor (¶ 22, II. 3-6).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Yalamarthy with each of the at least one active cooling cell including a top plate having at least one inlet therein, a bottom plate having a plurality of orifices therein, and a cooling element between the top plate and the bottom plate, the cooling element being configured to utilize vibrational motion when driven to draw a fluid into each of the at least one active cooling cell via the at least one inlet, direct fluid toward the bottom plate, and drive the fluid through the plurality of orifices such that the fluid having a speed of at least thirty meters per second after leaving the plurality of orifices, the fluid for transferring heat from the at least one processor to benefit from improving performance of the device utilizing the cooling system, suitable for use in smaller and/or mobile devices (Yalamarthy ¶ 52, II. 13-17).
Regarding Claim 11, Monsef in view of Yalamarthy discloses the limitations of Claim 10, however Monsef as modified does not disclose wherein the mini PC further comprising: a heat spreader coupled with the cooling system.
Instead, Yalamarthy (In Fig 10A) further teaches wherein the mini PC (¶ 34, II. 1-15) further comprising: a heat spreader (heat-generating structure (e. g. heat spreader/IC)) coupled with the cooling system (1000A).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Yalamarthy with the mini PC further comprising: a heat spreader coupled with the cooling system to benefit from improving performance of the device utilizing the cooling system, suitable for use in smaller and/or mobile devices (Yalamarthy ¶ 52, II. 13-17).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Monsef in view of Yalamarthy and further in view of Sathyamurthy et al (US 2023/0332847).
Regarding Claim 9, Monsef in view of Yalamarthy discloses the limitations of Claim 8, however Monsef as modified does not disclose wherein the mini PC further comprising: a dust guard coupled with the at least one inlet.
Instead, Sathyamurthy (In Fig 7) teaches wherein the mini PC (¶ 17, II. 1-7) further comprising: a dust guard (770) coupled with the at least one inlet (773), (¶ 77, II. 1-2), (Fig 7).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Monsef with Yalamarthy and further with Sathyamurthy with the mini PC further comprising: a dust guard being coupled with the at least one inlet to benefit from reducing or preventing the entry of dust into chambers (Sathyamurthy ¶ 78, II. 1-2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; Airflow Generation Device and Electronic Apparatus US 7,861,767, Frequency Lock in Active Mems Cooling System US 2022/0187033, Manufacturing Method of Fluid Control Device US 2018/0065368, Actuator Support Structure and Pump Device US 2013/0266461. Other pertinent art made of record are on form PTO-892 notice of reference cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR JALALI whose telephone number is (303)297-4308. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMIR A JALALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835