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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102:
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 16-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chiang et al. (US 2026/0150232, herein “Chiang”).
Regarding claim 1, Chiang discloses:
an apparatus (100) (figs. 1 and 7) comprising:
a first plate (120) (fig. 7) [par. 0053], the first plate (120) including a first plurality of fins, the first plurality of fins being arranged to have a first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, below); and
a second plate (110) (fig. 7) [par. 0048], the second plate (110) including a second plurality of fins, the second plurality of fins being arranged to have a second fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, below), wherein when the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) are assembled together, the first plurality of fins and the second plurality of fins are interleaved to form a first fin array, the first fin array having a third fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
349
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The recitations "a first plurality of fins integrally formed thereon" and "a second plurality of fins integrally formed thereon" are considered to be product by process limitations (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the product taught by Chiang is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim. Further, Chiang alludes to the option of integrally manufacturing the structure (100) [par. 0051, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7].
Regarding claim 2, Chiang discloses:
the first plate (120) further including a third plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2) integrally formed thereon (as it applies to claim 1, above), the third plurality of fins having the first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), wherein when the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) are assembled together, the third plurality of fins forms a second fin array, the second fin array having the first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Regarding claim 3, Chiang discloses:
the first plate (120) further including a third plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2) integrally formed thereon (as it applies to claim 1, above), and the second plate (110) further including a fourth plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2) formed thereon, the third plurality of fins having the first fin density, the fourth plurality of fins having a fourth fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), wherein when the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) are assembled together, the third plurality of fins and the fourth plurality of fins form a second fin array, the second fin array having a fifth fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Regarding claim 4, Chiang discloses:
the second plate (110) including a surface, and wherein when the first plate (110) and the second plate (110) are assembled together, the first plurality of fins is bonded to the surface (as it applies to claim 1, Chiang alludes to the option of having the structure 100 being manufactured by bonding [par. 0051, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7] (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Regarding claim 6, Chiang discloses:
when the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) are assembled together, the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) form a cold plate (10) [par. 0049 and 0067], the apparatus (100) further including:
a liquid cooling solution arrangement (that provides coolant to the apparatus 100, par. 0049 and 0067-0068), the liquid cooling solution arrangement including an inlet and an outlet (shown in fig. 12, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7), the inlet being arranged to provide a liquid to the cold plate (100), the outlet being arranged to carry the liquid away from the cold plate (100) [par. 0067-0068].
Regarding claim 7, Chiang discloses:
a system (figs. 1 and 7) (as disclosed in par. 0049 and 0067-0068) comprising:
a heat source [par. 0048]; and
a liquid cooling arrangement (that provides coolant to the apparatus 100, par. 0049 and 0067-0068), the liquid cooling arrangement including a cold plate (100), a liquid source (the source of coolant flowing through plate 100, see fig. 12, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7), a liquid inlet (I), and a liquid outlet (O) (see fig. 12, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7), the liquid cooling arrangement arranged to cool the heat source [par. 0049], wherein the cold plate (100) includes a first plate (120) including a first plurality of fins having a first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2) and a second plate (110) including a second plurality of fins having a second fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), the first plurality of fins being interleaved with the second plurality of fins to form a first fin array having a third fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), and wherein the liquid source provides a liquid through the liquid inlet (I) to the cold plate (100) and the liquid outlet (O) carries the liquid away from the cold plate (100) [par. 0049].
Regarding claim 8, Chiang discloses:
the second plate (110) including a surface, and wherein the first plurality of fins is bonded to the surface (Chiang alludes to the option of having the cold plate 100 being manufactured by bonding [par. 0051, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7].
Regarding claim 16, Chiang discloses:
an apparatus (100) (figs. 1 and 7) comprising:
a first plate (120) (fig. 7), the first plate (120) including at least a first plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2); and
a second plate (110) (fig. 7), the second plate (110) including a surface and at least a second plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), wherein the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) are coupled (fig. 7).
The recitations "a first plurality of fins integrally formed thereon", "a second plurality of fins integrally formed thereon" and "the at least first plurality of fins is bonded to the surface" are considered to be product by process limitations (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the product taught by Chiang is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim. Further, Chiang alludes to the option of integrally manufacturing the structure (100) or by bonding, par. 0051, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7.
Regarding claim 17, Chiang discloses:
the at least first plurality of fins being interleaved with the at least second plurality of fins (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Regarding claim 20, Chiang discloses:
the first plate (120) and the second plate (110) forming a cold plate (100), the apparatus further including:
a liquid cooling solution arrangement (that provides coolant to the apparatus 100, par. 0049 and 0067-0068), the liquid cooling solution arrangement including an inlet and an outlet (shown in fig. 12, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7), the inlet being arranged to provide a liquid to the cold plate (100), the outlet being arranged to carry the liquid away from the cold plate (100) [par. 0067-0068].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103:
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 5 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang.
Regarding claim 5, Chiang discloses:
the first plate (120) being formed from a metal [par. 0053], and wherein the first plurality of fins is bonded to the surface using one selected from a group including diffusion bonding, blazing, and friction bonding [par. 0051, as it applies to the embodiment of fig. 7] (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Chiang does not specifically disclose the second plate (110) being formed from metal. The Examiner takes Official Notice of heat dissipation plates as part of cooling plates for electronic devices comprised of metal materials and the selection of any of these known materials would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 18, Chiang discloses:
the at least first plurality of fins including a first fin and a second fin (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), but does not disclose the first fin and the second fin each having a fin thickness of approximately 0.1 millimeters, wherein the first fin and the second fin are spaced apart by a distance of between approximately 0.2 millimeters and approximately 0.3 millimeters.
However, although the specific thickness of the fins and the distance that separates the first and second fins are not disclosed by Chiang, the thickness of the fins and the distance that separates the fins are designed to optimize heat transfer depending on several design constraints, including, for example, the velocity of the coolant fluid passing through the fins and the amount of heat to be dissipated. Absent criticality or unexpected results of the claimed ranges, the thickness of the fins and the distance that separate the fins are considered result-effective variables, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the thickness of the fins and the distance that separate the fins through routine experimentation to arrive at a suitable heat dissipation value. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II). It is further noted that, absent criticality or unexpected results, changes in size or proportion are considered a routine modification to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 19, Chiang discloses:
the at least second plurality of fins including a third fin and a fourth fin (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), and the third fin being disposed between the first fin and the second fin, but does not disclose the third fin and the fourth fin each having the fin thickness of approximately 0.1 millimeters, wherein the third fin and the fourth fin are spaced apart by a distance of between approximately 0.2 millimeters and approximately 0.3 millimeters.
However, although the specific thickness of the fins and the distance that separates the first and second fins are not disclosed by Chiang, the thickness of the fins and the distance that separates the fins are designed to optimize heat transfer depending on several design constraints, including, for example, the velocity of the coolant fluid passing through the fins and the amount of heat to be dissipated. Absent criticality or unexpected results of the claimed ranges, the thickness of the fins and the distance that separate the fins are considered result-effective variables, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the thickness of the fins and the distance that separate the fins through routine experimentation to arrive at a suitable heat dissipation value. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II). It is further noted that, absent criticality or unexpected results, changes in size or proportion are considered a routine modification to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang in view of Yang et al. (US 2024/0060729, herein “Yang”).
Regarding claims 9 and 12, Chiang discloses:
the first plate (120) further including a third plurality of fins having the first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2).
Chiang does not disclose:
the heat source including a first area and a second area, the first area being arranged to generate a first amount of heat, the second area being arranged to generate a second amount of heat, the first amount of heat being greater than the second amount of heat, wherein the first fin array is arranged over the first area, as claimed in claim 9, and wherein the first fin array is arranged to absorb the first amount of heat, as claimed in claim 12.
However, Yang teaches that cooling systems (as seen in fig. 10, as it applies to fig. 7) for electronic devices comprising heat sources (C1, C2) including a first area (at C2) and a second area (at C1) [par. 0035-0036], the first area (at C2) being arranged to generate a first amount of heat, the second area (at C1) being arranged to generate a second amount of heat [par. 0035-0036], the first amount of heat being greater than the second amount of heat [par. 0035-0036] being provided with a highest fin arrangement density in position to the high temperature region (at C2) (fig. 7) in order to improve heat dissipation [par. 0036], are old and known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate into Chiang the teachings of Yang to have the heat source including a first area and a second area, the first area being arranged to generate a first amount of heat, the second area being arranged to generate a second amount of heat, the first amount of heat being greater than the second amount of heat, and to have the fin arrays being arranged over a respective area according to the heat generating amount of the respective area, and to absorb the amount of heat of the respective area. Further, Chiang alludes to the option of using fin structures of various shapes and sizes [par. 0048].
Regarding claims 10 and 13, the combination of Chiang and Yang discloses:
the third plurality of fins (Chiang) forming a second fin array having the first fin density (see annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2), and wherein the second fin array is arranged over the second area (claim 10) to absorb the second amount of heat (claim 13), as a matter of an obvious design choice, according to the user’s heat dissipating requirements, as taught by Yang.
Regarding claims 11 and 14, as it applies to claims 9-13, above, based on the teachings of Yang and the user’s heat dissipating requirements, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the third plurality of fins (Chiang, annotated fig. 7-CHIANG, page 2) cooperating with the second plate (Chiang, 110) to form a second fin array having a fourth fin density, and wherein the second fin array is arranged over the second area (claim 11) to absorb the second amount of heat (claim 14).
Regarding claim 15, Chiang discloses:
the heat source (semiconductor device) being a computing system [par. 0048].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6018. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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, 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.
/GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights