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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the connecting plate (see claim 5) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: control assembly (e.g. a controller) in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1-10 recite “and corresponds to an area where the joint and the at least part of the pipeline assembly” (see claim 1, lines 4-5) which renders claims 1-10 indefinite. Said recitation is given no patentable weight.
Claim 2 recites “are provided in a split manner” which renders claim 2 indefinite. Claim 2 is interpreted such that said trough and cooling plate are described as two elements.
Claim 5 recites “embodies as a collecting tray” which renders claim 5 indefinite. Claim 5 is interpreted such that the liquid collecting trough is configured as a collecting tray (e.g. the trough is capable of acting as a collecting tray).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhu (CN115297693A).
Regarding claim 1,
Zhu teaches a liquid collecting device (see par. 52), comprising a cooling plate 100, and a liquid collecting trough 210 provided surrounding a joint 300 connected to the cooling plate, wherein the liquid collecting trough is provided with a liquid collecting opening (e.g. the opening of trough 210, not labeled), which faces at least part of a pipeline assembly connected to the joint (see Fig. 3) and corresponds to an area where the joint and the at least part of the pipeline assembly, to allow a liquid cooling medium leaking from the at least part of the pipeline assembly as well as a connection position between the joint and the cooling plate to be collected in the liquid collecting trough (see pars. 59-62).
Regarding claim 2,
Zhu teaches wherein the liquid collecting trough and the cooling plate are provided in a split manner (e.g. as two elements), and the liquid collecting trough is located outside the cooling plate (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3,
Zhu teaches further comprising an enclosing barrier 240, wherein the enclosing barrier is arranged to enclose a periphery of the joint (see Fig. 2), and the enclosing barrier and the cooling plate together form the liquid collecting trough (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4,
Zhu teaches wherein the cooling plate comprises a heat-dissipating plate 110 (e.g. wherein plate 110 comprises at least support 111 and substrate 112 which dissipates heat, see pars. 55, 64) and a cover plate 120 arranged on the heat-dissipating plate, the enclosing barrier 240 (see Fig. 2) is arranged surrounding the cover plate, and a sealing ring is provided between the enclosing barrier and the cover plate to seal a gap therebetween (see at least par. 58); and a mounting groove, having a depth smaller than a thickness of the sealing ring, is provided on an outer wall of the cover plate, and the sealing ring is fitted in the mounting groove (see at least par. 58).
Regarding claim 5,
Zhu teaches the liquid collecting trough 210 is embodied as a collecting tray arranged on the cooling plate (see par. 57), wherein the collecting tray is provided with a through hole 220 for the joint to pass through; the collecting tray comprises a loop-shaped protruding structure that protrudes towards the at least part of the pipeline assembly (see Fig. 2, wherein “loop shaped is interpreted to refer to some shape comprising a continuous polygon protruding upwards or downwards from any element), to form the liquid collecting trough 210; and the collecting tray further comprises a connecting plate 120, the loop-shaped protruding structure is provided on the connecting plate, and the connecting plate is connected to the cooling plate 100.
Regarding claim 7,
Zhu teaches wherein the cooling plate comprises a heat-dissipating plate 110 (e.g. wherein plate 110 comprises at least support 111 and substrate 112 which dissipates heat, see pars. 55, 64) and a cover plate 120 arranged on the heat-dissipating plate, and the liquid collecting trough is a groove provided on the cover plate (see Figs. 2-4).
Regarding claim 8,
Zhu teaches a flow guiding structure (e.g. at least element 500), wherein the flow guiding structure is configured to be provided on the joint and cooperate with the at least part of the pipeline assembly; and the flow guiding structure extends into the liquid collecting trough (see Figs. 2-5), to guide the liquid cooling medium leaking from the at least part of the pipeline assembly into the liquid collecting trough.
Regarding claim 9,
Zhu teaches a cover 250, which is arranged on the liquid collecting trough to prevent the liquid cooling medium from leaking out of the liquid collecting trough.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu.
Regarding claim 6,
Zhu teaches wherein the pipeline assembly comprises a liquid guide tube (not labeled, see Figs. 2-4) and an anti-leakage outer tube 500 sleeved outside the liquid guide tube, but does not teach a leakage detection strip is provided on an inner wall of the anti-leakage outer tube.
However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of, and advantages of, a leakage detection strip would be well known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Zhu with the motivation of providing a user with advance notice of a leak at a potential origin of said leak.
Regarding claim 10,
Zhu teaches a suction mechanism (e.g. the mechanism comprising at least outlet assembly 400) connected to the liquid collecting trough and configured to draw the liquid cooling medium out of the liquid collecting trough, wherein the suction mechanism comprises: a liquid suction tube (not labeled, see Figs. 2-4) with one end extending into the liquid collecting trough; a liquid suction assembly 400, which is connected to the liquid suction tube to draw the liquid cooling medium out of the liquid collecting trough via the liquid suction tube; a leakage detector 700, which is located in the liquid collecting trough and configured to detect an amount of liquid cooling medium in the liquid collecting trough (see par. 76); and a control assembly (see par. 76), which is electrically connected to the leakage detector and the liquid suction assembly (see par. 76).
Zhu teaches that the detector 700 can send a reminder or alarm to a user (see par. 77), but does not teach that said control assembly (is configured) to control the liquid suction assembly to be started to draw the liquid cooling medium out of the liquid collecting trough when the amount of liquid cooling medium in the liquid collecting trough exceeds a warning level.
However, said configuration, and advantages of said configuration, would be well known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Zhu such that said control assembly comprises said configuration with the motivation of automatically removing a leaked liquid while warning a user of said leak.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Amos teaches a liquid cooled immersion device with collection trough.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE S TANENBAUM whose telephone number is (313)446-6522. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 AM - 7 PM.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at (571) 272-6681. 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.
/Steve S TANENBAUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights