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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima et al. (US 2020/0256623 A1) in view of Kurashima et al. (US 2018/0164043 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kojima discloses (Figure 1-5) a thermal diffusion device comprising: a housing having a first inner wall surface ( the inner surface of first sheet 11 facing the wick 30) and a second inner wall surface (the inner surface of second sheet 12 facing the wick 30) that face each other in a thickness direction and define an internal space (the cavity 13 in housing 10 formed by first and second sheets 11 and 12); a working medium enclosed in the internal space of the housing (at working liquid 20); and a wick in the internal space of the housing (wick structure 30), wherein the wick includes: a support that is in contact with the first inner wall surface (protruding portions 31 as seen in figure 1 and 2); a perforated body that is in contact with the support ( grid portion 32 which is formed with openings per at least paragraph 0034 and 0061), the perforated body having a through-hole that penetrates the perforated body in the thickness direction (openings in the grid portion 32 per at least paragraph 0034 and 0061 and as seen in figure 1-3b);
However Kojima is silent as to a protrusion portion on a peripheral edge of the through-hole and extending in a direction toward the first inner wall surface.
Kurashima teaches (Figure 1-11B) a thermal diffusion device comprising: a housing having a first inner wall surface ( the inner surface of layer 11 facing layer 12) and a second inner wall surface (the inner surface layer 14 facing layer 13) that face each other in a thickness direction and define an internal space (the cavity accommodating working fluid C in between layers 11 and 14); a working medium enclosed in the internal space of the housing (at working fluid C); and a wick in the internal space of the housing (in layer 12), wherein the wick includes: a perforated body ( with perforations formed at cavities 121, and 122 and pores 123), the perforated body having a through-hole that penetrates the perforated body in the thickness direction (at the cavities 121 and 123 as seen in at least figures 1-3A); and a protrusion portion on a peripheral edge of the through-hole and extending in a direction toward the first inner wall surface (at the walls of cavities 121 and 122 which extends down toward the inner surface of metal layer 11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified the through holes of the perforated portion of Kojima to include the shaped protrusions around the perforations of Kurashima. Doing so would provide a perforated structure that could improve the heat dissipation of a heat pipe per paragraph 0006-0007 of Kurashima and could help maintain the vapor and liquid phases of the working fluid in different layers allowing for diffusion and return of the vapor and liquid phases of the working fluid respectively as recognized by Kurashima per paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 2, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion (at 122) has a cylindrical shape (pe paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 3, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 2 above and Kurashima further discloses protrusion portion has a flat end portion (where the side of cavity 121 extend to a flat surface facing layer 14 as seen in figure 1A and 2 additionally the cavities 121 and 122 may have a tapered polygonal shape per paragraph 0037 which would have flat surfaces).
Regarding claim 4, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 2 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion (at 122) has an uneven end portion (as seen in the embodiment of fugue 6A and 6B).
Regarding claim 5, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion (At the wall around cavity 122) extends from an entirety of the peripheral edge of the through-hole (as seen in figure .
Regarding claim 6, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion ( at the walls of cavities 121 and 122) has a first end portion on a first inner wall surface side ( the side of pore 123 on the side closest to the layer 11) and a second end portion on a second inner wall surface side (at the end of the cavity 121 closest to layer 14), and when viewed in the thickness direction, a cross-sectional area of a region surrounded by an inner wall of the first end portion is smaller than a cross-sectional area of a region surrounded by an inner wall of the second end portion (the diameter around the pore 123 is smaller than the diameter of the widest section of cavity 121 as seen in figure 1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 7, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 6 above and Kurashima further discloses when viewed in the thickness direction, the inner wall of the first end portion ( the side of pore 123 on the side closest to the layer 11) is located on an inside with respect to the inner wall of the second end portion (at the end of the cavity 121 closest to layer 14, as seen in figure 1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 8, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 7 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion has a tapered shape in which a distance between outer walls of the protrusion portion is narrowed in the direction toward the first inner wall surface in a cross section along the thickness direction ( cavity 121 narrows toward the pore 123 as seen in figure 1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 9, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kurashima further discloses the protrusion portion ( at the walls of cavities 121 and 122) has a first end portion on a first inner wall surface side (at the end of the cavity 122 closest to layer 11) and a second end portion on a second inner wall surface side (at the end of the cavity 121 closest to layer 14), and when viewed in the thickness direction, a cross-sectional area of a region surrounded by an inner wall of the first end portion is larger than a cross-sectional area of a region surrounded by an inner wall of the second end portion (the diameter around the widest section of cavity 122 is larger than the diameter of the widest section of cavity 121 as seen in figure 1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 10, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 9 above and Kurashima further discloses when viewed in the thickness direction, the inner wall of the first end portion (at the end of the cavity 122 closest to layer 11) is located on an outside with respect to the inner wall of the second end portion (at the end of the cavity 121 closest to layer 14, as seen in figure 1A and 1B).
Regarding claim 13, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima does not explicitly disclose a thickness of the support is the same as a thickness of the perforated body. As Kojima is silent as to the relative dimensions of the support 31 and perforated body 32.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Kojima to have a thickness of the support is the same as a thickness of the perforated body since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. In the instant case, the device of Kojima would not operate differently with the claimed relative dimensions the thickness of the support 31 below the perorated body32 and the thickness of the perforated body 32 allow for working fluid to flow between the supports 31 the device would function appropriately having the claimed relative thickness. Further, applicant places no criticality on the relative size claimed indicating simply that the relative thicknesses “may” be the same or different (per paragraph 0106 and 0107 of the specification).
Regarding claim 14, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima does not explicitly disclose a thickness of the support is smaller than a thickness of the perforated body. As Kojima is silent as to the relative dimensions of the support 31 and perforated body 32.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Kojima to have a thickness of the support be smaller than a thickness of the perforated body since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. In the instant case, the device of Kojima would not operate differently with the claimed relative dimensions the thickness of the support 31 below the perorated body32 and the thickness of the perforated body 32 allow for working fluid to flow between the supports 31 the device would function appropriately having claimed the relative thickness. Further, applicant places no criticality on the relative size claimed indicating simply that the relative thicknesses “may” be the same or different (per paragraph 0106 and 0107 of the specification).
Regarding claim 15, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima further discloses the perforated body (32) comprises a material that is the same as a material of the support ( per paragraph 0077) .
Regarding claim 16, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima further discloses the perforated body (32) comprises a material different from a material of the support (per paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 17, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima further discloses the support includes a plurality of columnar members (protruding portions 31 as seen in figure 3(a) and 3(b) and per paragraph 0059).
Regarding claim 18, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima further discloses the support includes a plurality of rail-shaped members (protruding portions 31 as seen in figure 3(a) and 3(b) and per paragraph 0059, since rail shaped is broadly defined in the claim the columnar shape of the protruding portions 31 could be argued to have a rail like shape)
Regarding claim 19, Kojima as modified discloses thee claim limitations of claim 1 above and Kojima further discloses an electronic apparatus comprising: the thermal diffusion device according (where the vapor chamber is attached to a heat generating member 70 which may be an electronic device per paragraphs 0003 and 0092).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Kojima as modified by Kurashima discloses the claim limitations of claims 6 and 9 as noted above However Kurashina does not additionally discloses wherein the protrusion portion includes a lid portion that narrows an opening of the protrusion portion, at the first end portion as the cavities 121 and 122 of Kurashima do not include any structure that can reasonably be interpreted as a lid as claimed. For at least these reason claims 11 and 12 appear to read over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang (US 7770631 B2), Zhang et al. (US 8377214 B2), Sheng (US 11131508 B2), and Ingaki et al. (US 20190141855 A1) disclose relevant structures for vapor chambers/heat pipes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANS R. WEILAND whose telephone number is (571)272-9847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-3 EST and alternating Fridays.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/HANS R WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights