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 .
Status of Claims
This action is responsive to the amendment filed 8/12/26. Claims 1 and 3–15 have been amended, claim 2 has been cancelled, and claims 16–21 have been added. Claims 1 and 3–21 are pending. Claims 1 and 16 are independent. The amendments have been entered.
This action is non-final. The grounds of rejection set forth below rely on art not previously applied and are directed to a limitation (the first and second flow paths configured to guide air flowing in from the intake opening to the fan) that was present in substance in the claims as originally examined. The new grounds were therefore not necessitated by amendment. See MPEP 706.07(a).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 8/12/26 with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 5, 7 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) over Fujiwara (US 2011/0279974) and the rejection of claims 2–4, 6, 8 and 10–12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Fujiwara have been fully considered and are persuasive in part. Applicant correctly observes that Fujiwara describes the first flow path 91a and second flow path 91b of wind guide path 91 as paths through which cooling air flows from the cooling fan 24 to the heat sink 28 (Fujiwara ¶0082, ¶0083, ¶0096, ¶0097), that is, downstream of the fan. The region of Fujiwara in which air flows from the inlets 21, 22, 23 to the fan intakes 24a, 24b is the first chamber 61, in which no portion of the circuit board 31 is disposed (¶0071; FIG. 9). Fujiwara therefore does not disclose a first flow path and a second flow path, each formed at least partly by a surface of the board and a facing surface, configured to guide air flowing in from the intake opening to the fan. The rejections over Fujiwara are withdrawn.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection set forth below. For the record, the examiner notes that the prior action’s identification of the “bottom surface” and “top surface” of circuit board 31 followed the orientation of FIG. 9 (in which the palm rest 18 is drawn at the bottom) and was reversed relative to Fujiwara’s nomenclature: the power supply circuit component 49 is mounted on the second (upper) surface 31b (¶0040), which faces the upper wall 6 of the cover 12 (¶0027, ¶0083, ¶0096). The pairing of component 49, flow path 91b and cover 12 in the prior action was therefore internally consistent; only the labels were transposed. Fujiwara is retained below as a secondary reference.
The objections to claims 1 and 2 and the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the prior action are withdrawn in view of the amendments.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities. Each claim recites “the one or more heat conductive first connectors connect the board and the first metal sheet to transfer heat through the first connecting member.” The claims as amended no longer recite a “first connecting member”; the term lacks antecedent basis. For purposes of examination, the phrase is interpreted as “through the one or more heat conductive first connectors,” consistent with the remainder of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 9, 11 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities. Claim 9 recites “the one of the one or more first heat generating components configured to generate the largest amount of heat … is positioned …” and “[the] one of the one or more second heat generating components is configured to generate the largest amount of heat … is positioned …”; claim 11 recites “the second metal sheet faces the one of the one or more second heat generating components is configured to generate the largest amount of heat …”; claim 20 contains the same construction as claim 9. In each instance a relative pronoun (“that” or “which”) appears to have been omitted before “is configured,” leaving two main verbs in one clause. For purposes of examination the clauses are read as “the one of the … components that is configured to generate the largest amount of heat ….” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. MPEP 2111.
“metal sheet.” The specification describes the front metal sheet 28 and back metal sheet 50 as plate-like metal members that may form part of the housing or be separate from it, and recites both alternatives in claims 1 and 16. The term is construed as a plate-like member of metal facing the recited board surface; it is not limited to a member free of openings, and a metal frame or cover of plate form that faces the board surface is a metal sheet under this construction.
“heat conductive first connectors” / “heat conductive second connectors.” The specification states that the connecting members may be fasteners such as screws or bolts and that parts other than screws, bolts or other fasteners may be used as the connecting members so long as they are heat conductive (specification ¶0087, p. 27, ll. 11–14). The terms are construed as any heat conductive member, including a metal fastener, that connects the board to the respective metal sheet so that heat can pass between them. A metal fastener in contact with both the board and the sheet is a heat conductive connector.
“configured to guide air flowing in from the intake opening to the fan.” This is a functional recitation given weight (MPEP 2114). It is met by a passage, bounded at least in part by the recited board surface and a facing surface, through which intake air travels to the fan when the fan operates. It does not require that the passage be the exclusive path, that it be sealed, or that the intake air pass over any particular component.
“connect … without transferring heat through the one or more second heat generating components.” This limitation is met where the second connectors contact the board at locations other than through a second heat generating component, so that the conductive path from board to sheet does not pass through such a component.
“a number of … first connectors is greater than a number of … second connectors” / “first material has a higher thermal conductivity than the second material.” The specification presents these as interchangeable ways of making the first connecting members “easier to transfer heat” than the second, and states that “the first connecting members and second connecting members may be configured in any way” to that end, including the same number with different cross-sections or different materials (specification ¶0088–¶0089, p. 27, ll. 14–36). No criticality is asserted for either the count or the material selection.
Nothing in the claims invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f); each limitation recites structure (“sheet,” “connectors,” “fan,” “board”) without “means” and the term “configured to” modifies recited structure. MPEP 2181.
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.
16. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: (1) determining the scope and contents of the prior art; (2) ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue; (3) resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and (4) considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966).
Claims 1, 3, 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando et al. (US 9,723,731, hereinafter “Ando”) in view of Inoue et al. (US 9,756,761, hereinafter “Inoue”).
Regarding claim 1, Ando discloses an electronic apparatus (vehicular electronic device 1, FIG. 1) configured to allow air to flow into and out from the electronic apparatus (suction ports 3b; fan unit 2 discharges air behind back cover 3; col. 5, ll. 1–9 and 21–25), comprising: a housing comprising an intake opening (metallic back cover 3 with side plates 13 and outer frame 11 enclosing the stacked members, col. 3, ll. 33–44; suction ports 3b formed in the bent portion 3a of the back cover, col. 5, ll. 1–7; FIG. 1); a fan housed in the housing (centrifugal fan unit 2 attached to the back cover 3, col. 3, ll. 34–35; col. 5, ll. 10–16); a board housed in the housing (main board 4, col. 3, ll. 35–38); one or more first heat generating components mounted on a first surface of the board (SDRAM 32, LVDS 36, IOH 37 and CGIC 38 on the front surface of main board 4, col. 6, ll. 40–44; FIG. 3); one or more second heat generating components mounted on a second surface of the board opposite the first surface (main CPU 31 and PMIC 30 on the rear surface of main board 4, col. 5, l. 66 – col. 6, l. 8; FIG. 2); a first metal sheet facing the first surface of the board (interboard frame 5, a molded metallic, almost flat plate-shaped member disposed in front of main board 4 with a space between them, col. 3, ll. 45–48; col. 4, ll. 40–41; col. 4, ll. 52–55; see Claim Interpretation); a second metal sheet facing the second surface of the board (metallic back cover 3, a rectangular flat plate disposed behind main board 4, col. 4, l. 66 – col. 5, l. 2; col. 5, ll. 10–11); one or more first connectors and one or more second connectors connecting the board and the respective metal sheet (screws 12, which assemble the members 3 to 11 together and pass through the through holes 4z of main board 4, col. 3, ll. 42–44; col. 7, ll. 12–16; FIG. 1), the connection being made at the through holes 4z, from which the semiconductor packages are spaced by a predetermined distance or more (col. 7, ll. 12–16; areas 4za, FIGS. 2–3), so that heat is transferred between the board and the back cover without transferring heat through the one or more second heat generating components; the first metal sheet … is formed separately from the housing (frame 5 is a separate member, col. 3, ll. 38–39) and the second metal sheet at least partly forms the housing (back cover 3, col. 3, ll. 33–34); a first flow path configured to guide air flowing in from the intake opening to the fan, formed at least partly by the first surface and a first facing surface facing the first surface (“Air flows from the suction port 3b to a space between each of the boards 4, 6 and the interboard frame 5,” col. 5, ll. 7–9; the space between the front surface of main board 4 and frame 5 leads to the fan intake 2a, which “crosses a right side 4f of the main board 4,” col. 5, ll. 19–21, and through the opening 4a, col. 6, ll. 22–26); the one or more first … components are configured to collectively generate a first amount of heat, and the one or more second … components … a second amount of heat that is greater than the first amount of heat (the rear surface carries the two main heat radiation devices 30 and 31, the main CPU and PMIC, col. 6, ll. 3–8; the front surface carries memories, interface and clock circuits, FIG. 3); in the alternative, the component generating the largest amount of heat among the second components (CPU 31) generates more heat than any first component. Ando does not expressly disclose (i) a second flow path configured to guide air flowing in from the intake opening to the fan, formed at least partly by the second surface and a second facing surface facing the second surface; (ii) that the screws 12 are heat conductive connectors that connect the board and each sheet to transfer heat; or (iii) that a number of the one or more heat conductive first connectors is greater than a number of the one or more heat conductive second connectors. As to (i), Ando positions the intake port 2a of the fan unit 2 so that it crosses the right edge 4f of the main board 4 (col. 5, ll. 17–21), the rear surface of the main board — the surface carrying the CPU 31 and PMIC 30 — faces the back cover 3 to which the fan is attached, and Ando states that the opening 4a is “necessary for cooling two boards 4 and 6 efficiently” (col. 5, ll. 21–23; col. 6, ll. 22–26). A fan intake straddling the edge of a board draws from the spaces on both sides of that board. Inoue teaches feeding a fan from both of its sides with intake air, one stream of which is routed along a circuit board: air led into the housing through the air intake openings 82d “flows into the cooling fan 40 from both the upper side and the lower side,” part entering through the intake opening 52a and another part flowing “to between the circuit board 10 and the mounted plate portion 21” of the metal upper frame before entering the fan through the through holes 21e (Inoue col. 27, ll. 38–47; col. 28, ll. 45–50; FIG. 19). Inoue’s path between the board surface and the facing metal plate is a flow path formed at least partly by a surface of the board and a facing surface, configured to guide intake air to the fan. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route intake air in Ando along the rear surface of the main board 4, between that surface and the facing back cover 3, to the portion of the fan intake on that side of the board, as Inoue routes intake air between its board and facing metal plate, so that the CPU 31 and PMIC 30 — which Ando identifies as the two main heat sources (col. 6, ll. 3–8) — are cooled by intake air before it reaches the fan, and so that the fan draws from both of its sides as Inoue’s fan does. The space between the rear surface of main board 4 and the back cover 3 then forms the second flow path. As to (ii), Inoue discloses a plate-like upper frame 20 formed from one metallic plate and covering a surface of the circuit board 10, the circuit board being fixed to the frame “by a fastening member such as bolts and screws” through holes formed at corresponding positions, and states that the upper frame 20 “functions as a heat-releasing member to the parts mounted on the circuit board 10” (Inoue col. 3, ll. 57–67; see also col. 24, ll. 63–67). Screws that fix a board to a metal frame that serves as the board’s heat-releasing member are heat conductive connectors that connect the board and the frame to transfer heat (see Claim Interpretation). It would have been obvious to fasten Ando’s main board 4 to the frame 5 and to the back cover 3 with such screws, as Inoue fastens its board to its metal frames, so that each metal plate serves as a heat-releasing member for the parts on the facing surface of the board, as Inoue teaches. As to (iii), Ando and Inoue each use a plurality of screws at the board periphery and leave their number to the designer. The claimed asymmetry is a selection of the number of fasteners on each side of the board. Applicant’s specification identifies the count as one of several interchangeable ways of making the first connecting members transfer heat more easily than the second, stating that the connecting members “may be configured in any way” to that end, including an equal number with different cross-sections or different materials (specification ¶0088–¶0089, p. 27, ll. 14–36). Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the number of fasteners needed on each side to achieve a desired heat-transfer balance involves only routine skill. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); MPEP 2144.05(II)(B). It would have been obvious to provide a greater number of screws between the main board and the frame 5 than between the main board and the back cover 3, for example to increase conduction into the frame 5 on the side of the board whose components cannot be reached by the fan-side airflow, or simply because the frame 5 is the larger member and the stacked assembly of Ando is fastened through it (col. 3, ll. 42–44).Regarding claim 16, the limitations are the same as those of claim 1 except that, in place of the connector count, the claim recites that the first connectors comprise a first material, the second connectors comprise a second material, and the first material has a higher thermal conductivity than the second material. Ando in view of Inoue teaches the remaining limitations as set forth for claim 1. Neither reference specifies the materials of the two sets of screws. Applicant’s specification identifies material selection as an alternative to the connector count, to be used “so long as the first connecting members are configured so as to become easier to transfer heat” (specification ¶0088–¶0089, p. 27, ll. 14–36). Selecting a known metal fastener material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, including a higher-conductivity metal where more conduction is desired, is a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); MPEP 2144.07. It would have been obvious to form the screws connecting the main board to the frame 5 of a metal with higher thermal conductivity than the screws connecting the main board to the back cover 3 for the reasons given for limitation (iii) of claim 1.Regarding claim 3, see the rejection of claim 16; the same material-selection rationale applies to the first and second connectors of claim 1.Regarding claim 4, Inoue discloses a heat conductive third connecting member connecting the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet: the upper frame 20, the circuit board 10 and the lower frame 30 are “fixed to the housing by shared (that is, common) fastening members” inserted through holes at corresponding positions in each (Inoue col. 4, ll. 13–19), the upper frame also serving to secure the rigidity of the housing (col. 4, ll. 1–4). Ando likewise assembles the stacked members 3 to 11, including the back cover 3 and the frame 5, with screws 12 (col. 3, ll. 42–44). It would have been obvious to pass common screws through Ando’s frame 5, main board 4 and back cover 3, as Inoue does through its two frames and board, for the rigidity Inoue describes; a metal screw joining the two metal plates is a heat conductive connecting member between them.
Claims 5, 6, 10, 11, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando in view of Inoue and further in view of Morisawa et al. (US 11,262,810, hereinafter “Morisawa”).Regarding claims 5 and 17, Ando in view of Inoue teaches the apparatus of claims 1 and 16. Morisawa discloses that the board comprises a first interconnect pattern (ground pattern 50f, a conductor formed on the surface of circuit board 50 that surrounds the entire perimeter of the region B1 on which electronic parts 50c and 50e are mounted, col. 26, ll. 10–18; FIG. 15) connected with the one or more heat conductive first connectors to transfer heat (ground contact portions 52b fixed to the ground pattern 50f by a screw, col. 26, ll. 19–22). Morisawa does not state in terms that the ground pattern is connected to the surrounded components. Electronic parts mounted on a board are ordinarily connected to the board’s ground; a ground pattern surrounding the mounting region and connected to those parts transfers heat from them by conduction through its copper. It would have been obvious to connect the first heat generating components of Ando to such a ground pattern, and to fasten the screws 12 to it, for the grounding and shielding purpose Morisawa describes, the pattern thereby being connected with the one or more first heat generating components to transfer heat.Regarding claim 6, Morisawa discloses that the metal sheets are electrically connected with a ground potential of the board through the connectors (ground contact portions 52b fixed to the ground pattern 50f, which functions as an electric ground, by a screw, col. 26, ll. 10–13, 19–22), and that each sheet overlaps the components on its side of the board when viewed perpendicular to the board (the upper board shield 51 covers the upper surface and the lower board shield 52 covers the lower surface, col. 5, ll. 4–10; the lower shield covers the shielded region B1 on which the parts are mounted, col. 26, ll. 15–19). In Ando the frame 5 and back cover 3 likewise overlie the component-carrying areas of the main board 4 (FIG. 1). It would have been obvious to ground the frame 5 and back cover 3 of Ando through the screws 12 for the shielding purpose Morisawa describes, the first components then overlapping the first metal sheet and the second components overlapping the second metal sheet.Regarding claim 10, Ando does not specify the metals of the frame 5 and back cover 3. Morisawa lists iron, stainless steel and aluminum for its board shields (col. 5, ll. 12–14). Selecting, for the back cover 3 that faces the main heat sources, a metal (e.g., copper or steel) having a higher thermal conductivity and a greater specific gravity than the metal of the frame 5 (e.g., aluminum or magnesium alloy) is a selection of known materials on the basis of suitability for the intended use. In re Leshin; MPEP 2144.07. It would have been obvious to make the sheet facing the CPU 31 of the more conductive metal in order to spread the heat of the largest heat source.Regarding claim 11, Ando in view of Inoue and Morisawa teaches the apparatus of claim 10, and Ando discloses that the second metal sheet faces the second component generating the largest amount of heat (back cover 3 faces the rear surface carrying the CPU 31, col. 6, ll. 3–8; FIG. 2). Ando does not expressly disclose that an area of the second metal sheet is smaller than an area of the first metal sheet when viewed perpendicular to the board. The relative plan areas of the back cover 3 and frame 5 are a matter of sizing each member to the parts it carries (the frame 5 spans both boards 4 and 6, the back cover carries the main board and fan). Making one plate smaller than the other, where the specification identifies no criticality for the comparison, involves only routine skill. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).Regarding claim 12, Ando discloses that the housing comprises a first half forming a first surface of the apparatus (outer frame 11 with touch panel 10, forming the front surface, col. 3, ll. 49–57) and a second half forming a second surface opposite the first (back cover 3 forming the rear surface, col. 4, l. 66 – col. 5, l. 2). Ando does not expressly disclose that a perimeter of the first metal sheet is surrounded by a plastic member, and the plastic member forms at least part of the first half. Morisawa discloses upper and lower housing members 30A, 30B of ABS or polycarbonate resin that house the circuit board and its metallic board shields and form the upper and lower surfaces of the apparatus (col. 4, ll. 40–57). It would have been obvious to surround the perimeter of the frame 5 of Ando with a resin housing member forming part of the front half, as Morisawa encloses its metal plates in resin housing members, in order to provide an insulating, lightweight exterior while retaining the metal plate where it faces the board. In re Leshin; MPEP 2144.07.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando in view of Inoue and further in view of Fujiwara (US 2011/0279974).Regarding claims 7 and 18, Ando in view of Inoue teaches the apparatus of claims 1 and 16. Ando’s suction ports 3b are located together in the lower bent portion 3a (col. 5, ll. 2–7). Ando does not expressly disclose a first intake opening and a second intake opening positioned separately from each other and oriented differently from each other with respect to the fan, each feeding a respective one of the flow paths, nor that the first and second heat generating components do not overlap each other when viewed perpendicular to the board. Fujiwara discloses a housing with first inlets 21 in the lower wall 7 and second inlets 22 in the left wall 8c, positioned separately and opening in different directions with respect to the cooling fan 24, so that fresh air reaches the fan through either set of inlets and “even when some of the inlets of the housing 5 are clogged, cooling efficiency is less likely to be reduced” (Fujiwara ¶0033–¶0034, ¶0118–¶0119). It would have been obvious to provide the housing of Ando with a second set of inlets in a different wall, oriented differently with respect to the fan and communicating with the other of the two board-side spaces, for the redundancy Fujiwara describes, the first flow path then directing air from the one inlet and the second flow path from the other. As to the non-overlap, Ando places the CPU 31 and PMIC 30 on the rear surface and arranges the front-surface components around them (FIGS. 2–3); arranging the first and second components at non-overlapping positions is a rearrangement of parts that does not modify the operation of the device and would have been obvious to avoid concentrating heat on both faces at one location. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 19, 20 and 21 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, and if the informalities noted above are corrected.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
As to claims 8 and 19, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, in combination with the remaining limitations of claims 1, 7, 16 and 18, a battery positioned in the housing closer to the space between the first intake opening and the inflow opening of the fan than to the space between the second intake opening and the inflow opening.
As to claims 15 and 21, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, in combination with the remaining limitations of claims 1 and 16, a display panel positioned on the surface of the first metal sheet opposite the surface facing the board, with a heat conductive sheet or heat conductive grease positioned between the display panel and the first metal sheet.
As to claims 9 and 20, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, in combination with the remaining limitations of claims 1 and 16, two intake openings positioned separately and oriented differently with respect to the fan, with the largest-heat first component positioned at least partially between the first intake opening and the fan inflow opening and the largest-heat second component positioned at least partially between the second intake opening and the fan inflow opening, when viewed perpendicular to the board.
As to claim 13, the prior art of record does not teach a plastic member surrounding the perimeter of the first metal sheet that leaves the outer surface of the sheet uncovered, in combination with the limitations of claims 1 and 10–12.
As to claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach the combination of an exhaust-side heat sink between the fan outflow opening and the exhaust opening, a heat conductive sheet or grease between the first components and the first metal sheet, and a heat pipe or vapor chamber conducting heat from the second components to the heat sink, in combination with the limitations of claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 7,958,935 – is considered pertinent because this reference describes low-profile thermosyphon-based cooling system for computers and other electronic devices.
US 7,394,653 – is considered pertinent because this reference describes heat dissipating system of multi-media computer.
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 at (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 October 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights