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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/29/202 was filed after the mailing date of the instant application on 09/24/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 170. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 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 –
Claim(s) 42-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell (US 2013/0105122).
Regarding claim 42, Campbell teaches an immersive cooling system (700, Fig. 7A, [0055], [0056]) comprising:
a reservoir (701, Fig. 7A, [0056]);
a tube condenser (720, Fig. 7A, [0056]); and
a hot fluid holding tank at least partially positioned within a region previously configured to hold at least a portion of the tube condenser (reservoir 701 of another immersive cooling system 700; the region described is the shared area containing reservoir 701 of one immersive cooling system and reservoir 701 of another immersive cooling system when there are multiple immersive cooling systems, [0055]).
Regarding claim 43, Campbell teaches a wall of the hot fluid holding tank at least partially separates the reservoir from a lumen of the hot fluid holding tank (each immersive cooling system 700 has a separate reservoir 701, [0055]).
Regarding claim 44, Campbell teaches a heat exchanger (the other immersive cooling system 700 has another tube condenser 720, which is a heat exchanger, [0055]).
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(s) 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US 2013/0105122), Kılıç (Plate Heat Exchangers: Artificial Neural Networks for Their Design), and Sung (KR 100739483).
Regarding claim 45, Campbell does not teach the heat exchanger comprises a brazed plate heat exchanger.
However, Kılıç teaches plate heat exchangers with the benefits of increasing the amount of heat transfer, preventing formation of residue that accumulate over time, and protecting the system against excessive pressure during installation (Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the condenser (Campbell, 720, Fig. 7A, [0056]) to use a plate heat exchanger structure for the benefits of increasing the amount of heat transfer, preventing formation of residue that accumulate over time, and protecting the system against excessive pressure during installation (Kılıç, Abstract). This aligns with Campbell’s objective of enhancing heat transfer ([0004]).
Modified Campbell does not teach the plate heat exchanger is brazed.
However, Sung teaches a plate-type heat exchanger with the multiple heat exchange plates (10, paragraph 65, “heat exchange plates”) brazed to each other to increase bond strength (paragraph 65, “to further increase the bond strength, so that even if there is any impact load, breakage and deformation of the heat exchange plate 10 may be prevented”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plate type heat exchanger of modified Campbell to braze the heat exchange plates to each other to increase bond strength to prevent breakage and deformation of the heat exchange plate in cases of impact load (Sung: paragraph 65, “to further increase the bond strength, so that even if there is any impact load, breakage and deformation of the heat exchange plate 10 may be prevented”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to An Bach Phan whose telephone number is (571)272-7244. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3 ET.
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.
/A.B.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763