DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This is the first action on the merits for application 18/680,322, filed May 31, 2024.
This application is a continuation of PCT/US22/081396 and claims priority to a provisional application, filed December 12, 2022 and December 13, 2021 respectively.
Claims 1-22 are pending and are considered on the merits herein.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the 3rd limitation teaches “an a conductive outer surface” but should read “a conductive outer surface” removing the “an”.
In claim 1, please include an “and” between the dry coupling limitation and the conduit limitation to make clear the intended metes and bounds of the claim.
In claim 2, please include a “wherein” at the beginning of the third limitation “the first plate…” to make clear the relationship of this limitation with the components introduced.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-22 are 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 1 refers to “fluid” with the plurality of channels or pathways in the 2nd limitation but then refers to “heat transfer fluid” within the conduit in the final limitation. It is unclear from the claim language if the intent is to have two different fluids in the two different sections or if these are to be the same fluid in communication between the conduit and plurality of channels. While claim 7 seems to disclose the working fluid to be contained in the channels and pathways, this is unclear in the claim. Please use consistent language to refer to the fluids.
Claims 2-22 are rejected as being dependent on rejected base claim 1.
The following claims are further, individually rejected on their own merits.
Claims 7, and 13-18 refer to “the working fluid”, “the working gas”, and “the liquid working fluid” but it is unclear if these are the same as the “fluid”, “heat transfer fluid” introduced in claim 1, or a different fluid.
Claim 9 is indefinite as the term “dry socket” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 1 refers to a “dry coupling” or “sockets” but not a combination thereof. Please use consistent terminology to refer to the same structure throughout the claims.
Claim 11 is indefinite as it refers to “the tube leading to the condensing bulb” but this is not introduced in claim 1 or the remainder of claim 11. While claim 9 refers to “a bulb”, there is no previously recited claim which refers to a tube or condensing bulb, just discussion of a tube connected to a bulb (which seems to perform condensing) in claims 15 and 16. Please introduce these terms within the claim prior to reference to them.
Claim 12 refers to “the means for forming a metal-to-metal heat transfer” is unclear because of a lack of antecedent basis for metal to metal transfer and means of forming, but also unclear in what metal portions the claim is referring to.
Claim 14 refers to “the liquid” and “the lower portion of the heat pipe panel” but it is unclear what the lower portion of the heat pipe panel is to refer to as no locations are established in reference to upper or lower in claims 1 or 14. It is unclear if the operation of the claim is referring to condensing fluid capabilities introduced in other claims within the “socket” or a “bulb” or alternative operation.
Claim 15 refers to “the gas”, “the vaporization”, “the metal surfaces of the heat pipe panel”, “the tube entrance”, “the bulb” and “the manifold” but none of these terms are introduced in the claim or the dependency chain of claims. Please introduce these terms to establish the location of these components prior to discussion of their use.
Claims 16 refers to “the gas”, “the tube”, “the bulb portion of the extension”, and “the major inner space of the heat pipe panel” but none of these terms are introduced in the claim or the dependency chain of claims. Please introduce these terms to establish the location of these components prior to discussion of their use.
Claim 17 refers to “the inner surface of the heat pipe panel” and “the lower portion of the panel” but it is unclear where in the heat pipe panel these locations are as no locations are established in reference to upper or lower in claims 1, 6, or 14. Moreover, the Applicant is seemingly referring to the condensing operation of the claim introduced in other claims within the “socket” or a “bulb” or alternative operation.
Claim 18 requires sheets of metal which “are of a thickness and strength such that the chamber contains the working fluid as a liquid and as a gas with no leaks or distortion that changes the volume of the interior space of the heat pipe panel”. This claim is unclear as no recitation of the level of strength or thickness, or the method by which the strength is to be tested to achieve the claimed functionality. The metes and bounds of the sheets of metal are not discussed in the specification, with paragraph [0019] of the specification as filed only restating the claim and providing no clarification as to how the characteristic is achieved.
Claim 19 refers to “the metal sheets” and “the chamber” but these terms lack antecedent basis. It is unclear if the Applicant intends the claim to depend from claim 18 (but does not), which introduces these limitations, or a different scenario. Please correct the language of the claim.
Claim 19 is further unclear in that it requires the metal sheets to remain rigid “with no distortion or flexing that would cause metal fatigue during the working life of the heat pipe panel, which is expected to be at least thirty years” but provides no explanation as to how this condition is met, merely reciting in the specification the material needs to “meet durability standards” (paragraph [0022]) then fails to outline the any standards. Without clarification as to what constitutes “fatigue”, the level of distortion/flexing that is acceptable or the standards which would achieve these ambiguous levels, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear.
Claim 20 refers to “the metal sheets” but this term lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 20 is further unclear in that it requires selection and manufacturing of the metal sheets to have favorable operation experience in “maximum temperatures experienced under continuous direct sun under stagnation conditions” and “extremes of ambient temperatures” but provides no details as to how to manufacture or select favorable materials for use outside of selecting weather resistant metal (but only taught in paragraph [0048] relevant to the manifold but the claim is unclear as to what two metal sheets are defined). While paragraph [0035] details the extreme temperatures at issue to be “as much as 50 degrees above the ambient air temperature”, there is no manufacturing or selection criteria or operations defined in the specification to establish the intended metes and bounds of “the metal sheets forming the heat pipe panel” are “selected and manufactured” with the claimed conditions in mind. For this reason, it is unclear how the instant application can achieve the desired characteristics claimed with vague parameters for success and limited disclosure.
Claim 21 refers to “the manifold” but this term lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 21 is further unclear in that it recites “durability standards” for “the material from which the surfaces of the heat pipe panel are manufactured” but details no standards which would render the desired “no metal fatigue or apparatus damage from extended stagnation periods”. It is unclear the metes and bounds which will define the material of the claim based on this lack of disclosure. Outside of paragraph [0048]’s recitation of a weather resistant plastic or metal, it is unclear how to determine the scope or metes and bounds of the claim when the claim is to rely on durability standards and characteristics of long term use without disclosing the standards and metrics.
Claim 22 refers to “the rear surface of the heat pipe panel” but the device would reasonably comprise surfaces for the material block, the coupling and the conduit, making it unclear which rear surface is being referred to as “the rear surface”.
Claim 22 is further unclear how to achieve the “heat transfer desired for the efficiency of heat retention for the climatic conditions of different geographic regions in which the heat pipe panel will be located” as the specification and claims do not detail what the desired level of heat transfer and retention would be rendering unclear the scope of the claim. Paragraph [0038] details the use of a rigid board insulation as a possible insulation material but is silent to any other information referring to the size/material/resistance of the insulation or the level of transfer preferred by the desired material. The use of the heat pipe in any condition is ambiguous and with no direction in the specification, it is unclear how one could understand what the Applicant finds to be the desired level. The ambiguity renders an unclear claim with unclear metes and bounds.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 10, 12, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SWIFT et al (US PG PUB 2011/0192393A1).
Regarding claim 1, SWIFT et al teaches a heat pipe panel (1, figures 1, 5A/6A) comprising:
a conductive material block (2/3/4) defining a plurality of channels or pathways (5, “fluid transport channels”) disposed within the material block (2/3/4);
fluid (“heat-transfer fluid”, paragraph [0038]) disposed within the plurality of channels or pathways (paragraph [0038]);
a dry coupling (20/73/79, figure 5A) having an a conductive outer surface (formed of metal in paragraphs [0040] or [0057] interpreted to read on a conductive outer surface) and an interior chamber (area within the connector, necessarily present to allow for the fluid flow of paragraphs [0057] and [0072]) in fluid communication with the plurality of channels or pathways (inset of figure 5A, wherein vertical arrow emerging from the connector enables flow within the channels 5, as also shown in the overview of figure 5A);
a conduit (44 including 77) having sockets configured and dimensioned to receive the dry coupling (see figure 5A inset which shows the receipt of component 77 within the coupling 73) such that heat transfer fluid within the conduit is capable of being heated by conduction from the conductive surface (components are taught to be made of conductive metal, enabling the device to be capable of being heated by conduction from any conductive surface in contact with the same heat-transfer fluid, as is present in SWIFT et al, see figure 5A and the fluid and thermal connection between the heat surface (2/3/4) and the conduit (44/77).
Regarding claim 2, SWIFT et al teaches wherein the conductive block (1, figures 1 and 2) comprises:
a first plate (2) having a first interior face (8, lower face); and
a second plate (3) having a second interior face (9, upper face);
the first plate (2) being fixed to the second plate (3) such that the first interior face is proximate the second interior face (wherein sections 4 cause proximate location) and the plurality of channels or pathways (5) are defined by the first interior face and second interior face (see figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 3, SWIFT et al teaches wherein at least one of the first plate (2) and the second plate (3) include at least one depression (paragraph [0041] teaches the use of roughness comprising grooves (reading on depressions) on surfaces 8/9/10 of the interior faces of the plates) within at least one of the first interior face and the second interior face (paragraph [0041] teaches grooves on any of the surfaces of the plates as components 8-10), the at least one depression forming the plurality of channels or pathways (the interior walls of the plates form the channels, see figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, SWIFT et al teaches wherein the plurality of channels or pathways (5) are substantially parallel and are interconnected at one or both of a first end of the plurality of the channels or pathways or a second end of the plurality of channels (see figure 5A).
Regarding claim 5, SWIFT et al teaches the conductive material block (1) includes an outer surface (6, see figure 1) configured to conduct heat being emitted from a solar electric module (the device is capable of this functionality without disclosure of a solar electric module, but in the interest of compact prosecution, this embodiment is discussed in paragraph [0084] with adhesion to outer surface 6, as shown in figure 6A).
Regarding claim 6, SWIFT teaches the plurality of channels (5) are under partial vacuum (claim 1 of SWIFT et al teaches the hermetic sealing of the channels. The application of a partial vacuum is not a structural differentiating feature to the device of SWIFT et al. For this reason, the device of SWIFT et al is capable of being placed under partial vacuum during use, reading on the claims as written as the same structure is present in both SWIFT et al and the instant application.).
Regarding claim 7, SWIFT et al teaches the ratio of surface area of the outer surface to volume of the plurality of channels or pathways is sufficient to contain a working fluid in a liquid or a gaseous state (paragraph [0039] teaches the working fluid to be a liquid or gas, indicating the ratio of sizing must be sufficient to contain a liquid or gas state fluid.).
Regarding claim 9, SWIFT et al teaches the dry socket (44, manifold, interpreted as the socket of claim 1, see 35 USC 112 rejection above) comprises a bulb (elongated shape 44, interpreted to read on a bulb in its similarity in shape to a fluorescent bulb) formed from material having conductive properties that are substantially similar to the conductive properties of the material block (manifold 44, socket of the claim, made of metal in paragraph [0056] and conductive block made of metal in paragraph [0055]).
Regarding claim 10, SWIFT et al teaches the plurality of channels are configured in a continuous pattern (figure 5B shows a continuous path of channels 5 or in an alternative interpretation figure 5A shows a straight continuous pathway in a continuous pattern (duplicated pattern reads on continuous)).
Regarding claim 12, SWIFT et al teaches the means for forming a metal-to-metal heat transfer can be enhanced by a heat transfer paste applied to the socket at time of insertion (paragraph [0058] teaches the use of adhesive to cause connection (both thermal and physically) between the socket or conduit 20 and the plate 1).
Regarding claim 18, while 35 USC 112(b) concerns are addressed about this claim, in the interest of compact prosecution, the following art rejection is put forth as the best attempt at addressing the unclear claim language. SWIFT et al teaches the heat pipe panel (1) is comprised of two sheets of metal formed into an airtight chamber (shown as two sheets in figure 1, and made of coextruded metal (paragraph [0041]) to form chamber (5) between sheets (2/3)), the metal sheets are of a thickness and a strength such that the chamber contains the working fluid as a liquid and as a gas with no leaks or distortion that changes the volume of the interior space of the heat pipe panel (Thickness and strength are addressed in paragraph [0010] and paragraph [0043] teaches the use greater thickness for greater stiffness and thermal insulation, wherein the working gas is interpreted as the fluid within the channels and airtight in that no leak will occur between the junction of the two sheets due to coextrusion, fulfilling the claim as written. Moreover, it would have been obvious to utilize metal sheets which are strong, rigid and thick enough to withstand stresses, as durability, strength and longevity are known goals in the art, rendering design with these goals in mind well within the processes of one of ordinary skill.).
Regarding claim 19, while 35 USC 112(b) concerns are addressed about this claim, in the interest of compact prosecution, the following art rejection is put forth as the best attempt at addressing the unclear claim language. SWIFT et al teaches the formation of the metal sheets (2/3/4) to form the chamber (5) is such that the metal sheets (2/3/4) forming the chamber remain rigid with no distortion or flexing that would cause metal fatigue during the working life of the heat pipe panel, which is expected to be at least thirty years (While not expressly detailed, paragraph [0010[ details the use of metal which is continuously cast for “exceptional strength, which can withstand the damaging forces of thermal movements of large area installations and the high pressure of the heat-transfer fluid” and in paragraph [0077] as an exceptionally strong and rigid structure which can be used as a building material, interpreted to fulfill the formation of a non-flexing, rigid heat pipe panel (unclear what chamber the claim is discussing, but interpreted to be part of the heat panel). Moreover, it would have been obvious to utilize metal sheets and construction which is strong and rigid enough to withstand stresses, as durability, strength and longevity are known goals in the art, rendering design with these goals in mind well within the processes of one of ordinary skill.).
Regarding claim 20, SWIFT et al is silent to the metal sheets forming the heat pipe panel are selected and manufactured so that the panel contains the partial vacuum (hermetically sealing the metal plates (claim 1 of SWIFT et al) renders obvious a structure and device which is capable of receiving a partial vacuum) necessary for the liquid to vapor cycle through the expected operating temperature and pressure range experienced by the heat pipe panel, considering both the extremes of ambient temperatures experienced in place behind a solar electric module and the maximum temperatures experienced under continuous direct sun under stagnation conditions (SWIFT et al teaches the use of selecting a material for use as the absorber (or durable metal sheets per paragraph [0010]) which operates on the principle of increased efficiency with increased temperature of the absorber (paragraph [0105]), indicating the use of a high temperature absorber is well within the ambit and focus of one of ordinary skill in the art. Moreover, the operation of solar devices in any environment (temperature-wise) is a long held desire in the art and therefore the operation within these ranges (and materials to provide this operation) is always a goal and focus of innovation within the art, rendering the use of a metal of greatest temperature applicability as obvious and within the ambit of one of ordinary skill.). The Applicant has provide no examples as to what material is sufficient to provide the claimed functionality so the metal material with the considerations of SWIFT et al is interpreted to read on the claimed material.
Regarding claim 21, SWIFT et al teaches the material from which the surfaces of the heat pipe panel are manufactured to meet durability standards such that the heat pipe panel will experience no metal fatigue or apparatus damage from extended stagnation periods, where stagnation occurs when there is no circulation of fluid in the manifold to remove the heat impinging on the heat pipe panel under continuous direct sun on the solar electric module under which the heat pipe panel is placed (Paragraphs [0010] and [0011] teach the use of strong metal plates which are durable, interpreted to read on the instant claim. The Applicant has provide no examples as to what material is sufficient to provide the claimed functionality so the metal material with the considerations of SWIFT et al is interpreted to read on the claimed material. Moreover, the use of a durable structure, inert to the fluids present inside, is a clear and obvious objective to one of ordinary skill as a long-lasting and durable structure is a long held design parameter in the art. In selecting materials which allow for fulfillment of the long held desire of durability and longevity, one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously have selected a material such as that described in SWIFT et al).
Regarding claim 22, SWIFT et al teaches insulation placed between the rear surface of the heat pipe panel (1/90, figures 8A/8B) and the exterior in contact with outside atmosphere shall be of a thickness and resistance to heat transfer desired for the efficiency of heat retention for the climatic conditions of different geographic regions in which the heat pipe panel will be located (Paragraphs [0091], [0092], [0098], and [0102] details the use of insulation layers on the device to provide stiffness, thermal insulation and acoustic installation in various uses including use of the devices in homes, which will assist in use of the devices in different geographic regions. Moreover, the use of insulation is well established in the art to control the external heat impinging on a heat exchanger system, allowing for greater control in a changing system, a long held need in the art.).
Claim(s) 8, and 11-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SWIFT et al, in view of DUNCKER et al (US Patent 4,454,864).
Regarding claim 8, SWIFT et al teaches a coextruded material with metal sheets (2/3) on each side forming channels therein, which are airtightly packaged (hermetic sealed chamber, claim 1 of SWIFT et al), but fails to teach two metal sheets welded together about a perimeter of the material block.
DUNCKER et al teaches a solar collector comprising a pair of metal plates with hermetically sealed channels therebetween in column 3, line 11-20. This citation further teaches the use of welding around the perimeter of the plates to form the hermetic seal.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the metal plates with welded perimeter of DUNCKER et al, for the coextruded plates with channels therebetween of SWIFT et al so as to form the same predictable structure of a hermetically sealed channels between two metal plates. The use of one structure over another is obvious as they render the same predictable structure.
Regarding claim 11, while 35 USC 112(b) concerns are addressed about this claim such as the introduction of the condensing bulb and its location, in the interest of compact prosecution, the following art rejection is put forth as the best attempt at addressing the unclear claim language. SWIFT et al teaches further comprising a plurality of partitions (4) configured to form the plurality of channels or pathways (5) from the lower end of the panel to the upper end of the panel (see figures 1 and 5A) which connects to the manifold or conduit (77/101) but fails to teach the upper end of the panel containing the tube leading to the condensing bulb.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al further teaches a external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) which is present in a bulb shape (elongated tubes, as in a fluorescent bulb) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of condensation space to assist in heat removal for increasingly effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to utilize a condensing bulb within the manifold of SWIFT et al, as shown in DUNCKER et al, so as to increase effective heat exchange and removal.
Regarding claim 13, SWIFT et al teaches heat exchange via fluid heated or absorbing heat in the channels to cool the system (paragraph [0038]), but fails to disclose causing the working fluid to vaporize into a gas.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al teaches an external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches absorbing the heat of over the distance of the channels to cause evaporation within the channels then (abstract) then condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of evaporation and condensation processes to be used within the working fluid to assist in heat removal for effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24, c. 5, l. 14-35).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize evaporation (via a particular working fluid), as in DUNCKER et al, in conjunction to the heat absorption of SWIFT et al, to assist in cooling and heat exchange, making the option for more heat absorption and greater heat exchange possible.
Regarding claim 14, while SWIFT et al teaches the use of a device which absorbs the heat of the connected device then provide heat exchange (abstract), SWIFT et al is expressly silent to the liquid in the lower portion of the heat pipe panel gathers heat from the surroundings of the heat pipe panel converting the working fluid to a gas, and that gas flows upward in the heat pipe panel gathering additional heat energy as it flows to the top of the heat pipe panel; and due to the higher specific weight of the working fluid as a liquid, that liquid remains in the lower portion of the heat pipe panel. To be clear, the claim language as written is directed to the operation of the fluid, most notably, the flow of the fluid within the heat pipe panel, not to the structure of the device itself. It is the position of the Examiner that the evaporation of the working fluid and condensation of the fluid are able to occur in the device of modified SWIFT et al, fulfilling the claim as written. However, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of the 35 USC 112b issues discussed above, the Examiner presents the following rejection to address the operation of the device in case the intended structure (though ambiguous in the claim language) requires more structural components.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al teaches an external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches absorbing the heat of over the distance of the channels to cause evaporation within the channels then (abstract) then condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of evaporation and condensation processes to be used within the working fluid to assist in heat removal for effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24, c. 5, l. 14-35).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize evaporation (via a particular working fluid over the channels) and condensation (within the condensation zone/manifold), as in DUNCKER et al, in conjunction to the heat absorption channels and manifold area of SWIFT et al, to assist in cooling and heat exchange, making the option for more heat absorption and greater heat exchange possible. Based on the use of the evaporation and condensation arrangement of DUNCKER et al, in the channel and manifold regions of SWIFT et al, the device of modified SWIFT et al teaches the liquid in the lower portion of the heat pipe panel gathers heat from the surroundings of the heat pipe panel converting the working fluid to a gas (via channels and evaporation in DUNCKER et al), and that gas flows upward (evaporation) in the heat pipe panel gathering additional heat energy as it flows to the top of the heat pipe panel (see DUNCKER et al figure); and due to the higher specific weight of the working fluid as a liquid, that liquid remains in the lower portion of the heat pipe panel (necessarily will occur based on the density of liquid).
Regarding claim 15, while SWIFT et al teaches the use of a device which absorbs the heat of the connected device then provide heat exchange (abstract), SWIFT et al is expressly silent to the gas formed from the vaporization of the working fluid gathers additional heat energy as it flows up between the metal surfaces of the heat pipe panel and is drawn to the tube entrance by the condensing action of the bulb forming a relatively lower vacuum, which is surrounded by the cooler temperature of the socket which is in turn cooled by the circulating fluid in the manifold. To be clear, the claim language as written is directed to the operation of the fluid, most notably, the flow of the fluid within the heat pipe panel, not to the structure of the device itself. It is the position of the Examiner that the evaporation of the working fluid and condensation of the fluid are able to occur in the device of modified SWIFT et al, fulfilling the claim as written. However, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of the 35 USC 112b issues discussed above, the Examiner presents the following rejection to address the operation of the device in case the intended structure (though ambiguous in the claim language) requires more structural components.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al teaches an external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches absorbing the heat of over the distance of the channels to cause evaporation within the channels then (abstract) then condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of evaporation and condensation processes to be used within the working fluid to assist in heat removal for effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24, c. 5, l. 14-35).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize evaporation (via a particular working fluid over the channels) and condensation (within the condensation zone/manifold), as in DUNCKER et al, in conjunction to the heat absorption channels and manifold area of SWIFT et al, to assist in cooling and heat exchange, making the option for more heat absorption and greater heat exchange possible. Based on the use of the evaporation and condensation arrangement of DUNCKER et al, in the channel and manifold regions of SWIFT et al, the device of modified SWIFT et al teaches the gas formed from the vaporization of the working fluid gathers additional heat energy as it flows up between the metal surfaces of the heat pipe panel (necessarily occurs during absorption within the channels following vaporization) and is drawn to the tube entrance by the condensing action of the bulb forming a relatively lower vacuum (vacuum, c. 11, l. 50-52, evaporation region), which is surrounded by the cooler temperature of the socket which is in turn cooled by the circulating fluid in the manifold (condensation region).
Regarding claim 16, while SWIFT et al teaches the use of a device which absorbs the heat of the connected device then provide heat exchange (abstract), SWIFT et al is expressly silent to the gas flows upward collecting additional heat until it is drawn into the tube connected to the bulb portion of the extension from the upper side of the heat pipe panel where it then condenses into droplets of working fluid on the inner surface of the bulb which droplets then flow down the tube and into the major inner space of the heat pipe panel. To be clear, the claim language as written is directed to the operation of the fluid, most notably, the flow of the fluid within the heat pipe panel, not to the structure of the device itself. It is the position of the Examiner that the evaporation of the working fluid and condensation of the fluid are able to occur in the device of modified SWIFT et al, fulfilling the claim as written. However, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of the 35 USC 112b issues discussed above, the Examiner presents the following rejection to address the operation of the device in case the intended structure (though ambiguous in the claim language) requires more structural components.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al teaches an external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches absorbing the heat of over the distance of the channels to cause evaporation within the channels then (abstract) then condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of evaporation and condensation processes to be used within the working fluid to assist in heat removal for effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24, c. 5, l. 14-35).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize evaporation (via a particular working fluid over the channels) and condensation (within the condensation zone/manifold), as in DUNCKER et al, in conjunction to the heat absorption channels and manifold area of SWIFT et al, to assist in cooling and heat exchange, making the option for more heat absorption and greater heat exchange possible. Based on the use of the evaporation and condensation arrangement of DUNCKER et al, in the channel and manifold regions of SWIFT et al, the device of modified SWIFT et al teaches the gas flows upward collecting additional heat until it is drawn into the tube connected to the bulb portion of the extension from the upper side of the heat pipe panel (condensation region of DUNCKER et al/manifold of SWIFT et al) where it then condenses into droplets of working fluid on the inner surface of the bulb which droplets then flow down the tube and into the major inner space of the heat pipe panel (see condensation region operation of DUNCKER et al).
Regarding claim 17, while SWIFT et al teaches the use of a device which absorbs the heat of the connected device then provide heat exchange (abstract), SWIFT et al is expressly silent to the working gas is condensed back into a liquid form which then flows down the inner surface of the heat pipe panel to the lower portion of the panel where it rejoins the liquid working fluid to repeat the cycle as long as heat is gathered into the panel by conduction, radiation and convection to power the cycle of boiling the working fluid into gas then condensing the gas back into liquid working fluid. To be clear, the claim language as written is directed to the operation of the fluid, most notably, the flow of the fluid within the heat pipe panel, not to the structure of the device itself. It is the position of the Examiner that the evaporation of the working fluid and condensation of the fluid are able to occur in the device of modified SWIFT et al, fulfilling the claim as written. However, in the interest of compact prosecution and in light of the 35 USC 112b issues discussed above, the Examiner presents the following rejection to address the operation of the device in case the intended structure (though ambiguous in the claim language) requires more structural components.
DUNCKER et al teaches a heat pipe panel (fig. 1) comprising plates and channels in figures 1-3, just as in SWIFT et al. DUNCKER et al teaches an external region (similar to that of the manifold/conduit of SWIFT et al in that it is fluidically connected to the heat exchange plates (3). DUNCKER et al further teaches absorbing the heat of over the distance of the channels to cause evaporation within the channels then (abstract) then condensation to occur in the manifold or conduit region (4, condensation space) as shown in figures 1, 3, and 4. DUNCKER et al teaches the use of evaporation and condensation processes to be used within the working fluid to assist in heat removal for effective heat exchange (c. 1, l. 6-24, c. 5, l. 14-35).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize evaporation (via a particular working fluid over the channels) and condensation (within the condensation zone/manifold), as in DUNCKER et al, in conjunction to the heat absorption channels and manifold area of SWIFT et al, to assist in cooling and heat exchange, making the option for more heat absorption and greater heat exchange possible. Based on the use of the evaporation and condensation arrangement of DUNCKER et al, in the channel and manifold regions of SWIFT et al, the device of modified SWIFT et al the working gas is condensed back into a liquid form which then flows down the inner surface of the heat pipe panel to the lower portion of the panel where it rejoins the liquid working fluid to repeat the cycle as long as heat is gathered into the panel by conduction, radiation and convection to power the cycle of boiling the working fluid into gas then condensing the gas back into liquid working fluid (obviously occurring with evaporation and condensation as described in DUNCKER et al).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
EP2789930B1 also teaches a similar channeled heat exchanger arrangement adjacent to a solar panel with condensation and absorbing regions, reading on the claimed functionality.
CN109791000A also teaches a similar combination of a heat exchanger comprising a coupling, pipe and socket to a photovoltaic device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KOURTNEY SALZMAN CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5117. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-3PM EST M-F.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/KOURTNEY R S CARLSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721 4/18/2026
Prosecution Insights