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 .
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, 502.05.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 9/24/2024, 6/9/2025, 9/2/2025, 6/10/2026 have been fully considered and are attached hereto.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yasuyuki et al. (JP H04108422 – hereinafter, “Yasuyuki”, cited on the IDS filed 6/10/2026).
With respect to claim 1, Yasuyuki teaches (In Fig 1) an electronic endoscope processor (10, “endoscope system device”) comprising: a housing (9); a partition plate (15) that partitions an internal space of the housing into a first space below and a second space above (See Fig 1), the partition plate having a first aperture (15a) that is an aperture allowing the first space and the second space to communicate with each other (See Fig 1); and an exhaust fan (17b) that is attached to the housing and exhausts air in the first space to an outside (See Fig 1), wherein a first intake hole (11b) through which outside air is acquired into the first space and a second intake hole (11a) through which outside air is acquired into the second space are formed in the housing (See Fig 1).
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, 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 2-3, 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuyuki in view of Dalheimer (US 6,618,248).
With respect to claim 2, Yasuyuki teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above and Yasuyuki further teaches one or a plurality of heat generating components (12) that are arranged in the first space and generate heat during operation (See Fig 1).
Yasuyuki fails to specifically teach or suggest an air flow adjusting plate that is arranged between the first aperture and each of the heat generating components in the first space and adjusts an air flow entering the first space through the first aperture to be directed to each of the heat generating components.
Dalheimer, however, teaches an air flow adjusting plate (21) that is arranged between a first aperture (31) and a the heat generating component (Power supply unit) in a first space (24) and adjusts an air flow entering the first space (24) through the first aperture to be directed to the heat generating component (See Figs 1 and 5, air flow through an aperture in a partition plate, through the airflow adjusting plate (21) and across the power supply unit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dalheimer with that of Yasuyuki such that, in Yasuyuki, an air flow adjusting plate that is arranged between the first aperture and each of the heat generating components in the first space and adjusts an air flow entering the first space through the first aperture to be directed to each of the heat generating components, as taught by Dalheimer, since doing so would allow for the air flowing from the second space to be guided over the heat generating component which would allow for further air cooling of the heat generating component.
With respect to claim 3, Yasuyuki as modified by Dalheimer teaches the limitations of claim 2 as per above and Dalheimer further teaches wherein a second aperture (Second opening of 23) that is an aperture for adjusting a wind speed and/or a wind amount of the air flow directed to each of the heat generating components (Power supply unit) is formed in the air flow adjusting plate (21, see Figs 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dalheimer with that of modified Yasuyuki such that modified Yasuyuki further includes a second aperture that is an aperture for adjusting a wind speed and/or a wind amount of the air flow directed to each of the heat generating components is formed in the air flow adjusting plate, as taught by Dalheimer, since doing so would allow for the air flow adjusting plate to provide a desired wind speed/amount to the heat generating component(s).
With respect to claim 6, Yasuyuki as modified by Dalheimer teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above and Dalheimer further teaches a peripheral edge of a first aperture (31) has a turbulence generating structure (5) that generates turbulence in an air flow passing through the first aperture.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dalheimer with that of Yasuyuki such that, in Yasuyuki a peripheral edge of a first aperture has a turbulence generating structure that generates turbulence in an air flow passing through the first aperture, as taught by Dalheimer, since doing so would increase heat transfer from the heat generating component in the first space.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuyuki in view of Tomioka et al. (US 2011/0075365 – hereinafter, “Tomioka”).
With respect to claim 4, Yasuyuki teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest that the second intake hole is larger than the first intake hole.
Tomioka, however, teaches a first intake (23) which is larger than a second intake (24, ¶ 0026).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tomioka with that of Yasuyuki such that, in Yasuyuki, the first intake is larger than the second intake, as taught by Tomioka, since doing so would reduce strain on the exhaust fan (17b) relative to both the first and second intakes being the same size.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuyuki in view of McQueen (US 2022/0389731).
With respect to claim 5, Yasuyuki teaches the limitations of claim 1 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest a size of the first intake hole is set in such a manner than an air flow is fastest in the first space and the second space.
McQueen, however, teaches a size of an intake hole (132) is set in such a manner than a fluid flow is fastest in a space (¶ 0027, “The adjustable openings 132 may be allow for various flow rate configurations as desired, such as an unobstructed configuration (FIG. 4) allowing for a maximum flow rate through the housing 126 and a partially obstructed configuration (FIG. 5) in which the size of the openings is less than FIG. 4, and thereby the flow rate is decreased.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of McQueen with that of Yasuyuki such that, in Yasuyuki a size of the first intake hole is set in such a manner than an air flow is fastest in the first space and the second space, as taught by McQueen, since doing so would allow for maximum heat transfer to the air.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuyuki in view of Dalheimer and further in view of Hosoda (JP 2000102504).
With respect to claim 7, Yasuyuki as modified by Dalheimer teaches the limitations of claim 3 as per above but fails to specifically teach or suggest a peripheral edge of a second aperture has a turbulence generating structure that generates turbulence in an air flow passing through the second aperture.
Hosoda, however, teaches (In Fig 4) a peripheral edge of a second aperture (Aperture of 16 adjacent 23) has a turbulence generating structure (See Fig A below) that generates turbulence in an air flow passing through the second aperture.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Hosoda with that of modified Yasuyuki such that, in modified Yasuyuki a peripheral edge of the second aperture has a turbulence generating structure that generates turbulence in an air flow passing through the first aperture, as taught by Hosoda, since doing so would increase heat transfer from the heat generating component in the first space.
PNG
media_image1.png
383
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 7,218,517 to Wolford et al. which teaches a cooling apparatus for vertically stacked printed circuit boards.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY M PAPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2201. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am - 6pm EST.
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, JAYPRAKASH Gandhi can be reached at 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 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.
/ZACHARY PAPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights