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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of species A, as shown in figs. 2A and 3 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 without traverse is acknowledged.
Interview Summary
Authorization to withdraw claims 2, 8, 10, 15, 17, and 20 was provided by Attorney Greg Johnson (59027) via telephone call and email on February 26, 2026 in response to the restriction requirement sent on 12/5/2025. Therefore, claims 2, 8, 10, 15, 17, and 20 are withdrawn from consideration.
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, 3, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Engelder (US 4440219; “Engelder” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Engelder discloses: an electronic device, comprising:
a housing (20 and 21, figs. 2A-2B, 4) at least partially surrounding one or more electronic components (26, figs. 2A-2B, col. 3, lines 13-14), the housing comprising:
an outer wall (21) having a first surface (annotated as ‘FS21’ in annotated fig. 2B below) and a second surface (annotated as ‘SS21’ in annotated fig. 2B below) opposite the first surface; and
an inner wall (20) opposite the outer wall (fig. 4), the inner wall having a first surface (annotated as ‘FS20’ in annotated fig. 2B below) and a second surface opposite the first surface (annotated as ‘SS20’ in annotated fig. 2B below), wherein the first surface of the inner wall faces the second surface of the outer wall (see annotated fig. 2B below, and fig. 4) and wherein the second surface of the outer wall and the first surface of the inner wall define a cavity (44, fig. A); and
a thermal barrier provided within the cavity (vacuum space, col. 4, lines 14-20), the thermal barrier insulating the outer wall from heat generated by the one or more electronic components (26, col. 4, lines 14-20).
PNG
media_image1.png
516
517
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Engelder teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
wherein the thermal barrier is a vacuum chamber (vacuum space, col. 4, lines 14-20).
Regarding claim 5, Engelder teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
wherein the inner wall has a first thickness and the outer wall has a second thickness that is greater than the first thickness (col. 4, lines 9-14).
Regarding claim 6, Engelder teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
wherein the outer wall surrounds the inner wall (fig. 4 discloses this limitation).
Regarding claim 7, Engelder teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
wherein the thermal barrier has a uniform thickness (as disclosed upon examination of figures 2A-2B, 4).
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 4, 9, 11-12, 14, 16, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engelder (US 4440219; “Engelder” hereinafter), in view of de Kanter (US 4407136; “Kanter” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 4, Engelder teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches:
wherein the inner wall at least partially surrounds the one or more electronic components (26, figs. 2A-2B, 4, col. 6, lines 4-5) and a circuitry (i.e. electronic section 27, fig. 2B, col. 3, lines 3-40) on which the one or more electronic components are placed (“All of the electronic components and circuitry 86 of section 27..”Col. 6, lines 4-5).
Engelder does not explicitly teach:
one or more electronic components placed on a PCB.
However, Kanter teaches:
a printed circuit board (PCB) (30, fig. 1);
at least one hardware component mounted on the PCB (col. 3, lines 34-42);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kanter into Engelder such that the electronic device comprises a printed circuit board (PCB), wherein at least one hardware component is placed on the PCB, since claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (electronic components mounted on PCBs) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Kantor. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 9, Engelder teaches, an electronic device, comprising:
a double-walled housing (20 and 21, figs. 2A-2B, 4), comprising:
an inner wall (20) at least partially surrounding a circuitry (26, fig. 2A) and at least one hardware component (31 and 33, fig. 2B);
an outer wall (21) surrounding the inner wall (fig. 4)and forming an outside surface of the housing (figs. 2A-2B, 4) the outer wall and inner wall defining a cavity (44) between the outer wall and the inner wall (fig. 2A); and
a thermal barrier provided within the cavity (vacuum space, col. 4, lines 14-20).
Engelder does not explicitly teach:
a printed circuit board (PCB);
at least one hardware component mounted on the PCB;
However, Kanter teaches:
a printed circuit board (PCB) (30, fig. 1);
at least one hardware component mounted on the PCB (col. 3, lines 34-42);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kanter into Engelder such that the electronic device comprises a printed circuit board (PCB), wherein at least one hardware component is mounted on the PCB, since claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (electronic components mounted on PCBs) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Kantor. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 11, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 9,and Engelder further teaches:
wherein the thermal barrier is vacuum sealed (col. 4, lines 14-44).
Regarding claim 12, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 9, and Engelder further teaches:
wherein the inner wall has a first thickness and the outer wall has a second thickness that is greater than the first thickness (col. 4, lines 9-14).
Regarding claim 14, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 9, and Engelder further teaches:
wherein the thermal barrier has a uniform thickness (as disclosed upon examination of figures 2A-2B, 4).
Regarding claim 16, Engelder teaches:
an electronic device, comprising:
a double-walled housing (20 and 21, figs. 2A-2B, 4) at least partially surrounding a circuitry (26, fig. 2A), the double-walled housing, comprising:
a first wall (20);
a second wall (21) surrounding the first wall (Fig. 4), the second wall forming an outside surface of the double-walled housing (fig. 4 discloses this limitation), the first wall and the second wall defining a cavity (44, fig. 2A); and
an insulation means provided within the cavity (vacuum space, col. 4, lines 14-20), the insulation means acting as a thermal barrier against heat generated by at least one hardware component (26, figs. 2A-2B, col. 3. lines 13-15; col. 4, lines 14-20).
Engelder does not explicitly teach:
at least one hardware component mounted on a printed circuit board (PCB).
However, Kantor teaches:
at least one hardware component mounted on a PCB (col. 3, lines 34-42);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kanter into Engelder such that the electronic device comprises a printed circuit board (PCB), wherein at least one hardware component is mounted on the PCB, since claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (electronic components mounted on PCBs) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Kantor. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 18, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 16, and Engelder further teaches:
wherein the insulation means is formed by vacuum sealing the cavity (col. 4, lines 14-44).
Regarding claim 19, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 16, and Engelder further teaches:
wherein the insulation means has a uniform thickness (as disclosed upon examination of figures 2A-2B, 4).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Engelder (US 4440219; “Engelder” hereinafter), in view of de Kanter (US 4407136; “Kanter” hereinafter) as applied to claim 9, and further in view of Peters et al (US 5155356; “Peters” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 13, Engelder in view of Kanter teaches the limitations of claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the electronic device is a removable data storage device and wherein the electronic device further comprises a connecter extending from a distal end of the double-walled housing.
However, Peters discloses:
wherein an electronic device (20, fig. 3) is a removable data storage device (“Each sensor may be controlled by a microprocessor mounted on a printed circuit board 30 within the probe. The microprocessor operates under stored program instructions and includes associated internal memory or external memory” col. 5, lines 54-60, and data connector 42, fig. 3) and wherein the electronic device further comprises a connecter (42, fig. 3) extending from a distal end (end of housing 36, fig. 3) of a housing (36, fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include the data storage means, power supply and connector of Peters into Engelder as modified by Kantor, such that the electronic device is a removable data storage device and wherein the electronic device further comprises a connecter extending from a distal end of the double-walled housing, in order to allow connection of the electronic device to an external processor and power source (col. 6, lines 2-7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is:
US 20040075986 A1 Electronic Device. This invention relates to an electronic device, simultaneously provided with heat dissipation medium and a heat insulation, used in motor-control circuits in general.
US 10798839 B2 Thermal management Cage for a Solid State Drive. This invention generally relates to a solid state drive (SSD) device including a cage with a top wall and a bottom wall spaced a distance from the top wall so as to define a cage interior between the top and bottom walls. In addition, at least 10% of an area along a side of the cage is open to the cage interior to permit airflow through the side of the cage. At least one printed circuit board (PCB), which includes at least one integrated circuit component, is also provided within the cage interior.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER KRIM whose telephone number is (703)756-1246. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am -4:30pm.
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, Allen L Parker can be reached at (303) 297-4722. 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.
/P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/SAGAR SHRESTHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841