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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 11, 12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian (DE-102007033548-B4) in view of Wang (CN-2345237-Y) in view of Yildiz (US-20210034101-A1).
Regarding claim 1
Sebastian discloses
A cooling apparatus (¶ 10 under Description), comprising:
A control unit (¶ 4 – 6 under Description) for a detector (¶ 34 under Description) of a magnetic resonance device (¶ 10 under Description), the control unit comprising at least two electronic components that generate heat during operation of the magnetic resonance device (¶ 3 under Description),
Sebastian does not disclose
“wherein the control unit is configured to be arranged on a surface of the detector; and
an active cooling unit
comprising at least one piezoelectric fan,
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow
on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components”.
Wang, however, teaches
Wherein the control unit is configured to be arranged on a surface of the detector (¶ 8 under INVENTION-TITLE),
Sebastian in view of Wang do not disclose
“an active cooling unit
comprising at least one piezoelectric fan,
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow
on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components,”
Yildiz, however, teaches
an active cooling unit ([0007])
comprising at least one piezoelectric fan ([0038]),
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow
on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components ([0038], the embedded controller contains many electronic components, so at least “two”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the “control unit on the surface of the detector” as taught by Wang as well as the “piezo cooling fans” of Yildiz in the apparatus of Sebastian.
The justification for this modification would be to 1) use a compact control/detector unit that takes up very little space, and 2) use a fan that generates little to no EMI interference.
Regarding claim 11
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 1,
Yildiz
wherein:
the control unit comprises at least four electronic components and at least
three gaps ([0038]),
two of the at least four electronic components are arranged next to each other and spaced apart from one another by a gap in each of the at least three gaps ([0038]),
the active cooling unit is configured to generate an airflow through
at least one of the at least three gaps, and each of the at least four electronic
components has a heat surface and is arranged such that at least one of the at
least three gaps is free of a facing heat surface and is free of a piezoelectric
fan assigned to the gap ([0038]).
Regarding claim 12
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 1,
Yildiz, applied to claim 12, further teaches
wherein:
the at least two electronic components each comprise surface elements arranged parallel to each other and spaced apart from each other by a gap, and
the control unit is configured to be arranged on the surface of the detector unit such that flat surfaces of the surface elements the at least two electronic components are arranged perpendicular to a surface of the detector ([0038]).
Regarding claim 15
Sebastian discloses
A magnetic resonance device (¶ 10 under Description), comprising:
A detector (¶ 34 under Description); and
A cooling apparatus for a control unit (¶ 4 – 6 under Description) of the magnetic resonance device, wherein the cooling apparatus (¶ 10 under Description) comprises:
At least two electronic components that generate heat during operation of the magnetic resonance device (¶ 3 under Description),
Sebastian does not disclose
“Wherein the control unit is configured to be arranged on a surface of the
detector; and
an active cooling unit comprising at least one piezoelectric fan, and
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components”.
Wang, however, teaches
Wherein the control unit is configured to be arranged on a surface of the
detector; and (¶ 8 under INVENTION-TITLE)
Sebastian in view of Wang do not disclose
“an active cooling unit comprising at least one piezoelectric fan, and
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components.”
Yildiz, however, discloses
an active cooling unit ([0007])
comprising at least one piezoelectric fan ([0038]), and
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct an airflow on a surface of the control unit and/or on a surface of at least one of the at least
two electronic components ([0038], the embedded controller contains many electronic components, so at least “two”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the “control unit on the surface of the detector” as taught by Wang as well as the “piezo cooling fans” of Yildiz in the apparatus of Sebastian.
The justification for this modification would be to 1) use a compact control/detector unit that takes up very little space, and 2) use a fan that generates little to no EMI interference.
Claim(s) 2 – 4 & 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian (DE-102007033548-B4) in view of Wang (CN
2345237-Y) in view of Yildiz (US-20210034101-A1) in view of Name Not Available (JP-S6293670-U).
Regarding claim 2
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 1,
Although strongly implied, Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz do not disclose
“wherein the at least two electronic components of the control unit are arranged next to each other and spaced apart from one another via a gap, and
wherein the active cooling unit is configured to direct the airflow through
the gap”.
Name Not Available, however, teaches
wherein the at least two electronic components of the control unit are arranged next to each other and spaced apart from one another via a gap, and
wherein the active cooling unit is configured to direct the airflow through
the gap (¶ 1 under [Detailed explanation of the device] & Fig. 162, the many fins of the cooling mechanism are the at least two electronic components that are spaced apart with a gap).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the “spaced apart
components with airflow through the gaps” as taught by Name Not Available in the apparatus of Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz.
The justification for this modification would be to more efficiently cool the electronics.
Regarding claim 3
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz in view of Name Not Available teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 2,
Name Not Available, applied to claim 3, further teaches
the active cooling unit comprises at least two piezoelectric fans that are configured to direct an airflow through the gap (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device] & Figures on page 162),
the at least two piezoelectric fans are arranged at an opening in the gap
at equal distances from at least one of the at least two electronic components
and spaced apart from one another by the gap, (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device] & Figures on page 162) and
when the cooling apparatus is arranged on the surface of the detector,
the at least two piezoelectric fans are each disposed a different distance from
the surface of the detector (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device] & Figures on page 162).
Regarding claim 4
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz in view of Name Not Available teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 2,
Name Not Available, applied to claim 4, further teaches
wherein:
the active cooling unit comprises at least two piezoelectric fans that are
configured to direct an airflow through the gap,
the at least two piezoelectric fans are arranged at an opening of the gap with different distances from the at least one of the at least two electronic component and spaced apart from one another by the gap, and
when the cooling apparatus is arranged on the surface of the detector, the at least two piezoelectric fans are each disposed an identical distance from the surface of the detector (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device]).
Regarding claim 9
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz in view of Name Not Available teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 2,
Name Not Available, applied to claim 9, further teaches
wherein each of the at
least two electronic components has a heat surface, and are arranged such that
one heat surface per respective one of the at least two electronic faces the gap, and
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct the airflow
through the gap (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device]).
Regarding claim 10
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz in view of Name Not Available teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 2,
Name Not Available, applied to claim 10, further teaches
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz do not teach
wherein each one of the
at least two electronic components comprises a heat surface, and are arranged such that respective heat surfaces of the at least two electronic components face
the gap, and
wherein the at least one piezoelectric fan is configured to direct the airflow
through the gap (¶ 1, [Detailed explanation of the device]).
Claim(s) 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian (DE-102007033548-B4) in view of Wang (CN-2345237-Y) in view of Yildiz (US-20210034101-A1) in view of Mueller et al. (US-20200100742-A1).
Regarding claim 13
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 1,
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz do not teach
“further comprising:
a passive cooling unit comprising a cooling element arranged on a surface of
one of the at least two electronic components”.
Mueller, however, teaches
a passive cooling unit comprising a cooling element arranged on a surface of
one of the at least two electronic components ([0135]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the “passive surface cooling facility” as taught by Mueller in the apparatus of Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz.
The justification for this modification would be to have a passive way to cool the controller.
Regarding claim 14
Sebastian in view of Wang in view of Yildiz in view of Mueller teach the cooling apparatus as claimed in claim 13,
Mueller, applied to claim 14, further teaches
wherein the cooling element comprises a plurality of fins parallel to one another in a form of elevations perpendicular to a surface of the at least two electronic components, and wherein the active cooling unit is configured to direct an airflow along the fins ([0135], the cooling fins are perpendicular to the docking station that contains the two electronic components).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 – 8 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.
Regarding claim 5
Nothing in the prior art of record teaches or discloses
“when the control unit is arranged on the surface of the detector, a longitudinal side of the at least one electronic component and the gap run
predominantly in a vertical direction, and
wherein the vertical direction is with respect to the magnetic resonance
device and is perpendicular to a direction in which a patient is moved into
and out of a patient receiving area of the magnetic resonance device”.
In conjunction with the rest of the claim language.
Regarding claims 6 – 8
The claims are allowable due to their dependencies on objected-to claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDERICK WENDEROTH whose telephone
number is (571)270-1945. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 a.m. - 4 p.m.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/Frederick Wenderoth/
Examiner, Art Unit 2852