CTNF 18/935,299 CTNF 96566 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “individual channels having a dimension measured toward and away from the base that is greater than a dimension measured along the base” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 26 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. Claim 26 recite the phrase “and/or” which renders the claim indefinite. This language is indefinite because it is not clear what is being claimed and what the scope is. No person of the ordinary skill in the art would know what “and/or” means with reasonable certainty. Therefore, the scope is unclear and for purposes of examination, the limitations that follow “and/or” will be considered in the alternative. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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 non-obviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 107170722 A, hereinafter Ye) . Regarding claim 21 , Ye teaches a thermal management device (dual-mode piezoelectric radiating structure, figure 1) comprising: a base (substrate 5); and, a fin pack (heat dissipation column 51) positioned on the base (figures 1-4), the fin pack comprising multiple elongate fins extending upwardly from the base (as shown on figure 4), the elongate fins cooperatively defining intakes (holes 52) that are proximate to the base (figure 4) and channels that are distal to the base (upper channels of columns 51, figure 4), the intakes configured to receive air flowing laterally along the base (the heat dissipation column 51 set at the bottom of the two air through holes 52, paragraph 0006) and the channels are configured to receive air from the intakes and to direct the air away from the base (heat dissipation column 51 is designed as hollow structure, the bottom is opened with an air inlet through hole 52, the heat in the heat dissipation column 51 up to the area of the top part, paragraph 0006), the channels providing radio frequency (RF) shielding (a person of ordinary skill in the art would determine that the heat dissipation columns 51 along with hole 52 will provide a shielding effect by superposing the radiating effect) by having a longitudinal dimension measured towards and away from the base (of heat dissipation column 51, figure 4) that is greater than a transverse dimension measured parallel to the base (as shown on figure 4). Further, it is understood, claim 21 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 22 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 107170722 A, hereinafter Ye) in view of Kaslusky et al (US 20190043783 A1, hereinafter Kaslusky) . Regarding claim 22 , Ye teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the channels include a curved lower portion proximate to the intakes. However, Kaslusky teaches wherein the channels (channels 67) include a curved lower portion (as shown on figure 2b) proximate to the intakes (as shown on figure 2b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the teachings of Ye to include wherein the channels include a curved lower portion proximate to the intakes in view of the teachings of Kaslusky in order to yield the predictable result of providing linear airflow through the curved airflow channels. Regarding claim 26 , the combined teachings teach wherein the base (base 15, paragraph 0026 of Kaslusky) comprises a heat spreader, a heat source, or a part of an electronic device (heat produced by the heat producing device 19 is transferred to the base 15, paragraph 0026 and as shown on figure 1 of Kaslusky) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 23-25 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 107170722 A, hereinafter Ye) in view of Kopp et al (WO 2004050256 A1, hereinafter Kopp) . Regarding claim 23 , Ye teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the intakes are tapered measured transverse the base. However, Kopp teaches wherein the intakes (duct 5, corresponding to hole 52 of Ye) are tapered measured transverse the base (stiffening 4, figure 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the teachings of Ye to include wherein the intakes are tapered measured transverse the base in view of the teachings of Kopp in order to yield the predictable result of a very uniform spray pattern. Regarding claim 24 , the combined teachings teach wherein the intakes (duct 5 of Kopp) taper from a relatively larger opening (as shown on figure 3 of Kopp) proximate to where the air is received in the intakes to a relative smaller opening distal to where the air is received in the intakes (towards the end of duct 5, as shown on figure 3 of Kopp, as modified). Regarding claim 25 , the combined teachings teach wherein the taper (as shown on figure 3 of Kopp) defines the longitudinal dimension of the channels (longitudinal dimensions of distributor openings 7, as shown on figure 3 of Kopp) so that channels proximate to where the air is received in the intakes have a relatively shorter longitudinal dimension (as shown on figure 3 of Kopp) than channels that are more distal to where the air is received in the intakes (as shown on figure 3 of Kopp). Regarding claim 38 , the combined teachings teach wherein the intake is tapered and wherein the channels have increasing longitudinal dimensions along the taper (as shown on figure 3 of Kopp) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 27-31, 36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaslusky et al (US 20190043783 A1, hereinafter Kaslusky) in view of Gao et al (CN 111386007 A, hereinafter Gao) . Regarding claim 27 , Kaslusky teaches an electronic device (paragraph 0026) comprising: a heat source (heat producing device 19); a base (base 15) configured to receive heat from the heat source (paragraph 0026); and, a fin pack (plurality of fins 16) positioned against the base (figure 2a) to define intakes configured to receive fluid flowing across the base (as shown on figure 1), the fin pack (plurality of fins 16) defining channels (curved channels 17) that receive fluid flowing through the intakes and across the base and guide the fluid away from the base (as shown on figure 1). Kaslusky teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach individual channels having a dimension measured toward and away from the base that is greater than a dimension measured along the base. However, Gao teaches individual channels (channels within heat sink 20a, figure 4) having a dimension measured toward and away from the base (toward base 21, figure 4) that is greater than a dimension measured along the base (upper dimension of surfaces 224-225 is greater the dimension within trough 223, as shown on figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the teachings of Kaslusky to include individual channels having a dimension measured toward and away from the base that is greater than a dimension measured along the base in view of the teachings of Gao in order to yield the predictable result of providing direct contact to form a transfer path of heat. Further, it is understood, claim 27 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. Regarding claim 28 , the combined teachings teach wherein the heat source comprises a processor (heat producing device 19 with which the cooling system 10 can be used include, but are not limited to, microprocessors, paragraph 0026 of Kaslusky). Regarding claim 29 , the combined teachings teach wherein the heat source (heat producing device 19 of Kaslusky) physically contacts the base (contacting base 15, as shown on figure 1 of Kaslusky), or wherein the heat source is separated from the base by TIM, or wherein the heat source is fluidly coupled to the base. Regarding claim 30 , the combined teachings teach wherein the base (base 15 of Kaslusky) comprises a solid material (appearing to comprise of a solid material, figures 1-2 of Kaslusky) or wherein the base comprises a heat pipe. Regarding claim 31 , the combined teachings teach wherein the electronic device (paragraph 0026 of Kaslusky) comprises a personal computer (the heat producing device 19 with which the cooling system 10 can be used include, but are not limited to, microprocessors, car conversion electronics, power switches, and telecommunications equipment, paragraph 0026 of Kaslusky) or wherein the electronic device comprises a video game console. Regarding claim 36 , the combined teachings teach all the limitations of claims 21 and 27. See rejections of claims 21 and 27. Regarding claim 39 , the combined teachings teach wherein the channels (curved channels 17 of Kaslusky) comprise a curved lower portion (figure 2a of Kaslusky) and an upper portion that extends in the longitudinal direction (figure 2a of Kaslusky) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 32-35, 37 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaslusky as modified by Gao, as applied to claim 27 above, and in further view of Ye (CN 107170722 A, hereinafter Ye) . Regarding claim 32 , the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the intakes are configured to cause the fluid flowing across the base to flow parallel to the base. However, Ye teaches wherein the intakes (holes 52) are configured to cause the fluid (air, figure 7) flowing across the base to flow parallel to the base (air flowing parallel along substrate 5 to hole 52, figure 7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the combined teachings to include wherein the intakes are configured to cause the fluid flowing across the base to flow parallel to the base in view of the teachings of Ye in order to yield the predictable result of effectively increasing the central region of the cold air reaches heat dissipation column which is beneficial for heat dissipation. Regarding claim 33 , the combined teachings teach wherein the channels (within columns 51, figure 7 of Ye) guide the fluid away from the base (away from substrate 5, figure 7 of Ye) in a longitudinal direction extending away from the base (figure 7 of Ye). Regarding claim 34 , the combined teachings teach wherein the channels (within columns 51, figure 7 of Ye) are parallel to one another (figure 5 of Ye), or wherein the channels are not parallel to one another. Regarding claim 35 , the combined teachings teach wherein the channels (within columns 51, figure 7 of Ye) are straight walled (figure 7 of Ye) or wherein the channels are curved. Regarding claim 37 , the combined teachings teach wherein the channels (within columns 51, figure 7 of Ye) have equal longitudinal dimensions (as shown on figures 3-4 of Ye). Regarding claim 40 , the combined teachings teach wherein the intake (holes 52 of Ye) and the channels (within column 51, figure 7 of Ye) collectively cause the fluid to follow a path (figure 7 of Ye) that starts parallel to the base (parallel to substrate 5, figure 5 of Ye) and then curves away from the base (figure 7 of Ye). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm. 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. /DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 2 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 3 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 4 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 5 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 6 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 7 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 8 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 9 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 10 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 11 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/935,299 Page 12 Art Unit: 3763
Prosecution Insights