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
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restriction
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
Applicant’s election product, Species A with traverse, Figs 3-4, Claims 1-5, 11-14 and 17-20 in reply dated 03/27/2026 acknowledged.
In addition, an oral election of product, Species A with traverse, Figs 3-4, Claims 1-5, 11-14 and 17-20 in a telephonic conversation with Daniel Drexler (47,535) on 04/16/2026 was confirmed.
Claims 6-9 and 15-16 are withdrawn from further prosecution, and Claims 1-5, 11-14 and 17-20 are prosecuted given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of specification.
Response to Amendment
The Applicant originally submitted Claims 1-20 in the application. In the present response, the Applicant amended Claims 1, 4-5, 10, 13-14 and 20, cancelled Claims 2-3 and 11-12, and withdrawn Claims 6-9 and 15-16 due to Election/Restriction Requirement dated 02/06/2026. Accordingly, Claims 1, 4-10, 13-20 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filled 03/27/2026, with respect Election/Restriction Requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 121 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
With respect to the Applicant remarks that both Species A and B depend on the Claim 1, and therefore Election/Restriction Requirement not being proper, It should be noted that Claim 1 of claim set dated 03/06/2024 is considered as a generic, linking claim from which both species are derived, however Species A and B are distinct inventions, mutually exclusive and not obvious variant of each other.
Accordingly, Examiner submits, Election/Restriction Requirement in this Application is proper as Species A and B are two unique distinct inventions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 03/06/2024 and 11/19/2024 have been fully considered and is attached hereto.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “200” has been illustrated either between heat sink “13” and the second support member “112” as well as between first support member “111” and the second support member “112” in the elected embodiment of Figs 3-4.
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 “the second support member is provided with a position-limiting hole” in Claims 1 and 10, and “the first floating member comprises a connecting part and a deformation part that is disposed at an angle with respect to the connecting part; one end of the connecting part is connected to one of the second support member and the heat sink, and the other end of the connecting part penetrates through the position-limiting hole and is connected to one end of the deformation part” in Claims 1 and 10 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Examiner Note; the drawings does not illustrate how embodiment of Fig 2, wherein the heat sink (13) disposed between the second support member (112) and the first support member (111), could be modified with floating members (121) of embodiment of Figs 3-4, wherein the heat sink (13) is not disposed between the second support member (112) and the first support member (111).
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 antecedent bases informalities:
● In Claim 10, Line 9, “a heat sink” should be changed to read - - the heat sink - -.
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
With Respect to Claim 18, It is not clear in elected embodiment of Figs 3-4, the “heat sink” element “13” being movable in a first direction through the “floating structure” element “12” of a separate embodiment of Fig 2, so as to adapt the “semiconductor components” element “202” at different heights. See; MPEP 2173.05.
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.
Claims 1, 5 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 2004/0027807) in view of Lee et al (US 5,884,692).
Regarding Claim 1, Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) discloses a heat sink fixing structure (5/6/12/5/28), comprising:
a support structure (5/28) and a floating structure (6/7/12/16), (¶ 8, II. 6-11), (Fig 4);
the support structure (5/28) comprises a first support member (5) for supporting a semiconductor component (3) and a second support member (28) spaced apart from the first support member (28), (Fig 4);
a heat sink (4) is provided corresponding to the semiconductor component (3), and is connected to the second support member (28) in a floating manner by means of the floating structure (6/7/12/16); wherein the heat sink (4) is disposed between the second support member (28) and the first support member (5), (Fig 4);
the floating structure (6/7/12/16) comprises at least two first floating members (6/6), (Fig 4);
one of the heat sink (4) and the second support member (28) is provided with a position-limiting hole (hole accommodating 8), the other is connected to the first floating member (6), and the first floating member (6) makes the heat sink (4) and the second support member (28) floating fitted through the position-limiting hole (18), (Fig 4), wherein the first floating member (6) comprises a connecting part (12/7) and a deformation part (16) that is disposed at an angle with respect to the connecting part (12/7), (Fig 4), wherein one end of the connecting part (12/7) is connected to one of the second support member (28) and the heat sink, however Kashiwagi does not disclose wherein the other end of the connecting part penetrates through the position-limiting hole and is connected to one end of the deformation part.
Instead, Lee (In Figs 1, 4) teaches wherein one end of the connecting part (131) is connected to one of the second support member and the heat sink (11), and the other end of the connecting part (131) penetrates through the position-limiting hole (112, 122) and is connected to one end of the deformation part (1312), (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi with Lee with one end of the connecting part being connected to one of the second support member and the heat sink, and the other end of the connecting part penetrating through the position-limiting hole and being connected to one end of the deformation part to benefit from effectively dissipating heat generated by the CPU by fixedly engaging spring plate to the attachment plate (Lee, Col 1, II. 6-10).
Regarding Claim 5, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) further discloses wherein there are a plurality of first floating members (6/6).
Regarding Claim 18, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however where Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) further discloses wherein the heat sink (4) is movable in a first direction through the floating structure, so as to adapt the semiconductor components (6/12) at different heights (Fig 4).
Regarding Claim 19, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however where Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) further discloses wherein the support structure comprises (28/1) one of the following material: metal (¶ 50, II. 5-11), plastic, and ceramic (Fig 4).
Regarding Claim 20, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) further discloses wherein the heat sink (4) is floated by changing of the angle (Fig 4).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi in view of Lee and further in view of Gawlowski et al (US 10,616,993).
Regarding Claim 4, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however where Kashiwagi as modified does not disclose wherein: an abutting part is provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole; the other end of the deformation part abuts against the abutting part and forms a position- limiting fit with the abutting part.
Instead, Gawlowski (In Fig 1) teaches wherein: an abutting part (part of 106 abutting against 118) is provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole (hole accommodating 116), (Fig 1); the other end of the deformation part (118) abuts against the abutting part (part of 106 abutting against 118) and forms a position- limiting fit with the abutting part (part of 106 abutting against 118), (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi with Lee and further with Gawlowski with an abutting part being provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole, and the other end of the deformation part abutting against the abutting part and forming a position-limiting fit with the abutting part to benefit from applying a clamping force to clamp the heatsink and backing plate effectively dissipating heat in a given-sized heatsink (Gawlowski , Col 1, II. 7-10).
Claims 10, 13-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi in view of Ishimine et al (US 7,428,154) and further in view of Lee.
Regarding Claim 10, Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) disclose a board-level heat dissipation apparatus (4), comprising:
an integrated circuit board (1) provided with a plurality of semiconductor components (3);
a heat sink fixing structure (5/6/12/5/28), and the heat sink fixing structure (5/6/12/5/28) is connected to a heat sink (4) and the integrated circuit board (1), so that the heat sink (4) dissipates heat for the semiconductor components (3), wherein the heat sink fixing structure (5/6/12/5/28) comprises:
a support structure (5/28) and a floating structure (6/7/12/16), (¶ 8, II. 6-11), (Fig 4);
the support structure (5/28) comprises a first support member (5) for supporting a semiconductor component (3) and a second support member (28) spaced apart from the first support member (5), (Fig 4);
a heat sink (4) is provided corresponding to the semiconductor component (3), and is connected to the second support member (28) in a floating manner by means of the floating structure (6/7/12/16);
the heat sink (4) is disposed between the second support member (28) and the first support member (5), (Fig 4);
the floating structure (6/7/12/16) comprises at least two first floating members (6/6), (Fig 4);
one of the heat sink (4) and the second support member (28) is provided with a position-limiting hole (hole accommodating 8), the other is connected to the first floating member (6), (Fig 4), and the first floating member (6) makes the heat sink (4) and the second support member (28) floating fitted through the position- limiting hole (hole accommodating 8), (Fig 4); wherein the first floating member (5) comprises a connecting part (12/7) and a deformation part (16) that is disposed at an angle with respect to the connecting part (12/7), (Fig 4); one end of the connecting part (12/7) is connected to one of the second support member (28) and the heat sink, however Kashiwagi does not disclose wherein an integrated circuit board provided with a plurality of semiconductor components.
Instead, Ishimine teaches wherein an integrated circuit board (200) provided with a plurality of semiconductor components (101/101/170), (Fig 4A).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi with Ishimine with an integrated circuit board provided with a plurality of semiconductor components to benefit from enabling other high circuit elements to be arranged on the circuit board increasing the packing density (Ishimine Col 7, II. 1-5), however Kashiwagi as modified does not disclose wherein the other end of the connecting part penetrates through the position-limiting hole and is connected to one end of the deformation part.
Instead, Lee (In Figs 1, 4) teaches wherein one end of the connecting part (131) is connected to one of the second support member and the heat sink (11), and the other end of the connecting part (131) penetrates through the position-limiting hole (112, 122) and is connected to one end of the deformation part (1312), (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi with Ishimine and further with Lee with one end of the connecting part being connected to one of the second support member and the heat sink, and the other end of the connecting part penetrating through the position-limiting hole and being connected to one end of the deformation part to benefit from effectively dissipating heat generated by the CPU by fixedly engaging spring plate to the attachment plate (Lee, Col 1, II. 6-10).
Regarding Claim 13, Kashiwagi in view of Ishimine and further in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 10, however Kashiwagi as modified does not disclose wherein: an abutting part is provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole; the other end of the deformation part abuts against the abutting part and forms a position-limiting fit with the abutting part.
Instead, Ishimine (In Fig 4A) further discloses wherein: an abutting part (part of 160A abutting against 180A) is provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole (152A); the other end of the deformation part (180A) abuts against the abutting part (part of 160A abutting against 180A) and forms a position-limiting fit with the abutting part (part of 160A abutting against 180A), (Fig 4A).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi to Ishimine with an abutting part being provided on the periphery of the position-limiting hole and the other end of the deformation part abutting against the abutting part and forming a position-limiting fit with the abutting part to benefit from properly radiating the heat from CPU (Ishimine Col 1, II. 36-44).
Regarding Claim 14, Kashiwagi in view of Ishimine and further in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 10, however Kashiwagi (In Fig 4) further discloses wherein there are a plurality of first floating members (6/6).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103) as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi in view of Lee and further in view of Ishimine.
Regarding Claim 17, Kashiwagi in view of Lee discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Kashiwagi as modified does not disclose wherein the heat sink fixing structure is connected to a plurality of heat sinks, and the plurality of heat sinks are arranged on the second support member in series or in parallel.
Instead, Ishimine (In Fig 2) teaches wherein the heat sink fixing structure (190/162A/150A/250) is connected to a plurality of heat sinks (160), and the plurality of heat sinks (160) are arranged on the second support member (150) in series or in parallel (Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kashiwagi with Lee and further with Ishimine with the heat sink fixing structure being connected to a plurality of heat sinks, and the plurality of heat sinks being arranged on the second support member in series or in parallel to benefit from shorter assembling time and cost while cooling fins radiating heat from CPU’s through natural cooling improving the CPU performance (Ishimine Col 1, II. 36-42).
Examiner Note; It should be mentioned that the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See: St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bernis Co., 193: USPQ 8, see: MPEP 214404 section VI.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; Heat Sink and Electronic Apparatus Using the Same US 2009/0147480, Chip Package Structure and Electronic Device US 2024/0071859, Backside Initiated Uniform Heat Sink Loading US 10,170,391, Structure for Mounting Semiconductor Package US 7,983,048. 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 2841
Prosecution Insights