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 statements (IDS) submitted on 8/7/24, 1/31/25, and 3/17/25 are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
No Claims were withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/29/26.
Applicant's election with traverse of the species restriction in the reply filed on 5/29/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is first on the ground(s) that species must be in the claims to be restricted. This is not found persuasive because this is not supported by the MPEP section cited, examiner specially notes the existence of “ ¶ 8.02 Requiring an Election of Species; No Species Claim Present”.
Applicant second argues that species A-III and A-IV are not patentably distinct. This argument is persuasive (only for species A-IV), and withdrawn of this species is withdrawn.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first and second vapor channels of claim 3 must be shown/identified, also the “microstructure layer is provided on the inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity opposite to the first vapor channel and the second vapor channel” must be shown or identified or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a first region of the condensation region” of claim 14 must be shown or identified or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a second region of the condensation region” of claim 15 must be shown or identified or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 the 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 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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “first vapor channels” and "second vapor channels" but then states “opposite to the first vapor channel and the second vapor channel”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if applicant meant to claim both as plural here, if applicant means to claim one of the plurality, or if applicant is claiming new channels.
Claim 3 is further indefinite for the limitation of “the microstructure layer is provided on the inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity opposite to the first vapor channel and the second vapor channel”. One skilled in the art would not be clear how the structure would be considered opposite to the these channels. This is compounded by the figure not identifying the channels or point/location considered “opposite”. The only identifiable channels do not have understandable position of opposite to the microstructure layer shown.
Examiner notes that this claim is so indefinite as to prevent the appliciaotn of prior art to it.
Claim 5 is indefinite for the limitation of “the feature size of the microstructure is a size of a technical feature related to wettability of the microstructure layer” as one skilled in the art would not know what exactly reads on this limitation. It is not clear if it isa single particle size, a pore spacing, a spacing between elements (unclaimed), practically any measurement of the microstructure could be used as the microstructure deals with the fluid/wettability. Based on the specification the claim will be examined as “the feature size of the microstructure is a size of a pore of the microstructure layer”.
Claims 6-13 are rejected for dependence from claim 5.
Claim 14 is indefinite for the limitations of “the first region is a region of the condensation region other than a region connected to the capillary structure“ as it is unclear how any part of the condensation region is not connected (at least indirectly) with the capillary structure. Connected to is extremely broad and all elements shown are ultimately connected to each other as it isa single structure. Note this is also unclear as it is not shown/identified in the figures. The claim will be examined as “the first region is a region of the condensation region other than a region directly connected to the capillary structure“.
Claim 15 is indefinite for the limitations of “the second region is a region of the evaporation region other than a region connected to the capillary structure“ as it is unclear how any part of the condensation region is not connected (at least indirectly) with the capillary structure. Connected to is extremely broad and all elements shown are ultimately connected to each other as it isa single structure. Note this is also unclear as it is not shown/identified in the figures. The claim will be examined as “the second region is a region of the evaporation region other than a region directly connected to the capillary structure“.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (U.S. PGPub 2013/0037242).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a vapor chamber (element 1), configured to dissipate heat for a heat source (“heat source” para. 0002), comprising: a first plate cover (fig.4 element 11); a second plate cover (fig. 4 element 12), wherein the first plate cover and the second plate cover overlap along an overlapping direction to jointly form a sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), and a heat conductive surface (the outside of element 12, see para. 0021) configured to abut on the heat source is provided on a side of the first plate cover that faces away from the sealed accommodating cavity, wherein the overlapping direction is a direction in which the vapor chamber and the heat source are stacked (para. 0002 and 0021, further notes It is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963)); and a capillary structure (element 30), wherein the capillary structure is located in the sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), the capillary structure has a pair of a first overlapping surface (top of element 30 connected to element 11) and a second overlapping surface (bottom of element 30 connected to element 12) that are opposite to each other and perpendicular to the overlapping direction (per fig. 2), the first overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the second plate cover (per fig. 4), and the second overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the first plate cover to support the first plate cover and the second plate cover in the overlapping direction (per fig. 4), wherein a microstructure layer (element 20, note the term microstructure layer is very broad as it doesn’t define actual size or range required) is provided on an inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4) and a wall surface of capillary pores in the capillary structure (para. 0020), and the microstructure layer is configured to guide a liquid-phase working medium in the vapor chamber (per fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches the capillary structure comprises a plurality of strip-shaped capillary structure walls (per fig. 4 the two meet this limitation), the plurality of the strip-shaped capillary structure walls are dispersedly distributed in the accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), and a gap is formed between the inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity and a surface of each capillary structure wall other than the first overlapping surface and the second overlapping surface (per fig. 4).
Regarding claim 18, Chen teaches the capillary structure is a porous structure (pores para. 0020), and the capillary structure is made of at least one of copper mesh, copper wire, copper powder, and foamed copper (para. 0017 and 0019).
Regarding claim 19, Chen teaches the second overlapping surface of the capillary structure is fastened to the first plate cover (fig. 4), and the first overlapping surface of the capillary structure abuts on the second plate cover (per fig. 4).
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (U.S. PGPub 2013/0037242) in view of Oniki et al. (U.S. PGPub 2010/0157534).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a vapor chamber (element 1), configured to dissipate heat for a heat source (“heat source” para. 0002), comprising: a first plate cover (fig.4 element 11); a second plate cover (fig. 4 element 12), wherein the first plate cover and the second plate cover overlap along an overlapping direction to jointly form a sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4); and a capillary structure (element 30), wherein the capillary structure is located in the sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), the capillary structure has a pair of a first overlapping surface (top of element 30 connected to element 11) and a second overlapping surface (bottom of element 30 connected to element 12) that are opposite to each other and perpendicular to the overlapping direction (per fig. 2), the first overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the second plate cover (per fig. 4), and the second overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the first plate cover to support the first plate cover and the second plate cover in the overlapping direction (per fig. 4), wherein a microstructure layer (element 20, note the term microstructure layer is very broad as it doesn’t define actual size or range required) is provided on an inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4) and a wall surface of capillary pores in the capillary structure (para. 0020), and the microstructure layer is configured to guide a liquid-phase working medium in the vapor chamber (per fig. 4).
Chen does not teach a heat conductive surface configured to abut on the heat source is provided on a side of the first plate cover that faces away from the sealed accommodating cavity, wherein the overlapping direction is a direction in which the vapor chamber and the heat source are stacked. Oniki teaches the use of heat pipe with both two wick structures, with a heat conductive surface configured to abut on the heat source is provided on a side of the first plate cover that faces away from the sealed accommodating cavity, wherein the overlapping direction is a direction in which the vapor chamber and the heat source are stacked (shown in fig. 6). If the heat pipe of Chen was applied similarly then the far corner of the element 20 may be considered to read on the limitation (see 112b above). It would have been obvious to apply Chen as used in Oniki, the motivation would be its stated purpose of cooling an electronic (para. 0004).
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches the capillary structure comprises a plurality of strip-shaped capillary structure walls (per fig. 4 the two meet this limitation), the plurality of the strip-shaped capillary structure walls are dispersedly distributed in the accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), and a gap is formed between the inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity and a surface of each capillary structure wall other than the first overlapping surface and the second overlapping surface (per fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Chen does not teach a dimension range of the capillary structure in the overlapping direction ranges from 0.05 mm to 0.5 mm, and a thickness range of the microstructure layer ranges from 0.1 µm to 20 µm. Examiner notes that a change is size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV). Thus making these structure this size would be a mere change in size and obvious to one skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches the sealed accommodating cavity comprises a condensation region ( inherent though not identified).
Chen does not teach (as it does not specifically identify), a first region of the condensation region is provided with the microstructure layer, and the first region is a region of the condensation region other than a region connected to the capillary structure. Oniki teaches the use of heat pipe with both two wick structures, with a specific condenser section (right end shown in fig. 6). If the heat pipe of Chen was applied similarly then the far corner of the element 20 may be considered to read on the limitation (see 112b above). It would have been obvious to apply Chen as used in Oniki, the motivation would be its stated purpose of cooling an electronic (para. 0004).
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches the sealed accommodating cavity comprises a evaporator region ( inherent though not identified).
Chen does not teach (as it does not specifically identify), a second region of the evaporation region is provided with the microstructure layer, and the second region is a region of the evaporation region other than a region connected to the capillary structure. Oniki teaches the use of heat pipe with both two wick structures, with a specific evaporator section (left end shown in fig. 6). If the heat pipe of Chen was applied similarly then the far corner of the element 20 may be considered to read on the limitation (see 112b above). It would have been obvious to apply Chen as used in Oniki, the motivation would be its stated purpose of cooling an electronic (para. 0004).
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches the microstructure layer guides the liquid-phase working medium to the capillary structure, and the capillary structure guides the liquid-phase working medium to the evaporation region (per para. 0018).
Regarding claim 17, Chen teaches the first plate cover, the second plate cover, and the capillary structure are made of at least one of copper, copper alloy (para. 0017).
Chen does not teach a forming manner of the microstructure layer comprises at least one of high-temperature oxidation processing, high-temperature oxidation processing and high- temperature reduction processing, and electrodeposition. This limitation is a product-by-process limitation and “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is proper because the “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 18, Chen teaches the capillary structure is a porous structure (pores para. 0020), and the capillary structure is made of at least one of copper mesh, copper wire, copper powder, and foamed copper (para. 0017 and 0019).
Regarding claim 19, Chen teaches the second overlapping surface of the capillary structure is fastened to the first plate cover (fig. 4), and the first overlapping surface of the capillary structure abuts on the second plate cover (per fig. 4).
Regarding claim 20, Chen teaches an electronic device, comprising a vapor chamber (para. 0002 and abstract), configured to dissipate heat for a heat source (para. 0002);
wherein, the vapor chamber comprises: a first plate cover (fig.4 element 11); a second plate cover (fig. 4 element 12), wherein the first plate cover and the second plate cover overlap along an overlapping direction to jointly form a sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4); and a capillary structure (element 30), wherein the capillary structure is located in the sealed accommodating cavity (per fig. 4), the capillary structure has a pair of a first overlapping surface and a second overlapping surface that are opposite to each other and perpendicular to the overlapping direction (per fig. 4), the first overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the second plate cover (per fig. 4), and the second overlapping surface of the capillary structure is connected to the first plate cover to support the first plate cover and the second plate cover in the overlapping direction (per fig. 4), wherein a microstructure layer (element 20, note the term microstructure layer is very broad as it doesn’t define actual size or range required) is provided on an inner surface of the sealed accommodating cavity and a wall surface of capillary pores in the capillary structure (per fig. 4), and the microstructure layer is configured to guide a liquid-phase working medium in the vapor chamber (per fig. 4).
Chen does not teach a heat conductive surface configured to abut on the heat source is provided on a side of the first plate cover that faces away from the sealed accommodating cavity, wherein the overlapping direction is a direction in which the vapor chamber and the heat source are stacked. Oniki teaches the use of heat pipe with both two wick structures, with a heat conductive surface configured to abut on the heat source is provided on a side of the first plate cover that faces away from the sealed accommodating cavity, wherein the overlapping direction is a direction in which the vapor chamber and the heat source are stacked (shown in fig. 6). If the heat pipe of Chen was applied similarly then the far corner of the element 20 may be considered to read on the limitation (see 112b above). It would have been obvious to apply Chen as used in Oniki, the motivation would be its stated purpose of cooling an electronic (para. 0004).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 5 includes the limitation (see the 112b above) of the microstructure having smaller pores than the pores of the capillary structure, which is opposite of what prior art has taught, thus it would not be obvious to modify the structure found to have the pore structure as claimed.
Examiner further notes that the wave-formed roll-up structure for the microstructure layer of claim 6 was not found in the prior art , thus that would also be an nonobvious modification of the prior art.
Additional claims 7-13 are potentially allowable based on dependence.
Note that final allowability will be determined base upon the overcoming of the 112b rejections affecting those claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Meyer, IV et al. (U.S. PGPub 2016/0305715), Liu et al. (U.S. PGPub 2011/0108142), Inagaki et al. (U.S. patent 11,313,627), Ahamed et al. (U.S. PGPub 2026/0160500) all teach heat pipes with multiple capillary structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL M ATTEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7936. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8-5 and Friday 8-10 and 2-4.
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 be reached on (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.
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights