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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 10 objected to because of the following informalities: The claim calls for “concave-convex” structure. Typically concave or convex imply a curvilinear surface, the drawings detailing straight edges for the flow channels. Appropriate correction is required.
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(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 6,005,772 to Terao et al.
Terao discloses;
As to claim 19, a heat sink (20, 21, 22 see FIG. 28), comprising: a thermally conductive plate (2), comprising: a first direction (direction towards 3); and a sealed chamber (21, 22, 23) with flow channels (21b/c) spaced apart in a second direction (left-right direction FIG. 28), wherein the flow channels are configured to distribute two-phase cooling medium (liquid refrigerant, col. 7, ll. 28-29), wherein each of the flow channels comprises: first ends (proximate 20); and second ends (proximate 22) that are spaced apart from the first ends in a third direction (up-down direction FIG. 28), wherein the second direction and the third direction are perpendicular to the first direction, and wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the third direction.
As to claim 20, the heat sink of claim 19, wherein the first ends meet in the sealed chamber (20), and wherein the second ends meet in the sealed chamber (22).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al.
As to claim 1, Terao discloses a heat sink (FIG. 28) comprising a thermally conductive plate (2), and wherein the thermally conductive plate comprises: a first side (adjacent 3) disposed in a first direction (out of page FIG. 28) of the thermally conductive plate, wherein the first side comprises a heat source assembly region (2A); a sealed chamber (21, 22, 23) comprising flow channels (21b/c) that are spaced apart in a second direction (left to right FIG. 28), wherein the flow channels are configured to distribute a two-phase cooling medium (liquid refrigerant, col. 7, ll. 28-29), wherein the flow channels comprise: first ends (top of 21 proximate 23); and second ends (bottom of 21 proximate 22) that are spaced apart from the first ends in a third direction (Up and down FIG. 28), wherein the first ends are located above the second ends, wherein the second direction and the third direction are perpendicular to the first direction of the thermally conductive plate, and wherein the second direction is perpendicular to the third direction; and a power element (3) disposed in the heat source assembly region, and in thermal contact with the thermally conductive plate. Terao fails to disclose a power conversion device comprising: a housing comprising a mounting cavity, wherein the thermally conductive plate is mounted in the housing, and a power element mounted in the mounting cavity. Miyata teaches a power conversion device ([0038] “The in-vehicle device 1 is, for example, a power converter”) comprising: a housing (10) comprising a mounting cavity (inside space of 10), wherein a thermally conductive plate (14) is mounted in the housing, and a power element (13) mounted in the mounting cavity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the heat transfer mechanism of Terao to be used in a power conversion scenario as taught by Miyata to facilitate cooling of heat generating power converting components.
As to claim 2, Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 1, wherein the first ends meet in the sealed chamber (as in they are in fluid communication in 23A), and wherein the second ends meet in the sealed chamber (in fluid communication in 2A).
As to claim 3, Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 2, wherein the sealed chamber comprises: a first sub-cavity (23) located at an upper end of the sealed chamber; and a second sub-cavity (22) located at a lower end of the sealed chamber, wherein the flow channels are located between the first sub-cavity and the second sub- cavity, wherein the first end communicates with the first sub-cavity, wherein the first ends meet using the first sub-cavity, wherein the second ends communicate with the second sub-cavity, and wherein the second ends meet using the second sub-cavity.
As to claim 5, modified Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 2. Terao fails to disclose wherein the thermally conductive plate further comprises sealed chambers that are separated from each other. This limitation in Applicant’s embodiment amounts to a duplication of parts, and it has been held that the duplication of parts requires only routine skill in the art (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)). Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to duplicate the devices of Terao and join them as such, in order to increase the capacity of the system.
As to claim 6, Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 1, wherein the thermally conductive plate further comprises a second side opposite to the first side, wherein the sealed chamber comprises a separation part between two adjacent flow channels of the flow channels (FIG. 27), wherein the separation part comprises two ends that are in the first direction and that are respectively connected to the first side and the second side (thermally connected as well as physically connected FIG. 26), and wherein the flow channels are formed between the separation part and a chamber wall of the sealed chamber (FIG. 27).
As to claim 7, Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 6, wherein the separation part, the first side, and the second side are integrated (col. 16, ll. 10-14).
As to claim 8, Terao discloses the power conversion device of claim 1, wherein the flow channels are direct flow channels (FIG. 28) extending in the third direction.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al. further in view of US 5,316,077 to Reichard.
As to claim 10, Terao in view of Miyata disclose the power conversion device of claim 1. Terao fails to disclose wherein each of the flow channels comprises a flow channel wall that is a concave-convex structure. Reichard teaches flow channels (Fig. 5) with concave-convex structure (inasmuch as put forth by applicant). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the flow channels of Terao with the structure of Reichard in order to increase surface area and thus heat transfer in the fluid channels.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al. further in view of CN 104048542 A to MA.
As to claim 11, Terao in view of Miyata disclose the power conversion device of claim 1. Terao fails to disclose wherein the thermally conductive plate further comprises a second side opposite to the first side, and wherein the power conversion device further comprises a first heat exchange structure disposed on the second side. MA teaches a heat exchange structure (3) disposed on a second side cooling chamber (1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the second side of the thermally conductive plate of Terao with a heat exchange structure as taught by MA in order to cool the fluid in the system by convection.
As to claim 12, modified Terao teaches the power conversion device of claim 11. Terao fails to disclose wherein the first heat exchange structure comprises a first toothed fin, and wherein the first toothed fin is connected to the second side. MA teaches toothed fin heat exchange structure (3) attached to a second side of a cooling chamber (1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the second side of the thermally conductive plate of Terao with a heat exchange structure as taught by MA in order to cool the fluid in the system by convection.
As to claim 13, modified Terao teaches the power conversion device of claim 12. Terao fails to disclose wherein the first toothed fin is a straight toothed fin comprising two ends that extend in the third direction. MA teaches a straight toothed fin (3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the second side of the thermally conductive plate of Terao with a heat exchange structure as taught by MA in order to cool the fluid in the system by convection. MA fails to teach two ends that extend in the third direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the direction of the fins of Terao in view of MA to extend in the third direction as a choice of design, applicant offering no criticality to the arrangement.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al. further in view of CN 104048542 A to MA further in view of US 6,808,015 to Osakabe.
As to claim 14, modified Terao teaches the power conversion device of claim 11. Terao fails to disclose wherein the first heat exchange structure comprises: a plurality of first toothed fins that are spaced apart in the second direction; and a fin disposed between two adjacent toothed fins of the first toothed fins, wherein the fin comprises two ends that are respectively connected to the two adjacent toothed fins on two sides. MA teaches a plurality of first toothed fins (3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the second side of the thermally conductive plate of Terao with a heat exchange structure as taught by MA in order to cool the fluid in the system by convection. Ma fails to teach the plurality of first toothed fins spaced apart in the second direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the direction of the fins of Terao in view of MA to be spaced apart in the second direction as a choice of design, applicant offering no criticality to the arrangement. Osakabe discloses fins (21, FIG. 6) disposed between two adjacent heat exchangers (2a) wherein the fins comprise two ends that are respectively connected to the two adjacent heat exchangers on two sides. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the heat exchange structure of Terao with fins as taught by Osakabe in order to increase the convection heat transfer of the system.
Claim(s) 15-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al. further in view of US 6,195,256 to Tiziani.
As to claim 15, Terao in view of Miyata disclose the power conversion device of claim 1. Terao fails to disclose wherein the thermally conductive plate further comprises a second heat exchange structure that is disposed on the first side. Tiziani teaches a heat exchange structure (2) disposed on a chip side of plate (7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the first side of Terao with the heat exchange structure of Tiziani in order to cool the heat generating device by convection as well as conduction.
As to claim 16, modified Terao teach the power conversion device of claim 15. Terao fails to disclose wherein the second heat exchange structure comprises a second toothed fin that is connected to the first side. Tiziani teaches a toothed fin heat exchanger (FIG. 2 display toothed fins, i.e. sharply pointed edges) attached to a chip side of a heat transfer device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the first side of Terao with the heat exchange structure of Tiziani in order to cool the heat generating device by convection as well as conduction.
As to claim 18, modified Terao teach the power conversion device of claim 15. Terao fails to disclose wherein the second heat exchange structure is located outside the heat source assembly region. Tiziani teaches heat exchange structure (2) located outside of an assembly region of chip (1) (outside the assembly region in that the assembly region is that surface underneath chip 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the first side of Terao with the heat exchange structure of Tiziani in order to cool the heat generating device by convection as well as conduction.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,005,772 to Terao et al. in view of US 2024/0298427 to Miyata et al. further in view of US 6,195,256 to Tiziani further in view of CN 104048542 to MA.
As to claim 17, modified Terao teach the power conversion device of claim 16. Terao fails to disclose wherein the second toothed fin is a straight toothed fin comprising two ends that extend in the third direction. MA teaches a straight toothed fin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the device of Terao with the straight toothed fin of MA in order to increase the heat exchange by providing an inconsistent heat exchange surface as taught by MA (see e.g. Abstract). Terao in view of Tiziani fails to teach fins that extend in a third direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the filing to modify the direction of the fins of Terao in view of MA to extend in the third direction as a choice of design, applicant offering no criticality to the arrangement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As to claim 4, the closest prior art US 6,005,772 to Terao, fails to teach a confluence channel disposed between two adjacent flow channels. As to claim 9, Terao fails to disclose the flow channels located inside the plate member, the flow channels in this instant being located outside of the plate member.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 5,316,077 to Reichard disclosing a radiating member with fluid channels.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMIL ALEXANDER DECKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6578. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm Mon-Fri.
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.
/JAMIL ALEXANDER DECKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/Jayprakash N Gandhi/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights