Email Communication
Applicant is encouraged to authorize the Examiner to communicate via email by filing form PTO/SB/439 either via USPS, Central Fax, or EFS-Web. See MPEP 502.01, 502.02, 502.03.
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Receipt is acknowledged of a 371 of international PCT application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08/14/2024 has been fully considered and is attached hereto.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of extensive mechanical and design details, and implied language. The Examiner suggests deleting reference characters.
The disclosure is objected to because reference character “2”, “3” and “34” has been used in the drawings (Figs 1A, 1B and 7), however specification does not mention them. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “2”, “3” and “34” has been used in the drawings (Figs 1A, 1B and 7), however disclosure does not mention them.
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 “each cold plate at a different angle relative to the support frame” in Claim 2, “cold plates at a second distance from the support frame” in Claim 3, “a heat exchanger” in Claim 16, “liquid coolant in series” in Claim 17, “gasket comprises one or more bosses” in Claim 22 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 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 Objections
Claims 5 and 23-24 are objected to because of the following unintelligible content informalities:
● In Claim 5, Line 3, “the respective at least one cold plate” should be changed to read - - a respective cold plate - -.
● In Claim 23, Line 3, “liquid coolant, preferably arranged such that liquid coolant” should be changed to read - - “liquid coolant arrange such that the liquid coolant” - -.
● In Claim 24, Line 3, “a plurality of electronic devices disposed on a circuit board” should be changed to read - - the plurality of electronic devices disposed on the circuit board - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 4-7, 11-13, 15-16, 18-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
The term "preferably" in Claims 2, 4-7, 11-13, 15-16, 18-21 and 23 is a relative term which renders the claims indefinite. The term "preferably" is not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Examiner suggest that the phrase "preferably" be excluded from the claim language. See; MPEP 2173.05(c)(I).
The term limitation “each, cold plate” in Claims 2, 4-5, 11, 15-16 and 19-21 renders the Claims indefinite, Examiner suggesting changing the term limitation to read “each cold plate”.
The term limitation “each, resilient member” in Claims 6 and 13 renders the Claims indefinite, Examiner suggesting changing the term limitation to read “each resilient member”.
The term limitation “adjustable, preferably by adjusting” in Claim 12 renders the Claim indefinite, Examiner suggesting changing the term limitation to read - - adjustable by adjusting - -.
The term limitation “and preferably four, cold plates” in Claim 18 renders the Claim indefinite, Examiner suggesting changing the term limitation to read to read - - and four cold plates - -.
Examiner Note; Applicant is reminded of that; in standard English grammar rule, the clause limitation always ends with a “comma” (,); therefore, a “comma” (,) cannot exist within a clause limitation.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent claim form for failing to incorporate every limitation of a single preceding claims and breaks rules for multiple dependencies.
With respect to Claim 13, Claim 1 is an independent form and does not depend on dependent claims 5 or 6, which is impermissible cumulative claiming, and thus improper. See MPEP 608.01(o), and Rule 37 CFR 1.75(c).
Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-19 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell et al (US 2007/0091570).
Regarding Claim 1, Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) discloses an apparatus (400) for cooling a plurality of electronic devices (414) disposed on a circuit board (410), the apparatus (400) comprising:
a plurality of cold plates (420), each cold plate (420) having a thermal interface surface for cooling an electronic device (414) thermally coupled thereto (Fig 4A); and
a support frame (412/430) to which each of the plurality of cold plates (420) is attached (Fig 4A), the support frame (412/430) configured for attachment to the circuit board (410) so as to hold the thermal interface surfaces of the plurality of cold plates (420) in thermal contact with the plurality of electronic devices (414), (Fig 4C); and
wherein the support frame (412/430) is arranged to hold the thermal interface surface of each of the plurality of cold plates (420) at a different position relative to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 2, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the position relative to the support frame (412/430) comprises an angle relative to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4C), and the support frame (412/430) is arranged to hold the thermal interface surface of at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) at a different angle relative to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 3, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the position relative to the support frame (412/430) comprises a distance from the support frame (412/430), and the support frame (412/430) is arranged to hold the thermal interface surfaces of a first subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) at a first distance from the support frame (412/430) and to hold the thermal interface surfaces of a second subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) at a second distance from the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 4, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) is rotatably attached to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 5, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) is attached to the support frame (412/430) by one or more resilient members (440, 450), the one or more resilient members (440, 450) configured to force the respective at least one cold plate (420) away from the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 6, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 5, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the apparatus (400) further comprising at least one alignment pin (460) configured to constrain an orientation of at least one, and preferably each, resilient member (440, 450), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 7, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the support frame (412/430) comprises a first portion (430) to which each of the plurality of cold plates (420) are attached and a second portion (412) that opposes the first portion (430), preferably wherein one or more resilient members (440, 450) are attached to the first portion (430) of the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 8, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 7, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the first portion (430) and the second portion (412) of the support frame (412/430) are configured to be drawn together, so as to hold the thermal interface surfaces of the plurality of cold plates (420) in thermal contact with the plurality of electronic devices (414), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 9, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 7, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the apparatus (400) further comprising one or more projections (body of 460 between 412 and 430), (Fig 4A) between the first portion (430) and the second portion (412) of the support frame (412/430), the one or more projections (body of 460 between 412 and 430) configured to limit a distance between the first portion (430) and the second portion (412) of the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 10, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 7, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the first portion (430) of the support frame (412/430) is a plate (Fig 4A); and/or the second portion (412) of the support frame (412/430) is a plate (Fig 4A); and/or the support frame (412/430) is configured to compress the plurality of electronic devices (414) between the plurality of cold plates (420) and the circuit board (410), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 11, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) is adjustably attached to the support frame (412/430), so as to permit adjustment of a distance between the support frame (412/430) and the thermal interface surfaces of at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420), (Fig 4A); and/or a distance between the support frame and the thermal interface surfaces of at least one, and preferably each, cold plate is independently adjustable.
Regarding Claim 12, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein a force exerted on the electronic devices (414) by at least one of the plurality of cold plates (420) is adjustable, preferably by adjusting a position of a base of a respective resilient member (440, 450), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 13, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein at least one, and preferably each, resilient member (440, 450) is attached to the support frame (412/430) by an adjustable attachment portion (460) configured to permit adjustment of a position of a base of the respective resilient member (440, 450), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 14, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 13, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the adjustable attachment portion (460) is threaded into the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 15, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a first subset and a second subset (Fig 4C), and at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) of the first subset of the plurality cold plates comprises: an inlet (435) arranged to receive liquid coolant so as to transfer heat from the electronic devices (414) to the liquid coolant (Fig 4B); and an outlet (437) arranged to provide the liquid coolant to the second subset of the plurality of cold plates (420), (Fig 4B).
Regarding Claim 16, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a first subset and a second subset (Fig 4C), and wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) of the second subset of the plurality cold plates (420) comprises: an inlet (435) arranged to receive liquid coolant from the first subset of the plurality cold plates (420) so as to transfer heat from the electronic devices (414) to the liquid coolant (Fig 4B); and preferably an outlet (437) arranged to provide the liquid coolant to: one or more further subsets of cold plates (420) of the plurality of cold plates (420), (Fig 4B); or a heat exchanger.
Regarding Claim 17, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a first subset and a second subset (Fig 4C), and wherein: the first subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a plurality of cold plates (420) arranged to receive liquid coolant in series or in parallel (Fig 4D); and/or the second subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a plurality of cold plates (420) arranged to receive liquid coolant in series or in parallel (Fig 4D).
Regarding Claim 18, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a first subset and a second subset (Fig 4C), and wherein: the first subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) comprises a plurality of, and preferably four, cold plates (420) arranged to receive liquid coolant in parallel and the second subset of the plurality of cold plates (420) is a single cold plate (420) arranged to receive liquid coolant from the first subset of the plurality of cold plates (420), (Fig 4D); and/or the first subset of the plurality of cold plates comprises a plurality of cold plates that are disposed around the second subset of the plurality of cold plates.
Regarding Claim 19, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 1, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (420) defines an internal volume arranged to receive liquid coolant into the internal volume (Fig 4C), so as to transfer heat from the electronic devices (414) to the internal volume of the respective cold plate (420), (Fig 4C).
Regarding Claim 24, Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) discloses a system (400) for cooling a plurality of electronic devices (414) disposed on a circuit board (410), the system (400) comprising:
a plurality of electronic devices (414) disposed on a circuit board (410), (Fig 4C); and an apparatus (400) configured to cool the plurality of electronic devices (414), the apparatus (400) comprising:
a plurality of cold plates (420), each cold plate (420) having a thermal interface surface for cooling an electronic device (414) thermally coupled thereto (Fig 4A); and a support frame (412/430) to which each of the plurality of cold plates (420) is attached, the support frame (412/430) configured for attachment to the circuit board (410) so as to hold the thermal interface surfaces of the plurality of cold plates (420) in thermal contact with the plurality of electronic devices (414), (Fig 4A); and
wherein the support frame (412/430) is arranged to hold the thermal interface surface of each of the plurality of cold plates (420) at a different position relative to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
Regarding Claim 25, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 24, however Campbell (In Figs 4A-4D) further discloses wherein an upper surface of each electronic device (414) is in thermal contact with at least one of the thermal interface surfaces of the plurality of cold plates (420), wherein the upper surfaces of each of the plurality electronic devices (414) are at different positions relative to the support frame (412/430), (Fig 4A).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Chu et al (US 2005/0128705).
Regarding Claim 20, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 19, however Campbell does not disclose wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate comprises one or more protrusions on an internal surface of the internal volume, preferably wherein the one or more protrusions comprise any one or more of: skiving; fins; pins; ridges; channels; and baffles.
Instead, Chu (In Fig 2) teaches wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (110) comprises one or more protrusions (132) on an internal surface of the internal volume (Fig 2), preferably wherein the one or more protrusions (132) comprise any one or more of: skiving; fins (132); pins; ridges; channels; and baffles, (Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with Chu with each cold plate comprises protrusions on an internal surface of the internal volume and the protrusions comprise fins to benefit from providing enhanced cooling system which effectively cools electronic devices, while improving system reliability by reducing the number of system points of failure (Chu ¶ 4, II. 1-25).
Regarding Claim 21, Campbell in view of Chu discloses the limitations of Claim 20, however Campbell as modified does not disclose wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate comprises a gasket therein, the gasket arranged to constrain the liquid coolant to flow around the one or more protrusions.
Instead, Chu (In Fig 2) further teaches wherein at least one, and preferably each, cold plate (110) comprises a gasket (gasket, ¶ 27, II. 24-29) therein, the gasket (gasket, ¶ 27, II. 24-29) arranged to constrain the liquid coolant to flow around the one or more protrusions (132), (Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with Chu with each cold plate comprising a gasket therein and the gasket arranged to constrain the liquid coolant to flow around the protrusions to benefit from providing enhanced cooling system which effectively cools electronic devices, while improving system reliability by reducing the number of system points of failure (Chu ¶ 4, II. 1-25).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Chu and further in view of Mira (US 5,662,163).
Regarding Claim 22, Campbell in view of Chu discloses the limitations of Claim 21, however Campbell as modified does not disclose wherein an interior surface of the cold plate and/or a surface of the gasket comprises one or more bosses arranged to engage a complementary surface of the gasket or interior surface of the cold plate, so as to align the gasket within the cold plate.
Instead, Mira (Fig 2) teaches wherein an interior surface of the cold plate (20) and/or a surface of the gasket comprises one or more bosses (22a-22d) arranged to engage a complementary surface of the gasket (26), (Fig 2) or interior surface of the cold plate, so as to align the gasket (26) within the cold plate (20).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with Chu and further with Mira with an interior surface of the cold plate and/or a surface of the gasket comprising bosses arranged to engage a complementary surface of the gasket so as to align the gasket within the cold plate to benefit from aligning the backing plate through holes in the gasket so that backing plate, gasket, substrate, heat generating device, heat sink and clasp plate being positioned to couple together (Mira Col 5, II. 29-34).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Kadhim et al (US 2024/0008220).
Regarding Claim 23, Campbell discloses the limitations of Claim 19, however Campbell does not disclose wherein at least one of the plurality of cold plates comprises a base and a retaining wall that together define a volume for holding liquid coolant, preferably arranged such that liquid coolant overflows over the retaining wall.
Instead, Kadhim (In Fig 3) teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of cold plates (1) comprises a base (16) and a retaining wall (7) that together define a volume for holding liquid coolant (Fig 3), preferably arranged such that liquid coolant overflows over the retaining wall (7), (¶ 59, II. 1-8), (Fig 3).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell with Kadhim with the plurality of cold plates comprising a base and a retaining wall that together defining a volume for holding liquid coolant such that liquid coolant overflows over the retaining wall to benefit from coldest coolant being directed to contact the hottest area of the heat sink (Kadhim ¶ 31, II. 1-9).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure; Assembly to Provide Thermal Cooling US 2012/0063098, Method of Assembling a Cooling System for a Multi-component Electronics System US 2008/0092387, Cold Plate and System for Cooling Electronic Devices US 2022/0418156, Liquid-Based Cooling System for Cooling a Multi-Component Electronics System US 2008/0084664. Other pertinent art made of record are on form PTO-892 notice of reference cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR JALALI whose telephone number is (303)297-4308. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached on 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 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/AMIR A JALALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights