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 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 1-20 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 and 16 recite the limitations: “a printed circuit board that is connectable to the pumping unit […] a second blind mate connector that is connectable to the first blind mate connector and is connectable to the pump cassette.”
Furthermore, claim 10 recites the limitations: “a first printed circuit board that is connectable to the pumping unit […] a second printed circuit board that is connectable to the pump cassette”.
The aforementioned italicized limitations “connectable” are open-ended limitations that render the claims indefinite, since it’s not clear whether relevant components are actually connected or not. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation (MPEP 2111.04 and 2103 (I) (C)). It has been held that the open-ended recitations stating that an element is capable to perform a function are not the positive limitations but only require the ability to so perform. They do not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138.
Just because something is capable of doing something, doesn’t actually mean it does it. “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). The Office hereby notes that the limitation “connectable” does not explicitly denote how features(s) are constructed and/or associated with other claimed limitations; whereas the claim is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions. If a claim is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, then the claim may be deemed indefinite. See Ex parte Miyazaki, 2008 WL 5105055 at *5(BPAI Nov. 19, 2008).
In the instant case, independent claims 1, 10, and 16 are drawn to “a cooling system”, which comprises in its assembled form the aforementioned components being interconnected (i.e., “connected”, not “connectable”). What is “connectable” are only the first and second “blind mate connectors”, whereas the remaining components are “connected” in the claimed assembled “cooling system”.
Accordingly, the aforementioned claims must be amended accordingly.
Furthermore, depended claims 2 and 17 positively set forth “a second circuit board”. However, the “first circuit board” has never been positively set forth in parent independent claims 1 and 16. This produces ambiguity and impreciseness. It appears that the limitation the “printed circuit board” should be the “first printed circuit board” in said independent claims 1 and 16.
Furthermore, claim 6 positively sets forth “a jumper that connects two signal terminals of the printed circuit board”. However, claim 3 positively sets forth “a first (second) jumper that connects two signal terminals of the printed circuit board”. It appears that two different limitations refer to the same component of the claimed apparatus. This produces ambiguity and impreciseness
Furthermore, the Office notes that numerous recited limitations do not have clear support in the specification, e.g., “a first (second) blind mate connector”, “a first (second) circuit board”, “a first (second jumper”, etc.
The Office reminds Applicant that the uniform terminology should be used throughout the claims. The claimed terminology should be consistent with the terminology of the specification and should follow the nomenclature of the specification. The terms and phrases used in claims must have a clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o) (e.g., the “printed (first) circuit board” should be the “chassis side circuit board”, the “second circuit board” should be the “cassette side circuit board”, the “first (second) blind mate connector” should be the “chassis (cassette) side blind mate connector”, etc.).
The remaining dependent claims have been also rejected, since they inherit the aforementioned problems of the respective parent claim(s).
Appropriate corrections are required. The Office requests Applicant’s cooperation with reviewing all pending claims and correcting all remaining informalities present in the claims, but not made of record above.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 16, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by 2006/0002080 to Leija et al. (hereafter “Leija”, cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Leija discloses: A cooling system, comprising: a liquid cooling circuit; (cooling system 200, see [0015]-[0016] and Figure 2) a pumping unit (leak-free connector 220 including housing 402 and designed to accommodate pump modules) that is configured to circulate liquid through the liquid cooling circuit, (see [0020], [0029]-[0032] and Figures 2, 4, 5A and 58) the pumping unit comprising a pump cassette: (pump modules 238 and 240) and a connection assembly for establishing electrical connections between the pumping unit and the pump cassette, the connection assembly comprising: a printed circuit board (blade, see [0002]) that is connectable to the pumping unit; (leak-free connector 220 mounted to the blade; two pump modules 238 and 240 mounted to the blade 202, see [0016]) a first blind mate connector that is connected to the printed circuit board; (electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220) and a second blind mate connector that is connectable to the first blind mate connector and is connectable to the pump cassette. (The mezzanine card 302 also includes an electrical connector 326 to interface with the electrical connector on the leak-free connector. When coupled with the corresponding electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220 (see FIG. 4), the electrical connector 326 provides the electrical power necessary to run the pumps 310 and 316, the logic circuitry (not shown) that is coupled to the LED 332 and to the fluid level sensor inside the reservoir, and any other devices on the mezzanine card requiring electrical power. The electrical connector 326 also provides a data connection between the blade 202 and the mezzanine card, see [0028] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood, Leija discloses: A cooling system, comprising:
a liquid cooling circuit; (cooling system 200, see [0015]-[0016] and Figure 2) a pumping unit (leak-free connector 220 including housing 402 and designed to accommodate pump modules) that is configured to circulate liquid through the liquid cooling circuit, (see [0020], [0029]-[0032] and Figures 2, 4, 5A and 5B) the pumping unit comprising a pump cassette: (pump modules 238 and 240) and a connection assembly for establishing electrical connections between the pumping unit and the pump cassette, the connection assembly comprising: a first printed circuit board (blade, see [0002]) that is connectable to the pumping unit; (leak-free connector 220 mounted to the blade; two pump modules 238 and 240 mounted to the blade 202, see [0016]) a first blind mate connector that is connected to the first printed circuit board; (electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220) a second printed circuit board (mezzanine card 302, see [0027]) that is connectable to the pump cassette; and a second blind mate connector that is connectable to the first blind mate connector and is connected to the second printed circuit board. (The mezzanine card 302 also includes an electrical connector 326 to interface with the electrical connector on the leak-free connector. When coupled with the corresponding electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220 (see FIG. 4), the electrical connector 326 provides the electrical power necessary to run the pumps 310 and 316, the logic circuitry (not shown) that is coupled to the LED 332 and to the fluid level sensor inside the reservoir, and any other devices on the mezzanine card requiring electrical power. The electrical connector 326 also provides a data connection between the blade 202 and the mezzanine card, see [0028] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 16, as best understood, Leija discloses: A cooling system, comprising:
a liquid cooling circuit; (cooling system 200, see [0015]-[0016] and Figure 2) a pumping unit (leak-free connector 220 including housing 402 and designed to accommodate pump modules) that is configured to circulate liquid through the liquid cooling circuit, (see [0020], [0029]-[0032] and Figures 2, 4, 5A and 58) the pumping unit comprising a pump cassette: (pump modules 238 and 240) that is hot-swappable from the pumping unit (see [0020] and [0030]) and a connection assembly for establishing electrical connections between the pumping unit and the pump cassette, the connection assembly comprising: a printed circuit board (blade, see [0002]) that is connectable to the pumping unit; (leak-free connector 220 mounted to the blade; two pump modules 238 and 240 mounted to the blade 202, see [0016]) a first blind mate connector that is connected to the printed circuit board; (electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220) and a second blind mate connector that is connectable to the first blind mate connector and is connectable to the pump cassette. (The mezzanine card 302 also includes an electrical connector 326 to interface with the electrical connector on the leak-free connector. When coupled with the corresponding electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220 (see FIG. 4), the electrical connector 326 provides the electrical power necessary to run the pumps 310 and 316, the logic circuitry (not shown) that is coupled to the LED 332 and to the fluid level sensor inside the reservoir, and any other devices on the mezzanine card requiring electrical power. The electrical connector 326 also provides a data connection between the blade 202 and the mezzanine card, see [0028] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 2, Leija discloses that the connection assembly comprises a second printed circuit board (mezzanine card 302, see [0027]) that is connected to the second blind mate connector; and the second blind mate connector is connectable to the pump cassette via the second printed circuit board (The mezzanine card 302 also includes an electrical connector 326 to interface with the electrical connector on the leak-free connector. When coupled with the corresponding electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220 (see FIG. 4), the electrical connector 326 provides the electrical power necessary to run the pumps 310 and 316, the logic circuitry (not shown) that is coupled to the LED 332 and to the fluid level sensor inside the reservoir, and any other devices on the mezzanine card requiring electrical power. The electrical connector 326 also provides a data connection between the blade 202 and the mezzanine card, see [0028] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 8, Leija discloses a fan configured to blow air across the liquid cooling circuit (see [0014]).
Regarding claims 9 and 15, Leija discloses that the pump cassette is hot-swappable from the pumping unit such that the pump cassette can be removed from the pumping unit and replaced with a second pump cassette (see [0020] and [0030]).
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.
Claims 7, 14 and 20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leija taken alone.
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Leija discloses that “the connector 220 includes electrical leads to provide power from the blade 202 to the mezzanine cards” (see [0020]).
It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in related arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the connection assembly of Leija by enabling the pumping unit to operate using a variable power supply as claimed, in order to predictably achieve flexibility and modularity required by specific applications and provide advantages in terms of cost savings and ease of configurability, since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined / modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination / modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 17, Leija discloses that the connection assembly comprises a second printed circuit board (mezzanine card 302, see [0027]) that is connected to the second blind mate connector; and the second blind mate connector is connectable to the pump cassette via the second printed circuit board (The mezzanine card 302 also includes an electrical connector 326 to interface with the electrical connector on the leak-free connector. When coupled with the corresponding electrical connector 426 on the leak-free connector 220 (see FIG. 4), the electrical connector 326 provides the electrical power necessary to run the pumps 310 and 316, the logic circuitry (not shown) that is coupled to the LED 332 and to the fluid level sensor inside the reservoir, and any other devices on the mezzanine card requiring electrical power. The electrical connector 326 also provides a data connection between the blade 202 and the mezzanine card, see [0028] and [0030]).
Furthermore, regarding claims 3-6, 11-13 and 17-19, the official notice of the facts outside of the current record is taken that the use of jumpers, dip switches and termination resistors in combination with connectors mounted to a PCB were notoriously known to the persons skilled in related arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in related arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the aforementioned components in Leija in order to achieve claimed functionality as an obvious design choice, since all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined / modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination / modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Conclusion
The additional prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure, because of the teachings of various modular cooling systems. Furthermore, the Office would like to direct the Applicant’s attention to the US 11, 395, 443 which could have been also used for statutory rejections of the at least independent claims (see Fig. 7 depicting pumping unit (600), pump cassettes (650a, 650b), and col. 3, ll. 32-35 reciting that “The liquid pumping unit can also include at least one blindly matable electrical connector configured to matingly engage or to matingly disengage from a complementary electrical
connector associated with the pump tray on insertion or removal, respectively, of the pump tray”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anatoly Vortman whose telephone number is (571)272-2047. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, between 10 am and 8:30 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, Jayprakash N. 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.
/Anatoly Vortman/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights