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 .
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 1 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 1 recites the limitation “the edge” in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 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, 7, 8, 10-15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Takagi (JP 2017073502 – see attached translation).Re claim 1: Takagi discloses A cooling device (1 in fig. 1) for cooling electronic components (2’s in fig. 1), comprising: a bottom plate (32 in fig. 3), a top plate (31 in fig. 3) which is a deep-drawn component with a depression (31 has a depression in fig. 3), wherein the bottom plate and the top plate are arranged in such a way that a cooling duct is formed between the bottom plate and the top plate by way of the depression (the cooling duct shown in fig. 2 is formed between the bottom plate and top plate via the depression according to fig. 3) wherein the cooling duct extends along a longitudinal direction (lengthwise direction in fig. 2) from an inlet opening (bottom 33a in fig. 2) to an outlet opening (top 33a in fig. 2), wherein a cooling fluid flow of a cooling fluid can flow through the cooling duct along the longitudinal direction (coolant flows lengthwise along the DRfw direction in fig. 2); and at least one turbulator (one v-shape of one of the 343’s in fig. 2) which is arranged within a turbulator section (section with the 343’s in fig. 2) of the cooling duct, wherein at least one tapered portion (40 and 42 and the lumps near them in fig. 2) of a flow cross section of the cooling duct (cross section of the cooling duct of fig. 2) is configured upstream and/or downstream of the turbulator section (fig. 2), in order to deflect a part region, close to the edge, of the cooling fluid flow within the cooling duct (the tapered portion deflects a region where the fluid splits into two paths which is close to the top edge of cooling fluid in fig. 5).Re claim 2: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is configured such that a minimum width of a flow cross-section in the tapered portion is smaller than a width of the at least one turbulator (the minimum cross section of 40 is smaller than the width of one v-shape of one the 343’s in fig. 2).Re claim 3: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is formed by at least one projection of a wall delimiting the cooling duct (40 is a projection of the top wall in fig. 2).Re claim 4: Takagi discloses wherein the projection is formed by a bead of the top plate (fig. 2). Re claim 5: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is arranged directly adjacent to the at least one turbulator with respect to the longitudinal direction (40 is next to a v-shape of the 343’s in fig. 2).Re claim 7: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is configured such that the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in a region of the tapered portion is at least 5 % smaller than the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in the turbulator section (the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in a region of the tapered portion is more than 5% smaller than the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in the turbulator section in fig. 2).Re claim 15: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is configured such that the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in the region of the tapered portion is a maximum of 20% smaller than the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in the turbulator section (the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in a region of the tapered portion is not more than 20% smaller than the flow cross-section of the cooling duct in the turbulator section in fig. 2).Re claim 8: Takagi discloses comprising a plurality of turbulators which are arranged one behind the other in the cooling duct along the longitudinal direction (a plurality of v-shapes of a 343 is arranged one behind the other along the longitudinal direction in fig. 2).Re claim 10: Takagi discloses wherein the turbulators have increasing turbulence factors along the longitudinal direction (the cooling fluid is subjected to more and more turbulence because of the additional turbulators along the longitudinal direction in fig. 2).Re claim 11: Takagi discloses wherein the tapered portion is formed by a first blocking element (40 in fig. 2), which is configured in particular as an additional component (40 in fig. 2) to the bottom plate and top plate (fig. 2).Re claim 17: Takagi discloses further comprising at least one second blocking element (42 in fig. 2) arranged next to the turbulator (a v-shape of a 343 in fig. 2) with respect to the longitudinal direction (fig. 2).Re claim 12: Takagi discloses further comprising at least one second blocking element (42 in fig. 2) arranged next to the turbulator (a v-shape of a 343 in fig. 2) with respect to the longitudinal direction (fig. 2).Re claim 13: Takagi discloses An electronic arrangement (everything in fig. 1) comprising: a cooling device (1 in fig. 1) and at least one electronic component (2 in fig. 1) that is to be cooled (fig. 1).Re claim 14: Takagi discloses wherein the electronic component being cooled is connected to the bottom plate of the cooling device in a thermally conductive manner (2 is thermally connected to a 32 of fig. 3 as can be seen in fig. 1).
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.
Claims 6, 9, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takagi (JP 2017073502).Re claim 6: Takagi does not explicitly disclose wherein the tapered portion is configured symmetrically with respect to the longitudinal direction. However, it would obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling device of Takagi wherein the tapered portion is configured symmetrically with respect to the longitudinal direction in order to further focus the cooling fluid towards the center of the bottom plate to remove more heat from the electronic component, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.Re claim 9: Takagi does not explicitly disclose comprising in each case a tapered portion between two turbulators arranged one behind the other in the longitudinal direction. However, it would obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling device of Takagi wherein comprising in each case a tapered portion between two turbulators arranged one behind the other in the longitudinal direction in order to further focus the cooling fluid towards the center of the bottom plate to remove more heat from the electronic component, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Re claim 16: The modified Takagi discloses wherein the turbulators have increasing turbulence factors along the longitudinal direction (the cooling fluid is subjected to more and more turbulence because of the additional turbulators along the longitudinal direction in fig. 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2018/0252479 – is considered pertinent because this reference describes a heat exchanger for cooling multiple layers of electronic modules.
US 2019/0360766 – is considered pertinent because this reference describes a heat exchanger with multi-zone heat transfer surface.
US 2006/0243429 – is considered pertinent because this reference describes heat exchangers with turbulizers having convolutions of varied height.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHENGFU J FENG whose telephone number is (571) 272-2949. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 900am-530pm 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 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 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.
/ZHENGFU J FENG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835 March 7, 2026