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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered. (Note that about three dozen references appear to be listed in the specification without a corresponding information disclosure statement having been filed.) Due to the multiplicity of references listed in this manner, the examiner has not considered the various listed references.
Drawings
The replacement drawings were received on January 30, 2025. These drawings are acceptable for beginning examination, but are still objected to for the reasons set forth below.
The drawings filed on January 30, 2025 are objected to because the line quality is generally poor due in part to the drawings not being in black ink as required and due in part to the lettering being too small to be readily readable. 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 the 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.
Color photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(h), one set of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system or three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if not submitted via the via USPTO patent electronic filing system, and, unless already present, an amendment to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the specification:
The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.
Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings and black and white photographs have been satisfied. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(2).
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it includes acronyms in parenthesis (recommend removing the acronyms entirely), because it does not avoid legal phraseology normally reserved for claims (i.e., “comprising), because it does not provide a concise summary of the salient elements of the inventive apparatus (i.e., “can include” appearing throughout the abstract), and because it does not avoid referring to the purported merits and speculative merits of the invention (i.e., the last sentence of the abstract). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: the extensive use of uncommon acronyms (i.e., “MCHS”, “FPM-HP”, “DLCF”, “DLPF” throughout the specification renders the specification difficult to read and to search. Applicant is required to replace the various uncommon acronyms with the corresponding terminology written out in full throughout the specification. It is acceptable to leave the acronyms where they are tied to the corresponding terminology written out in full when first introduced in order to leave the acronyms in place in one location in the specification for consistency with the priority documents, for example.
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 through 5 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.
For example, it is not clear whether the acronyms enclosed in parenthesis are intended to be included or excluded in the claims, thus rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claims. Examples of these parenthesis enclosed acronyms are: “”(MCHS)” [claim 1, line 2; claim 3, line 2]; and, “FPM-HP” [claim 2, line 2; claim 3, line 3]. Furthermore, in order to enhance readability and searchability and clarity, uncommon or unusual acronyms such as the aforementioned ones should not be claim limitations.
The terms “local” and “high” in claim 3 are relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “local” and “high” are not defined by the claim, the specification do 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. Thus, as used to quality the heat generation, these terms render the same indeterminate and the claim and all claims depending therefrom indefinite.
Furthermore, it is not at all clear which combination configurations are intended to be encompassed by the limitations “are combined to optimize hotspot management in electronics cooling applications that involve local high heat generation” [claim 3, lines 3-5], thus further rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claim and by all claims depending therefrom.
With regard to claims 4 and 5 as written, the limitation “in a parallel flow configuration” [claim 4, line 2] and “in a counter flow configuration” [claim 5, line 2] fail to clearly set forth specifically which particular relative configurations of the heat pipe and of the heat sink are intended to be encompassed thereby, and it is further unclear whether the flow through only the heat sink is being addressed thereby or not, thus further rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Aa best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claims, claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vafai (Pub. No. US 2002/0135980 A1).
With regard to claim 1 of the instant application, Vafai discloses a microchannel heat sink (i.e., see at least paragraph [0007] and claim 15).
With regard to claim 2 of the instant application, Vafai discloses a flat plate heat pipe 108 (i.e., see Figure 3 and Figure 4; see also paragraph [0044)] with dimensions disclosed as being of an order of magnitude (i.e., measured in millimeters) and thus inherently micro-sized as recited by the claim.
With regard to claim 3 of the instant application, Vafai discloses a microchannel heat sink (i.e., as noted above with regard to claim 1 of the instant application) and a flat plate micro heat pipe 108 (i.e., as noted above with regard to claim 2 of the instant application) which may be present in combination (i.e., see at least abstract and paragraph [0007]) in high heat flux electronic cooling.
With regard to claim 4 of the instant application, Vafai discloses that the heat sink has substantially parallel micro-channels (i.e., see at least paragraph [0020] which are at least broadly readable on the parallel flow configuration as recited by the claim as best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claims.
With regard to claim 5 of the instant application, Vafai discloses that the heat sink also has layers of microchannels with flow in opposite directions therethrough (i.e., see at least paragraph [0020]; also see at least Figure 15) which are at least broadly readable on the counter flow configuration as recited by the claim as best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claims.
The reference thus reads on the claims.
Conclusion
The additional related and/or prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LJILJANA V CIRIC whose telephone number is (571)272-4909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Saturday, flexible.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/Ljiljana V. Ciric/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
LJILJANA (Lil) V. CIRIC
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights