DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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, 502.05.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 3/12/2024, 5/20/2025 have been fully considered and are attached hereto.
Specification
The specification is objected to since the written description does not provide a cross-reference to the related applications. See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
The specification is objected to since the title is not descriptive.
A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 11-12, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishikawa (JP 6296027).
With respect to claim 1, Ishikawa teaches (In Fig 2) an electronic arrangement comprising: an electronic component (M), a cooler (3) for cooling the electronic component (M), a housing (21), and a contact element (40), wherein the electronic component (M) and the cooler (3) are arranged within the housing (21, See Figs 1-2), wherein the cooler (3) has at least one coolant connection (31) which protrudes through a through-opening (21h) of the housing (21, see Fig 2), wherein the contact element (40) interconnects the cooler (3, via 31) and the housing (21) in an electrically conductive manner (Fig 2 shows the case (21) the contact element (40) and the cooler (3, via 31) all in mechanical contact and the specification teaches that each are made of metal (“the first and second cases 21 and 22 are formed by casting a metal”, “a plurality of coolers 30 that are formed hollow and flat with a metal”, “the 1st connection pipe 4 may be formed, for example with a metal,”) and so Ishikawa teaches that the contact element interconnects the cooler and housing in an electrically conductive manner, as claimed) and wherein the contact element (40) is configured and arranged concentrically with the through-opening (21h, implied/suggested by Figs 2, 6).
With respect to claim 2, Ishikawa further teaches a radial gap is arranged between the coolant connection (31) and the housing (21, see Fig 2).
With respect to claim 3, Ishikawa further teaches that the coolant connection (31) extends along a longitudinal axis (50) and wherein the contact element (5) forms a mechanical contact and an electrically conductive contact between the cooler (3) and the housing (4) in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis (50).
PNG
media_image1.png
560
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 4, Ishikawa further teaches that the contact element (40) comprises at least one contact area (Area of 41m which contacts 31, see Fig 2) protruding parallel to the longitudinal axis (See Fig A above which shows the longitudinal axis).
With respect to claim 5, Ishikawa further teaches that the contact element (40) comprises a plurality of contact areas distributed around a circumference of the through-opening (21h, see Fig B below).
PNG
media_image2.png
503
653
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, Ishikawa further teaches that the contact element (40) is configured as a component that is separate from the housing (21) and the cooler (3, see Fig 5 which shows 40 as being separate from 21, and further Ishikawa recites, “The tubular portion 41 of the first connecting pipe 4 is inserted into a root portion 41r (see FIG. 3) on the flange portion 40 side and a through hole (circular hole) 21h formed in the first case 21, and the refrigerant outflow pipe 31 is inserted” which suggests that 31 is also separate from 40).
With respect to claim 12, Ishikawa further teaches that the contact element (40) is connected to the housing (21) or to the cooler (3) by an interlocking connection and/or by a bonded connection (“Each fastening portion 40c has a bolt hole, and is fastened to the first case 21 via a bolt (not shown) that is inserted into the bolt hole and screwed into a screw hole formed in the first case 21.” where using a bolt to connect the contact element to the housing can be considered an interlocking connection).
With respect to claim 14, Ishikawa further teaches a seal (46) arranged in a sealing manner between the cooler (3) and the housing (21, see Fig 2, the seal (46) is arranged between 31, which is considered a part of 3, and the housing 21).
With respect to claims 15 and 18, Ishikawa further teaches that the electronic component (M) comprises power electronics and includes an inverter (“a plurality of semiconductor modules M constituting the inverter and the voltage conversion module”).
With respect to claim 16, Ishikawa further teaches that the coolant connection (31) extends along a longitudinal axis in a tubular manner (See Figs 1-2 which shows the connection (31) extending laterally in a tubular manner).
With respect to claim 17, Ishikawa further teaches that the seal (46) is arranged radially within the contact element (40, see Fig 2).
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.
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.
Claims 6, 7, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa.
With respect to claim 6, Ishikawa teaches the limitations of claim 5 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest that the contact areas are configured as cutting elements, or spherical areas, or pyramid peaks.
However, it has been held that mere changes in shape are obvious1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the contact areas of Ishikawa be configured as cutting elements, spherical areas, or pyramid peaks, since doing so would allow for the contact areas to provide enough surface area contact between the housing (21) and the contact element (40) to allow for electrical continuity between the two while also reducing the amount of material and weight of the contact element.
With respect to claim 7, Ishikawa teaches the limitations of claim 4 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest that the contact area as an annular cutting edge.
However, it has been held that mere changes in shape are obvious1.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the contact areas of Ishikawa be configured as an annular cutting edge, since doing so would allow for the contact areas to provide enough surface area contact between the housing (21) and the contact element (40) to allow for electrical continuity between the two while also reducing the amount of material and weight of the contact element.
With respect to claim 10, Ishikawa teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest the limitations of claim 10.
However, it has been held that making separate structures integral is obvious2.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the contact element configured as a component that is integral with the housing or cooler since doing so would make it more difficult to misplace the contact element or for it to become loose.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9, 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.
With respect to claim 8, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 8 and at least in part because claim 8 recites, “wherein the cooler (3) and the housing (4) are connected in a fixed manner in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis (50), and wherein the at least one contact area (51) is configured to press into an opposing component in the direction of the longitudinal axis (50) when the cooler (3) and housing (4) are screwed together for the first time”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 8 are believed to render said claim 8 patentable over the art of record.
With respect to claim 9, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 9 and at least in part because claim 9 recites, “wherein the contact element (5) comprises a contact surface (53) for forming a flat contact between the cooler (3) and housing (4)”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 9 are believed to render said claim 9 patentable over the art of record.
With respect to claim 13, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 13 and at least in part because claim 13 recites, “wherein the cooler (3) comprises at least two coolant connections (31), and wherein the electronic arrangement (1) comprises one contact element (5) for each coolant connection (31)”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 13 are believed to render said claim 13 patentable over the art of record.
While Ishikawa teaches many of the limitations of claims 1 and 4 as per above, neither Ishikawa nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest the above-mentioned limitations of claims 8-9, 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 6859918 which discloses a sealing member (6) between a cooler (5) and a housing (4, See Fig 1), and;
JP 2015207611 which discloses (In Fig 4) a sealing member (10) between a cooler (3) and a housing (6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY M PAPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2201. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am - 6pm EST.
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, Jayprakash N Gandhi can be reached at 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 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.
/ZACHARY PAPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835
1 In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
2 In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)