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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 1/19/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CHINA 202410084738.4 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation of “its top”, wherein it is unclear what “its” is referring to. Specifically, it is unclear as to what the exact relationship the “its” have with the previous recited structure, since the term “its” is vague. Since the metes and bounds of the limitation cannot be ascertained, the limitation is indefinite , the claim is rendered indefinite and determined to be an antecedent basis issue. The phrase “its top” has been examined as -- the top of the trough body --.
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency from a claim that has been rejected.
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.
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.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim (s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qu CN ‘693 CN 115297693 A in view of Cheon US 2007/0133171 Al.
Re claim 1, Qu teach a liquid cooling system for an electronic device comprising a liquid guide tube (500, 600), a liquid cooling body (111), a multi-channel structure (figs 3, 5 showing internal with different channels, channels in between 120, 110) and a liquid collection device (240), wherein the liquid cooling body and the multi-channel structure are communicated through the liquid guide tube, and the liquid collection device continuously surrounds the multi-channel structure, the liquid guide tube, and the liquid cooling body.
Qu fail to explicitly teach a window.
Cheon teach has a window (70) to expose a heated surface of the liquid cooling body to provide viewing into the body (para ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a window as taught by Cheon in the Qu invention in order to advantageously allow for ability to see liquid level.
Re claim 2, Qu teach further comprising a detector (700) for detecting liquid leakage, wherein the detector is configured to obtain a leakage detection result before the liquid collection device is saturated with liquid (page 8).
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qu CN ‘693 CN 115297693 A in view of Cheon US 2007/0133171 Al and Franz et al. US 2022/0404079 Al.
Re claim 3, Qu teach wherein the liquid collection device is in a form of a protective shell, and a collection cavity is formed between the protective shell and at least one of the multi-channel structure, the liquid guide tube and the liquid cooling body (figs).
Qu, as modified, fail to explicitly teach the suction device.
Franz et al. teach further comprising a suction device (para 19); and the suction device is configured to suck liquid from the collection cavity to provide pumping in a cooling circuit .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include the suction device as taught by Franz et al. in the Qu, as modified, invention in order to advantageously allow for pressurized cooling lines.
Re claim 4, Qu teach wherein the liquid cooling body comprises a heated plate (110, 112) and a cover plate (120); a first sealing connection seam (seam for 160) is formed between the cover plate and the heated plate to seal a liquid cooling cavity defined by the cover plate and the heated plate, the heated plate and an edge of the window are sealingly connected to form a second sealing connection seam (seal for 260) surrounding the first sealing connection seam, and a pocket between the first sealing connection seam and the second sealing connection seam is communicated with the collection cavity.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QU CN ‘693 CN 115297693 A in view of Cheon US 2007/0133171 Al and Franz et al. US 2022/0404079 Al and Qu ‘886 US 20240310886 A1.
Re claim 5, Qu, as modified, fail to explicitly teach a protective outer tube.
Qu ‘886 teach wherein the protective shell comprises a first collection box arranged at the liquid cooling body, a protective outer tube (annotated fig ) sleeved on the liquid guide tube, and a second collection box arranged at the multi-channel structure; and two ends of the protective outer tube extend into (into contact with, figs) the first collection box and the second collection box respectively (noting two separate boxes associated with two cold plates, fig 10) to connect two heat dissipating units (noting in the instant combination two units of claim one are connected in series).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a protective outer tube as taught by Qu ‘886 in the Qu, as modified, invention in order to advantageously allow for enhanced sealing performance when cooling multiple units.
PNG
media_image1.png
584
525
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the independent claims, and specifically does not show every single detail of claim 6 combined with the claims claim 6 dep[ends from.
The closest prior art of record Qu (in combination with Qu, as modified, see above) teaches wherein the first collection box comprises a trough body (240) having an opening on its top and a first cover (250) covering the opening of the trough body (figs), a bottom of the trough body is provided with the window, and an edge of the heated plate is sealingly connected to the edge of the window (entire structure is sealed), but Qu as modified above, fail to teach “a gap is formed between an edge of the cover plate and an inner side wall of the trough body, so that liquid leaking from a sealing connection between the heated plate and the cover plate flows through the gap to a side of the cover plate away from the heated plate; and a sheet detector is laid on the cover plate and configured to detect whether there is leakage”.
Also, Re claim 6, US 20250169036 A1 teach a side window, and a leak detector, but fail to teach “wherein the first collection box comprises a trough body having an opening on its top and a first cover covering the opening of the trough body , a bottom of the trough body is provided with the window, and an edge of the heated plate is sealingly connected to the edge of the window (entire structure is sealed); a gap is formed between an edge of the cover plate and an inner side wall of the trough body, so that liquid leaking from a sealing connection between the heated plate and the cover plate flows through the gap to a side of the cover plate away from the heated plate; and a sheet detector is laid on the cover plate and configured to detect whether there is leakage”. Also, Re claim 6, US 20230413473 A1 teach a side window, but fail to teach “and a sheet detector is laid on the cover plate and configured to detect whether there is leakage”. Also, Re claim 6, US 20160120059 A1, US 20160120071 A1, US 20100290190 A1, US 7142425 B2 teach a window and a leak detector. Also, US 20260101473 A1 teach a side window but was not filed before the instant application.
The prior art fails to neither anticipate nor render obvious the applicants’ invention. Thus the applicants’ invention is novel and non-obvious in view of the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220065267 A1
US 20170215301 A1
US 20150036293 A1
US 20140218858 A1
US 20040008483 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GORDON A JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-1218. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5 M-F PST.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GORDON A JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights