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 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 6 “the metal block” should read “the heat block” to properly align with its antecedent basis in lines 1-2.
Claim 1 lines 7-8 “the high-efficiency radiator” should read “a high-efficiency radiator” to properly establish antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harslund (WO 2008034442 A2)1 further in view of Kinstle (US 20160161998 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Harslund discloses (in at least figures 1-2, the description, and the claims) dry block temperature calibrator (fig. 2 and page 8 lines 24-27: temperature calibrating system 20)2, comprising a heat block (fig. 2 and page 5 lines 11-20: dry-block calibration unit 3) with a Peltier element on each side of the block (fig. 2: temperature regulating elements 7 extending around either side of dry block calibration unit 3. See page 5 lines 11-20: “temperature regulating elements 7 could be one or more Peltier elements”), and a heat sink (system 20 comprises multiple heat sinks. See fig. 2 and page 8 lines 28-31: cooling unit 21 comprises “a heat sink with a fan.” See also fig. 2 and page 5 lines 4-9: evaporating ends 6 of heat pipe/ thermo siphon 2 on either side of dry-block calibration unit 3 also function as a heat sink drawing heat away from dry block.) coupled to each Peltier element to perform heat exchange (fig. 2: heats sinks of cooling unit 21 coupled to elements 7 and dry block calibration unit 3 via heat pipe/ thermo siphon 2. See page 9 lines 5-16. See also page 5 lines 4-9), wherein the cooling of the Peltier element is performed by water (Page 1 lines 12-21: “The heat pipe is evacuated and back-filled with a small quantity of a working fluid such as water […]”), and consequently cooling the metal block used to test/calibrate temperature sensors (Page 9 lines 5-16: “The temperature of the calibration unit 3 will decrease rapidly due to the heat flow to the condenser 5.”), a siphon that directs the water flow to the high-efficiency radiator (Page 9 lines 5-16: “thermo siphon 2 will start transferring heat from the calibration unit 3 to the cooling unit 21.”fig. 2 and page 8 lines 28-31: cooling unit 21 with “a heat sink with a fan”), and then the water flow is recirculated to the heat sinks concluding the closed system (Page 9 lines 5-16. See also Page 1 lines 12-21.).
Harslund does not explicitly disclose a pump.
Kinstle discloses an analogous art (fig.’s 1-2 and par. 14: radiator 101 for an active cooling system that includes a thermo electric cooler device) comprising a pump that directs a water flow to a high-efficiency radiator (fig.’s 1-2 and par.’s 14-15: “ pump 102 forces liquid coolant from radiator 101 through tubing to chiller cold plate 103”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the pump, as taught by Kinstle, to be included in the device of Harslund to increase the rate of fluid circulation leading to improved heat transfer throughout the system (Kinstle par.’s 14-15 and par.’s 7-8).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes:
Gao (US 11740139 B2) discloses the calibrator according to certain limitations claim 1.
Bronlund (US 20200166416 A1) discloses the calibrator according to certain limitations claim 1.
Farley (US 20180274991 A1) discloses the calibrator according to certain limitations claim 1.
Hurst (US 20190049319 A1) discloses the calibrator according to certain limitations claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN MANCINI whose telephone number is (703)756-5796. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-5PM.
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, KRISTINA DEHERRERA can be reached at (303)297-4237. 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.
/EVAN MANCINI/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 Citations made to attached copy.
2 Note Harslund page 8 line 24-27: “Due to the similarities between the first and second embodiments, the same reference numerals will be used to refer to the same elements of the two embodiments.”
Prosecution Insights