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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 7/23/2026. The 35 USC 112 rejections have been withdrawn. Claims 1-7, 9 remain pending for consideration on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 1, applicant has added the limitation “the chamber is maintained under a reduced pressure environment less than atmospheric pressure”. Paragraph 0046 of the published applications describes in the jet flow evaporative cooling system 300 illustrated in FIG. 6, the refrigerant before passing through a refrigerant supply valve 117 is maintained at a pressure equal to or higher than atmospheric pressure. There is nothing in the originally filed claims, specification or drawings to support this newly added limitation of “the chamber is maintained under a reduced pressure environment less than atmospheric pressure”. Thus, the newly added limitation is deemed to be NEW MATTER.
In claim 9, applicant has added the limitation “wherein a degree of vacuum of the reduced pressure environment is 5 kPa or more and less than atmospheric pressure”. Paragraph 0030 of the published applications describes in a case where water is used as the refrigerant and the boiling point is to be set to approximately 33° C., the degree of vacuum in the space 120 can be set to 5 kPa. There is nothing in the originally filed claims, specification or drawings to support this newly added limitation of “wherein a degree of vacuum of the reduced pressure environment is 5 kPa or more and less than atmospheric pressure”. Thus, the newly added limitation is deemed to be NEW MATTER.
Claims 2-7 are rejected based on dependency from a rejected claim.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 20230065557) in view of Cader et al (US 7477513) and Tilton et al (US 20040060313).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a jet flow evaporative cooling system (fig. 1) that cools a heat generation unit (101) with a jet flow of liquid (fluid, paragraph 0032), the jet flow evaporative cooling system comprising: a heat transfer portion (body of 212 connected to 120) integrally formed with a cooling portion (212) configured to receive the jet flow of liquid and an arrangement portion (120) on which the heat generation unit is arranged; an opening portion (310, 320) configured to jet a liquid (paragraph 0032) supplied from a supply portion (330) to the cooling portion (paragraph 0032); and a chamber (220) configured to accommodate the opening portion, and the cooling portion (all accommodated in 110) and configured not to accommodate the arrangement portion therein (fig. 1), wherein the chamber is maintained under a reduced pressure environment (the increase of the internal pressure of the heat dissipating fluid caused by the expansion of the heat dissipating fluid under a phase change in the fluid flowing space can be reduced so as to effectively prevent from fluctuating the boiling point of the heat dissipating fluid when the dissipating fluid undergoes a phase change, paragraph 0022) less than atmospheric pressure (paragraph 0022 describes reduced pressure which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize is capable of being under atmospheric pressure), wherein the opening portion is configured to jet the liquid to the cooling portion (paragraph 0032) but fails to explicitly teach a drain portion configured to drain the liquid, a chamber configured to accommodate the drain portion, wherein at least a part of the cooling portion is inclined, wherein the liquid is drained from the drain portion via the cooling portion and wherein the inclined part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion.
However, Cader teaches a drain portion (opening of 52 in to 20) configured to drain the liquid (col. 5, lines 34-40), a chamber (interior of 20) configured to accommodate the drain portion (fig. 1), and wherein the liquid is drained from the drain portion via the cooling portion (fig. 1, col. 5, lines 34-40) wherein the part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion (fig. 1) to return waste coolant back to the thermal conditioning unit.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the jet flow evaporative cooling system of Chen to include a drain portion configured to drain the liquid, a chamber configured to accommodate the drain portion, and wherein the liquid is drained from the drain portion via the cooling portion; wherein the part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion in view of the teachings of Cader to return waste coolant back to the thermal conditioning unit.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach wherein at least a part of the cooling portion is inclined; wherein the inclined part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion.
However, Tilton teaches at least a part of the cooling portion (121) is inclined (fig. 2) wherein the inclined part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion (121 slopes to 123) to more effectively manage the desired thermal characteristics of the electronic component.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the jet flow evaporative cooling system of the combined teachings to include wherein at least a part of the cooling portion is inclined; wherein the inclined part of the cooling portion is configured such that non-vaporized liquid is guided toward the drain portion to suppress non-vaporized liquid from remaining on the cooling portion in view of the teachings of Tilton to more effectively manage the desired thermal characteristics of the electronic component.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach in the chamber, the cooling portion is arranged vertically below the opening portion (figs. 1-3 of Chen), and at least a part of the drain portion is arranged vertically below the cooling portion (fig. 1 of Cader).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach in the chamber, the cooling portion is arranged vertically above the opening portion (18b is arranged above 30b, fig. 3 of Cader), the drain portion is arranged vertically below the opening portion (fig. 3 of Cader), and the opening portion (30b, fig. 3 of Cader) is arranged vertically below the cooling portion and is arranged at a position different from a position of a vertical lower portion located at a lowest part of the cooling portion (fig. 2 of Cader).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach further comprising a jet unit configured to include the supply portion (annotated Fig. 1 of Cader), the opening portion (annotated Fig. 1 of Cader), and a partition portion (annotated Fig. 1 of Cader), wherein the partition portion is arranged near the opening portion to surround the opening portion in the jet unit (annotated Fig. 1 of Cader).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach an opening range of the opening portion is wider than an opening range of the partition portion (the spray from the opening is wider than the partition, fig. 1 of Cader).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach the cooling portion includes a groove portion formed by an upper groove portion (flat surface of 185 fig. 5 of Tilton) and a lower groove portion (triangle groove between two 185, fig. 5 of Tilton), and wherein at least a part of the upper groove portion and the lower groove portion is inclined in a direction in which the groove portion extends (fig. 5 of Tilton).
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach the liquid mainly contains water (water, paragraph 0006 of Chen).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (US 20230065557) in view of Cader et al (US 7477513) and Tilton et al (US 20040060313) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of O’Conner et al (US 20260076283).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein the liquid includes water (water, paragraph 0005 of Chen) but fails to explicitly teach wherein a degree of vacuum of the reduced pressure environment is 5 kPa or more and less than atmospheric pressure.
However, O’Conner teaches a degree of vacuum of the reduced pressure environment is 5 kPa or more and less than atmospheric pressure (10kPa to 30kpa, paragraph 0134 which is understood to be less than atmospheric pressure which is understood to be 101.325kPa) to ensure that water is cleared from sprayer so when pressure is reduced, there will be no ice formation on the outlet of sprayer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify the jet flow evaporative cooling system of the combined teachings to include wherein a degree of vacuum of the reduced pressure environment is 5 kPa or more and less than atmospheric pressure in view of the teachings of O’Conner to ensure that water is cleared from sprayer so when pressure is reduced, there will be no ice formation on the outlet of sprayer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with the reply have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that the reference does not teach less than atmospheric pressure, the Examiner disagrees. Chen describes wherein the chamber is maintained under a reduced pressure environment (the increase of the internal pressure of the heat dissipating fluid caused by the expansion of the heat dissipating fluid under a phase change in the fluid flowing space can be reduced so as to effectively prevent from fluctuating the boiling point of the heat dissipating fluid when the dissipating fluid undergoes a phase change, paragraph 0022) less than atmospheric pressure (paragraph 0022 describes reduced pressure which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize is capable of being under atmospheric pressure). Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant does not separately argue claims 2-7 except for the dependency from claim 1. Therefore the rejections are considered proper and maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3840. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-3:00 CT pm M-F.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571) 270-5054. 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.
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights