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
Claims 1, 3-6, 10-14, and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 3, and 6: every instance of “the power transistors” should be amended to recite “the plurality of power transistors” for consistent claim nomenclature.
Claim 3 Ln.11: the clause “placed on the plane” should be amended to recite “placed on the same plane” for consistent claim nomenclature.
Claim 4 Ln.7: the clause “inserted into the insertion hole through” should be amended to recite “inserted into the at least one insertion hole through” for consistent claim nomenclature.
Claim 5 Ln.5: the clause “to a cooling unit in the power converter” should be amended to recite “to the cooling unit in the power converter” since claim 1 provides the antecedent basis for the limitation.
Claims 10 and 11: the Office recommends amending both instances of the clause “wherein the laminar structure comprises three layers” to recite “wherein the at least one layer of the laminar structure comprises three layers” in order to make it clear as to what the relationship between the “at least one layer” of claim 9 and the “three layers” of claims 10 and 11 is since the original claims do not clearly outline the relationship.
Claim 12 Ln.1: the clause “A power converter” should be amended to recite “The power converter” since claim 12 is a linking claim that links to claim 1 that already provides the antecedent basis for the power converter in the preamble of claim 1.
Claim 12 Ln.3: the clause “a cooling unit” should be amended to recite “the cooling unit” since the cooling unit is in reference to the cooling unit of claim 1.
Claims 12-14: the Office suggests amending every instance of “the transistor unit” to recite “the transistor unit according to claim 1” for the sake of providing consistent claim nomenclature.
Claim 16 Ln.1: the clause “A motor vehicle” should be amended to recite “The motor vehicle” since claim 16 is a linking claim that links to claim 15 which provides the antecedent basis for the “motor vehicle” in the preamble of claim 15.
The Office notes that the above objections are a non-exhaustive list, and thus requests Applicant’s cooperation with reviewing the claims and correcting ALL remaining informalities present in the claims but not made of record above. Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-16 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.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is believed to be indefinite because of the limitation “a transistor”. Based on paragraph [0044] of Applicant’s specification (see US PG-Pub version of Applicant’s specification), it seems like the claimed “transistor” of claim 15 is supposed to refer to the transistor unit of claim 1, but the claim is structured such that the “transistor” is supposed to be different from the “transistor unit”. Therefore, it is indefinite as to whether or not the “transistor” if claim 15 is in fact supposed to be separate from the transistor unit of claim 1, if the “transistor” of claim 15 is supposed to refer to the transistor unit of claim 1, if the “transistor” of claim 15 is supposed to the plurality of power transistors of claim 1, or if the “transistor” of claim 15 is supposed to one of the plurality of power transistors of claim 1. For the purposes of compact prosecution and examination, the clause “a transistor” of claim 15 was interpreted as “the transistor unit according to claim 1” in order to be consistent with Applicant’s specification.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, for inheriting the deficiency of claim 15 since claim 16 is a linking claim that links back to claim 15.
See next page→
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 12-13, and 15-17, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tokuyama (US 20180013355)1.
Regarding claim 1, Tokuyama discloses (Figs.1-3B):
A transistor unit (300) for a power converter (299) comprising: a printed circuit board ([0060]: "The power semiconductor module 300 includes an insulation material 333. A wiring pattern is integrally formed on the insulation material 333"- 333 with the wiring pattern will define a "printed circuit board") populated with a plurality of power transistors (328 and 330), wherein the printed circuit board ([0060]) has at least one electrical wire (315D, 319D, 320D, and/or 327U,L) connecting (See Fig.2E) the transistor unit (300) within the power converter (299); a thermal conductor (305) on the power transistors (328 and 330) coupling the transistor unit (300) to a cooling unit (400) for the power converter (299) (Figs.2D-3B: 305 is on 328 and 330 via 333); and a transistor housing (302) configured to at least partially house (See Figs.2D-3) the printed circuit board ([0060]).
Regarding claim 17, Tokuyama discloses (Figs.1-3B):
A method of producing a power converter (299) comprising: assembling a transistor unit (300), wherein a printed circuit board ([0060]: "The power semiconductor module 300 includes an insulation material 333. A wiring pattern is integrally formed on the insulation material 333"- 333 with the wiring pattern will define a "printed circuit board") in the transistor unit (300) is populated with a plurality of power transistors (328 and 330), wherein the printed circuit board ([0060]) is at least partially contained (See Figs.2D-3A) in a transistor housing (302), and a thermal conductor (305) is placed on (Figs.2D-3B: 305 is on 328 and 330 via 333) the plurality of power transistors (328 and 330); and coupling (See Figs.2D-E) the transistor unit (300) to a cooling unit (400) with the thermal conductor (305) to produce the power converter (299).
Regarding claim 2, Tokuyama further discloses:
Wherein the transistor housing (302) comprises at least one housing element (See Figs.2D-3 and [0056]: 302 is at least one housing element).
Regarding claim 6, Tokuyama further discloses:
Wherein the transistor housing (302) at least partially encapsulates the printed circuit board ([0060]: "The power semiconductor module 300 includes an insulation material 333. A wiring pattern is integrally formed on the insulation material 333"- 333 with the wiring pattern will define a "printed circuit board") and the power transistors (328 and 330) (Figs.2D-3A: 302 will at least partially encapsulate the printed circuit board, 328, and 330 so that only 305 is exposed and in contact with 400), and/or wherein the transistor housing contains thermally conductive fillers.
Regarding claim 12, Tokuyama further discloses:
A power converter (299) for a vehicle ([0031]: "a hybrid vehicle and a pure electric vehicle") comprising: the transistor unit according to claim 1 (See Rejection of Claim 1 above); and a cooling unit (400) configured to cool the transistor unit (See Rejection of Claim 1 above), wherein the thermal conductor (305) for the transistor unit (See Rejection of Claim 1 above) is placed on (See Fig.2E) the cooling unit (400).
Regarding claim 13, Tokuyama further discloses:
A power converter housing (400 and 700), wherein the transistor unit (See Rejection of Claim 1 above) is placed (See Fig.2E) in the power converter housing (400 and 700), and wherein the cooling unit (400) forms part of the power converter housing (400 and 700) (Figs.2B-E: 400 forms a lower part of the power converter housing 400,700), or is integrated in the power converter housing.
Regarding claim 15, Tokuyama further discloses (using the interpretation outlined in the 112 rejection above):
An electric axle drive for a motor vehicle comprising: at least one electric machine ([0031]: "an electric motor"); the transistor unit according to claim 1 (See Rejection of Claim 1 above); and the power converter according to claim 12 (See Rejection of Claim 12 above).
Regarding claim 16, Tokuyama further discloses:
A motor vehicle comprising: the electric axle drive according to claim 15 (See Rejection of Claim 15 above).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuyama (US 20180013355) in view of Nascimento (US 20090225485).
Regarding claim 7, Tokuyama does not disclose:
A snubber capacitor on the printed circuit board.
Nascimento, however, teaches (Fig.1):
A snubber capacitor (38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Nascimento to modify the device of Tokuyama such that it has a snubber capacitor on the printed circuit board, as claimed, in order to better protect the transistor unit due to the snubber capacitor being able to further suppress overvoltages as taught by Nascimento ([0041]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuyama (US 20180013355) in view of Lampson (US 7135827).
Regarding claim 8, Tokuyama does not disclose:
An integrated gate driver on the printed circuit board.
Lampson, however, teaches (Fig.7):
An integrated gate driver (219) on the printed circuit board (201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Lampson to modify the device of Tokuyama such that it includes an integrated gate driver on the printed circuit board, as claimed, in order to provide a simple and efficient means of rapidly/quickly switching the plurality of power transistors on as taught by Lampson (Col.18 Lns.42-45).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuyama (US 20180013355) in view of Gottwald (US 20220183138).
Regarding claim 9, Tokuyama does not disclose:
Wherein the thermal conductor comprises a laminar structure with at least one layer, wherein the laminar structure contains an organic material, a ceramic material, a metallic material, a metallized ceramic, and/or a plastic.
Gottwald, however, teaches (Fig.3):
Wherein the thermal conductor (10) comprises a laminar structure (See Fig.3) with at least one layer (Fig.3: 10 is made up of three layers- 12, 14, and 16), wherein the laminar structure contains an organic material, a ceramic material ([0030] and [0034]: 12 is called a ceramic carrier and will thus contain a ceramic material), a metallic material, a metallized ceramic, and/or a plastic.
See next page→
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Gottwald to modify the device of Tokuyama such that the thermal conductor comprises a laminar structure with at least one layer that contains an organic material, a ceramic material, a metallic material, a metallized ceramic, and/or a plastic, as claimed, in order to further improve the overall heat dissipation capabilities (i.e., including the thermal conductor of Gottwald such that it is provided between the circuit board and thermal conductor of Tokuyama such that the combination of the thermal conductor of Gottwald and thermal conductor of Tokuyama define the claimed thermal conductor will further improve the overall thermal contact as taught in [0031] of Gottwald, and thus improving the overall heat dissipation capabilities).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Gottwald further teaches:
(Claim 10): Wherein the laminar structure (See Fig.3) comprises three layers (Fig.3: 10 is made up of three layers- 12, 14, and 16), wherein a middle layer (12) contains a different material than outer layers (14 and 16) (Fig.3 and [0034]-[0035]: 12 is made out of a different material than that of 14 and 16).
(Claim 11): Wherein the laminar structure (See Fig.3) comprises three layers (Fig.3: 10 is made up of three layers- 12, 14, and 16), wherein a middle layer (12) has a different curing characteristic than outer layers (14 and 16) (Fig.3 and [0034]-[0035]: 12 is made out of a different material than that of 14 and 16 and will thus have a different curing characteristic).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Gottwald to further modify the device of modified Tokuyama such that the laminar structure comprises three layers and arranged such that a middle layer contains a different material than outer layers, as claimed in claim 10, or such that a middle layer has a different curing characteristic than outer layers, as claimed in claim 11, in order to achieve the improved heat dissipation capabilities as outlined in claim 9 above.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tokuyama (US 20180013355) in view of Fukuchi (US 20220181233) (of record, cited in the IDS).
Regarding claim 14, Tokuyama does not disclose:
A retaining element configured to retain the transistor unit in the power converter, wherein the retaining element is configured to press the transistor unit against the cooling unit.
Fukuchi, however, teaches (Figs.1-4):
A retaining element (6) configured to retain the transistor unit (2) in the power converter (100), wherein the retaining element (6) is configured to press the transistor unit (2) against the cooling unit (35) (Fig.4 and [0040]: 6 will press 2 against 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Fukuchi to modify the device of Tokuyama such that it has a retaining element that retains the transistor unit in the power converter so that the retaining element presses the transistor unit against the cooling unit, as claimed, in order to further improve the thermal and mechanical connection between the transistor unit and the cooling unit due to the retaining element providing an improved contact between the two component.
See next page→
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, subject to the obviation of the objections outlined above.
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon an allowable claim that is dependent upon a rejected base claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the device as recited in the combined subject matter of claims 1 and 3, and at least in part, because claim 3 recites the limitations: “wherein the printed circuit board is embedded between the first housing element and the second housing element, wherein the first housing element has at least one contact window that exposes the power transistors, wherein the first housing element has an outer surface facing away from the printed circuit board that is in a same plane as cooling surfaces of the power transistors, and wherein the thermal conductor is configured to be placed on the plane”.
The aforementioned limitations, in combination with all remaining limitations of respective claim 3, are believed to render the combined subject matter of claims 1 and 3, and all claims depending therefrom allowable over the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, subject to the obviation of the objections outlined above.
The additional prior art references teach other devices and cooling systems that are related to that of the instant application. However, none of the remaining prior art references, taken alone or in combination, are believed to teach and/or suggest, at least, the aforementioned allowable limitations as respectively recited in claim 3. Therefore, none of the prior art references, taken alone or in combination, are believed to render the claimed invention unpatentable as claimed in claim 3.
Furthermore, none of the prior art references provided in the German Office action (of record, cited in the IDS, including Original Copy of the Search Opinion provided) are believed to teach and/or suggest, at least, the aforementioned allowable claim limitations as respectively claimed in claim 3. For all of the reasons outlined above, claim 3 is also believed to be allowable over the German Office action.
Finally, the Office has not identified any double patenting issues. For all of the reasons outlined above, claim 3 is believed to be in condition for allowance, subject to the obviation of the objections outlined above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20230208280: teaches how an integrated gate driver can be used to switch on power transistors.
US 20230137176: teaches a heat dissipation system for a plurality of power transistors in a power converter.
US 20230111154: teaches how an integrated gate driver can be used to switch on high-power switching devices like MOSFETs and IGBTs.
US 20230050545: teaches a heat dissipation system for a power converter.
US 20210148648: teaches a multi-layered heat sink.
US 8717765: teaches a PCB with power transistors and a snubber capacitor.
US 20150003019: teaches a power transistor that has a two-piece power transistor housing.
US 20140055973: teaches a snubber capacitor on a PCB.
US 20070053168: teaches fins of a heat sink having a laminate structure.
US 20070012429: teaches a heat sink that has a laminate structure.
US 5060112: teaches the use of a leaf spring to urge a power transistor against a wall of a heat sink.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN S SUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1243. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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 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.
/STEPHEN S SUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
1 Examiner’s Note: regarding method claim 17, since there are no specific method steps being claimed, just a general process of assembling the device (i.e., providing each element, forming, joining, inserting, connecting, etc.), the fact that the structure of the device of the present invention is anticipated over Tokuyama, means that the general method for providing such a structure is also anticipated in view of the same reference. The method steps recited in the claims are inherently necessitated by the structure of the device of Tokuyama.
Prosecution Insights