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 20 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.
The term “high thermal conductivity” in claim 20is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ high thermal conductivity ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not able to be ascertained what would constitute a high thermal conductivity as opposed to a moderate thermal conductivity and as such it is considered that any material not expressly disclosed as being thermally insulative would meet such a limitation.
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.
1.Claims 1-3, 6, 9-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson (US5457291) in view of McKnight (US20130087407).
With respect to claim 1 Richardson discloses a system comprising:
A group of unit cells (that is to say individual resonators) of a surface configured for sound absorption, the group of unit cells having dimensions that are relative to wavelengths of incoming acoustic waves of combined frequencies, the group of unit cells comprising:
A first unit cell , the first unit cell comprising s first air cavity within a first solid supporting structure (42), the first air cavity comprising a first chamber (R) having a first chamber volume with a first chamber width dimension and a first neck port (P), wherein the first neck port has a first neck volume with a first neck width dimension that is narrower than the first chamber width dimension (see figure 5), wherein the first neck port extends through the first solid supporting structure and is coupled to the first chamber to expose the incoming acoustic waves to air in the first chamber, and wherein the first chamber volume and the first neck volume determine a first resonant frequency of the first unit cell to resonate the first unit cell at the first resonant frequency, to phase cancel a first frequency of the incoming acoustic waves, wherein exposed to the incoming acoustic waves (described in column2 as Helmholtz resonators); and
A second air cavity within a solid support structure the second air cavity comprising a second chamber having a second chamber volume with a second chamber width dimension and a seconds neck port, wherein the second neck port has a second neck volume with a second neck width dimension that is narrower than the second chamber width dimension, wherein the second neck port extends through the solid supporting structure and is coupled to the second chamber to exposed he incoming acoustic waves to air in the second chamber, and wherein the second chamber volume and the second neck volume determines a second resonant frequency to resonant the second chamber at the second resonant frequency to phase cancel a second frequency of incoming acoustic waves when exposed to the incoming acoustic waves (as in the first of the plurality of resonators there is such dimensions to the Helmholtz resonators. It is further pointed out that claim 1 does not require the first and second frequencies to be different form one another.)
Richardson does not expressly disclose a second unit cell within a second solid supporting structure.
McKnight discloses the use of multiple cells each having their own support structure (see figure 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing to combine the teachings of McKnight to provides multiple different cellular structures each having its own properties with the teachings of Richardson to provide cellular structure of resonant cavity and neck resonators. The motivation for doing so would be to provide additional control over the range of frequencies to be attenuated (para 59- 63 of McKnight)
As it regards the limitation of deep subwavelength values given that the structure of the instant invention and the structure of Richardson are both Helmholtz resonators the selection of the vales based upon the desired attenuation would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing. This would include deep subwavelength values per se, as it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claim 2 Richardson as modified further discloses (see Richardson column 2) wherein the first air cavity, the first neck portion and the first solid supporting structure form a Helmholtz resonator.
With respect to claim 3 Richardson as modified further discloses wherein the first unit cell of a first subgroup of respective first unit cells and wherein the second unit cell is one second unit cell of a second subgroup of respective second unit cells (see again McKnight figure 16).
With respect to claim 6 Richardson as modified further discloses wherein the first unit cell is incorporated into a metasurface comprising an array of unit cells (see again McKnight figure 16).
With respect to claim 9 Richardson as modified discloses the attenuation of different frequencies (see McKnight para 59-63) including a broad range of frequencies. While not expressly stating a separation of frequencies of 1khz per se, the selection of such a value would have been an obvious smatter to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing. This would have been only a matter of tuning the structure for a desired response. Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claim 10 Richardson as modified further discloses a third unit cell (see again McKnight figure 16 there are a plurality of cells), the third unit cell comprising a third air cavity (see unit cell teachings of Richardson) within a third solid support structure (see again 42 of Richardson taken in conjunction with McKnight), the third air cavity comprising a third chamber having a third chamber volume with a third chamber width dimension and a third neck port, wherein the third neck port has a third neck volume with a third neck width dimension that is narrower than the third chamber width dimension, wherein the third neck port extends through the third solid support structure and is couped to the third chamber to expose the incoming acoustic waves to air in the third chamber, and wherein the third chamber volume and the third neck volume determined a third resonant frequency (see again Richardson column2 ) of the third unit cell to resonant the third unit cell at the third resonant frequency (par 59-63 of McKnight multiple frequencies) to phase cancel a third frequency of the incoming acoustic waves, when exposed to the incoming acoustic waves.
With respect to claim 11 Richardson as modified discloses the attenuation of different frequencies (see McKnight para 59-63) including a broad range of frequencies. While not expressly stating a separation of frequencies of within 1khz per se, the selection of such a value would have been an obvious smatter to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing. This would have been only a matter of tuning the structure for a desired response. Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claim 12 Richardson as modified further discloses a method comprising at least one processor of forming resonant structures including the steps of obtaining measurements, determining parameters and controlling the construction of the device (see McKnight para 71, algorithm implies the use of computer processing and automation).
With respect to claim 13 Richardson as modified further discloses wherein the first neck port is a right cylindrical cylinder (see figures) and wherein the determining of the dimensions of the first unit cell comprises determining a first neck port height and a first neck port radius (see again figures and inherent in the neck being a portion of a Helmholtz resonator).
With respect to claim 16 Richardson further discloses a metasurface comprising:
A base structure (320 of McKnight, see para 69-71); and
A group of unit cells (see McKnight figure 16) contained by the base structure, the group of unit cells comprising a first subgroup of respective first unit cells, and a second subgroup of respective second unit cells (see again McKnight figure 16 multiple sets of unit cells taught);
Wherein the respective fist unit cells comprise first Helmholtz resonators (see Richardson column 2) comprising respective first air chambers coupled to respective first neck ports that extend to a surface of the base structure to facilitate air flow to the respective first air chambers (see Richardson), and wherein the respective second unit cells comprise respective Helmholtz resonators comprising respective second air chambers coupled to respective second neck ports that extend to a surface of the base structure to facilitate air flow to the respective second air chambers.
Wherein the respective first unit cells are configured with respective first deep subwavelength dimensions relative to first wavelengths of incoming acoustic waves having a first specific frequency value within a first narrow band frequency range and wherein the respective seconds unit cells are configured with respective second deep subwavelength dimensions relative to second wavelengths of the incoming acoustic waves having a second specific frequency value within a seconds narrowband frequency range (device of Richardson taught to be Helmholtz resonators, the selection of multiple wavelengths of sound reduction is taught by McKnight), and
Wherein the first deep subwavelength dimension s are selected to resonate the respective first unit cells at the first specific frequency value to collectively phase cancel a first frequency of the incoming acoustic waved when exposed to the incoming acoustic waves, and wherein he second deep subwavelength dimensions are selected to resonate he respective second unit cells at the second specific frequency value to collectively phase cancel a second frequency of the incoming acoustic waves when exposed to the incoming acoustic waves (see again teachings of Richardson column 2 device is a Helmholtz resonator).
With respect to claim 17 Richardson as modified further discloses wherein the respective first unit cells are evenly distributed in a first array pattern with the base structure, and wherein the respective second unit cells are evenly distributed in a second array pattern, interleaved with the first array pattern within the base structure (refer to arrangement of the cells in figure 16 of McKnight).
2. Claims 4-5,8, and 14-15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson (US5457291) in view of McKnight (US20130087407) in view of Guo (US11929053).
With respect to claims 4, 14 and 18 Richardson as modified discloses the invention as claimed except expressly wherein the air chambers are cylindrical.
Guo discloses the use of a cylindrical resonant chamber (see figures 1a and 1b).
It would have been an obvious matter to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing to combine the teachings of Guo to use a cylindrical resonant chamber with the chamber and structure of Richardson as modified. The motivation for doing so would be to simplify the manufacture of the resonator by maintaining a consistent diameter through the process.
With respect to claim 5 Richardson as modified by McKnight and Guo further discloses wherein the first neck cylinder dimensioned with the first neck width dimension and a first neck height dimension and wherein the first neck volume is based on the first neck height dimension and a first neck circular area corresponding to the first neck width dimension (see Richardson this si the shape and dimensioning of the Neck).
With respect to claim 8 and 15 Richardson as modified further discloses wherein the formation of the device is by means of a 3d printer (see Guo column 3 lines 35-45).
3. Claims 7 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson (US5457291) in view of McKnight (US20130087407) in view of Guo (US11929053) and Hakuta (US20190295521).
With respect to claim 7 and 19 Richardson as modified discloses the invention as claimed except expressly wherein the meta surface is positioned proximate at least one of a server or a rack of servers.
Hakuta discloses a device including multiple resonators which serves to reduce noise associated with a server structure (see abstract and para 120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing to combine the teachings of Hakuta to use resonators to silence sounds associated with a server or rack of servers with the device of Richardson as modified so as to provide the3 desired sound reduction of Richardson with the intended use of the server. The motivation would be due to the known amount of noise associated with the servers.
With respect to claim 20 Richardson as modified (see abstract of Hakuta) further discloses wherein the resonant structure is formed of a material capable of conducting heat away from the server to a medium external to the at least one server (namely the air).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hakuta (US20220389939) discloses a blower with resonant structure; Wilson (US9343059) discloses an underwater noise abatement wall using different shapes of resonators; McKnight (US8869933) discloses an acoustic barrier support structure; Chang (US8857563) discloses a hybrid acoustic barrier and absorber; Tanabe (US20100078258) discloses a silencing means for computer equipment; Trader (US1554179) discloses a sound absorber of multiple resonant structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FORREST M PHILLIPS whose telephone number is (571)272-9020. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00-5:00.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/FORREST M PHILLIPS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights