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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended independent claim 1 to recite that a “second heat dissipation structure” is located in a first sub receiving cavity. It is unclear how the second heat dissipation structure is located within the first sub receiving cavity. The Specification details these components in paragraphs 92 and 100 and it appears they reside outside the receiving cavity. It appears there are no other embodiments or variants where this structure is located within.
The amended limitations make no specific structural recitation as to what comprises a heat dissipation structure. As such, even the transceiver casing (118) of the prior art is capable of heat dissipation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. As noted above, the amended claims recite that a second heat dissipation structure (defined as 20 in Applicant’s figures) is located in the first sub-receiving cavity (14; Applicant figure 1). It is unclear how this is possible as the dissipation structure appears to reside outside the entire housing (10; figure 1).
Remaining claims are rejected on the basis of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2025/0311084 to Weltsch et al.
Weltsch discloses in the abstract and figures 1 and 3, a heat dissipation apparatus comprising:
A housing (NIC assembly 100) comprising a cavity with an opening (where component is inserted in figure 3B);
At least one dividing assembly (120) located in the receiving cavity and configured to divide the cavity into two areas;
At least one first heat transfer structure (paragraph 42 describes a heat sink) located in the second cavity (upper portion); and
At least one first heat transfer structure (cooling unit 200), with one end connected to the first dissipation structure and the other end to pass through the housing for heat exchanging;
Wherein the pipe is flat (110 is flat in figure 3B).
Examiner notes that the current limitations briefly define the “flat” heat pipe. There are no dimensions claimed to further distinguish over the size in relation to other components.
As noted above, the transceiver casing (118) is capable of heat dissipation and therefore anticipates the second heat dissipation structure located in the receiving cavity and connected to the “transfer structure” when assembled. There is no claimed detail as to what the second heat transfer structure comprises (the first heat transfer structure defines and claims heat pipes and associated shapes and connections).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2-8 and 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weltsch in view of US 2024/0188255 to Zhang et al.
Weltsch discloses the invention as claimed except for dimensional changes, heat pipe routing and various other rearrangement changes. It appears applicant’s invention relates to the “flat” heat pipe.
Zhang discloses heat sinks (170) in an enhanced module shell with various compartments and routing of liquid cooled heat piping (paragraphs 49 and 63) with various chambers, heat pipe dimensions (figure 7) and various form factors for the transceiver (SFP, etc).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the housing, add compartments or change the sizes and shapes of components therein as a matter of packaging optimization.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2021/0072473 (figures 5A-5B show two different heat dissipation areas).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric K Wong whose telephone number is (571)272-2363. The examiner can normally be reached M-Tu, Th-F 8A-6P.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at 571-270-1739. 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.
ERIC K. WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2874
/Eric Wong/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights