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 .
This office action is a response to Reopen prosecution after Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement(QPIDS) request after Notice of Allowance dated 05/13/2026, that was in response to a Quick Path IDS filed with request for continued examination dated 05/05/2026.
Claims 1-12 and 22- 29 are pending.
Claim 10 is amended.
Examiner Notes
Prosecution has been re-opened in view of the pertinent teachings found in the reference US Patent Publication No. 2024/0057296A1 to Gary et al., that was listed in the above mentioned Quick Path IDS filed 05/05/2026.
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 12, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. 2025/0024630 to Ge et al., (hereinafter Ge), in view of US Patent Publication No. 2024/0057296 to Gary et al., (hereinafter Gary)
Regarding claim 1, Ge teaches a controller configured to serve a cooling load of a data center facility (Control in data center for cooling, see 51-54, p9, Ge) comprising one or more computers in a rack group of one or more computer racks (Servers in racks, see P8, P2, Ge), the controller comprising one or more processing circuits configured to:
allocate an amount of heat generated by the one or more computers of the rack group (Heat generated electronic components in data center comprised of server racks, see P5, P8, Ge) into (i) a first amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into cool air provided by an air cooling system (Air cooling used, see P8, Ge) and (ii) a second amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into chilled water provided by a water cooling system (Liquid cooling, with liquid that can be water, see P8, p27, 26, Ge), wherein the air cooling system and the water cooling system operate in parallel to provide both the cool air and the chilled water to the rack group (Air stream and liquid cooling in parallel to provide cooling, see P8, P24, Ge);
operate the air cooling system to reject the first amount of heat from the rack group into the cool air (Air cooling is operated to remove heat from some components meaning a first amount of heat is rejected, see P24, P8, Ge);
and operate the water cooling system to reject the second amount of heat from the rack group into the chilled water (Liquid cooling is operated to remove heat from some components meaning a second amount of heat is rejected, see P24, P8, Ge).
Ge does not explicitly teach generate a reserve capacity constraint that requires an amount of heat rejection capability be available; and allocating an amount of heat comprises determining target values of a first amount of heat and a second amount of heat, wherein allocating an amount heat generated into a first amount of heat to be rejected and a second amount of heat to be rejected uses the reserve capacity constraint;
However, Gary from the same or similar field of computing systems and cooling, teaches generate a reserve capacity constraint that requires an amount of heat rejection capability be available (A capacity criteria of air cooling is established that includes a threshold that establishes a buffer/margin (i.e. a reserve capacity) and thus constrains the capacity of cooling to include at least said buffer/margin. The buffer/margin capacity is a heat rejection capability that would be available if required, see p34, Gary); and allocating an amount of heat comprises determining target values of a first amount of heat and a second amount of heat (An amount of heat can be allocated to air cooling up to a target threshold amount and an amount of liquid cooling with a utilization threshold target, and wherein see P60, 61, 34, Gary), wherein allocating an amount heat generated into a first amount of heat to be rejected and a second amount of heat to be rejected uses the reserve capacity constraint (Air and liquid cooling can be provided in consideration of using a reserve capacity threshold embodied at least as a buffer or safety margin in an air cooling capacity, see p34, P60, 61, 17, 20, Gary);
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by Ge and incorporating a consideration of a reserve capacity constraint in determination of target values of heat amounts, as taught by Gary.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better maintain a safety margin in the cooling capacity of a hybrid cooling system when cooling amounts of heat generated with air cooling and liquid cooling (see p34, P60, 61, 17, 20, Gary).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further discloses wherein the water cooling system comprises a chiller (Chiller, see P26, Ge) and the air cooling system comprises at least one of: a computer room air conditioner; or a computer room air handler (Computer room air conditioning (crac), see P24, p6, Ge).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches wherein the chiller is configured to provide cooling to the rack group and to the air cooling system (Chiller used in liquid cooling and for crac, see P26, 14, Ge).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further discloses wherein a computer rack of the rack group comprises: an immersion system, wherein computers of the computer rack are submerged in a non-conductive liquid and the water cooling system rejects heat via a heat exchange between the chilled water and the non-conductive liquid; a direct liquid system, wherein the chilled water is circulated through a heat exchanger connected to a computer of the computer rack; an indirect liquid system, wherein the water cooling system rejects heat via a heat exchange between the chilled water and a secondary fluid circulated through the heat exchanger connected to the computers of the computer rack; or a liquid to air system, wherein the water cooling system rejects heat via a water to air heat exchanger disposed in the computer rack (The cooling system includes liquid air heat exchanger (lahx) or rear door heat exchanger (rdhx) with water and chiller in various configurations, see P26-27, Figs., p8, p2, Ge).
Regarding claim 22, Ge teaches a controller configured to serve a cooling load of a data center facility (Control in data center for cooling, see 51-54, p9, Ge) comprising one or more computers in a rack group of one or more computer racks (Servers in racks, see P8, P2, Ge), the controller comprising one or more processing circuits configured to:
allocate an amount of heat generated by the one or more computers of the rack group (Heat generated electronic components in data center comprised of server racks, see P5, P8, Ge) into (i) a first amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into cool air provided by the air cooling system (Air cooling used, see P8, Ge) and (ii) a second amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into chilled water provided by the water cooling system (Liquid cooling, with liquid that can be water, see P8, p27, 26, Ge), wherein the air cooling system and the water cooling system operate in parallel to provide both the cool air and the chilled water to the rack group (Air stream and liquid cooling in parallel to provide cooling, see P8, P24, Ge); operate the air cooling system to reject the first amount of heat from the rack group into the cool air (Air cooling is operated to remove heat from some components meaning a first amount of heat is rejected, see P24, P8, Ge); and operate the water cooling system to reject the second amount of heat from the rack group into the chilled water (Liquid cooling is operated to remove heat from some components meaning a second amount of heat is rejected, see P24, P8, Ge).
Ge does not explicitly teach generate a timer constraint that requires at least one of: a currently operating equipment of a water cooling system or an air cooling system remain operating for a first period of time; or an equipment currently not operating of the water cooling system or the air cooling system remain not operating for a second period of time; and allocating an amount of heat comprises determining target values of a first amount of heat and a second amount of heat, wherein allocating an amount of heat generated into a first amount of heat to be rejected and a second amount of heat to be rejected uses the timer constraint;
However, Gary from the same or similar field of computing systems and cooling, teaches generate a timer constraint that requires at least one of: a currently operating equipment of a water cooling system or an air cooling system remain operating for a first period of time; or an equipment currently not operating of the water cooling system or the air cooling system remain not operating for a second period of time (An air cooling system operates for a first time period until a capacity threshold is met prior to liquid cooling engaging, see P34, Gary); and allocating an amount of heat comprises determining target values of a first amount of heat and a second amount of heat (An amount of heat can be allocated to air cooling up to a target threshold amount and an amount of liquid cooling with a utilization threshold target, and wherein see P60, 61, 34, Gary), wherein allocating an amount of heat generated into a first amount of heat to be rejected and a second amount of heat to be rejected uses the timer constraint (Air and liquid cooling can be provided in consideration of using a air cooling for a time period up until a threshold cooling capacity time is reached that imposes a limit or constraint on the time that air cooling is used until liquid cooling is engaged, see p34, P60, 61, 17, 20, Gary);
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by Ge and incorporating a consideration of a constraint related to time when a specific cooling is used and determination of target values of heat amounts, as taught by Gary.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better utilize a desired form of cooling at an initial time for a constrained amount of time until another cooling is engaged, such as to use a cooling that uses less energy initially than another form of cooling (see p34, P60, 61, 17, 20, Gary).
Claims 4, 5, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ge, in view of Gary, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2017/0231118 to Cader et al., (hereinafter Cader).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge teaches chilled water and air cooling (see P8, p27, 26, Ge)
Ge does not explicitly teach one or more processing circuits further configured to: obtain a load balance constraint that requires balance between (i) a heat production comprising an amount of heat generated by one or more computers of a rack group and (ii) a heat rejection comprising a first amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into cool air provided by an air cooling system and a second amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into liquid provided by a liquid cooling system; and allocate an amount of heat generated into the first amount of heat to be rejected and the second amount of heat to be rejected using the load balance constraint.
However, Cader from the same or similar field of data centers and heat consideration, teaches one or more processing circuits further configured to: obtain a load balance constraint that requires balance (Balance, see P26, Cader) between (i) a heat production comprising an amount of heat generated by one or more computers of a rack group and (ii) a heat rejection comprising a first amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into cool air provided by an air cooling system and a second amount of heat to be rejected from the rack group into liquid provided by a liquid cooling system (Air and liquid cooling provide balance to mitigate heat produced by components, see P26, Fig. 6, p39, Cader); and allocate an amount of heat generated into the first amount of heat to be rejected and the second amount of heat to be rejected using the load balance constraint (Air and liquid cooling amounts provide are allocated to mitigate heat produced by components, see p39, P26, Fig. 6, Cader)..
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating a balance of cooling to heat produced, as taught by Cader.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide heat mitigation to a data center and its components so that the systems function ass intended (see P26, Fig. 6, p39, Cader).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ge, Gary, and Cader teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches wherein an air cooling system is of a plurality of air cooling systems (Various air cooling systems, such as cracs, inlets, etc., p25, Ge), a water cooling system is of a plurality of water cooling systems (Various systems of a liquid cooling system, such as heat exchangers, chillers, etc., Figs., P26-27, 35, Ge), a rack group is of a plurality of rack groups (Racks in groups such as rows, see p6, p3, 35, Ge), wherein one or more processing circuits are further configured to: obtain a first indication of interconnections between the plurality of air cooling systems and the plurality of rack groups (Racks obtained with interconnected air cooling to indicative of air flow to racks, see Figs., p35, p8, 25-27, Ge); obtain a second indication of interconnections between the plurality of water cooling systems and the plurality of rack groups (Racks obtained with interconnected liquid cooling to indicative of flow to racks, see Figs., p35, p8, 25-27, Ge);
Ge does not explicitly teach generate load balance constraint that require for connected rack group of a plurality of rack groups balance between (i) a respective heat production comprising an amount of heat generated by one or more computers of the connected rack group and (ii) a respective heat rejection comprising a first respective amount of heat to be rejected from a connected rack group into cool air provided by connected air cooling systems of the plurality of air cooling systems rack group and a second respective amount of heat rejected from the connected rack group into the chilled water provided by connected water cooling systems of the plurality of water cooling systems; and allocate the amount of heat generated by the one or more computers of the connected rack group into the first respective amount of heat to be rejected and the second respective amount of heat to be rejected using the load balance constraint
Cader further teaches generate load balance constraint that require for connected rack group of a plurality of rack groups balance (Balance, see P26, Cader) between (i) a respective heat production comprising an amount of heat generated by one or more computers of the connected rack group and (ii) a respective heat rejection comprising a first respective amount of heat to be rejected from a connected rack group into cool air provided by connected air cooling systems of the plurality of air cooling systems rack group and a second respective amount of heat rejected from the connected rack group into the chilled water provided by connected water cooling systems of the plurality of water cooling systems (Air and liquid cooling provide balance to mitigate heat produced by components, see P26, Fig. 6, p39, Cader); and allocate the amount of heat generated by the one or more computers of the connected rack group into the first respective amount of heat to be rejected and the second respective amount of heat to be rejected using the load balance constraint (Air and liquid cooling amounts provide are allocated to mitigate heat produced by components, see p39, P26, Fig. 6, Cader).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating a balance of cooling to heat produced, as taught by Cader.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide heat mitigation to a data center and its components so that the systems function ass intended (see P26, Fig. 6, p39, Cader).
Claim 24 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.
Claims 6 and 25rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ge, in view of Gary, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2016/0062340 to Ogawa et al., (hereinafter Ogawa).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches an amount of heat generated (Heat generated electronic components in data center comprised of server racks, see P5, P8, Ge), a first amount of heat to be rejected (Air cooling used to reject an amount of heat that must occur at a specific time, see P8, Ge), and a second amount of heat to be rejected are specific to a time instance (Liquid cooling used to reject another amount of heat, see P8, p27, 26, Ge)and a controller (Controller, see 51-54, p9, Ge)
Ge does not explicitly teach to determine values of an amount of heat generated and an amount of heat to be rejected at a plurality of future time instances.
However, Ogawa from the same or similar field of temperature management of electronic devices, teaches to determine values of an amount of heat generated and an amount of heat to be rejected at a plurality of future time instances (Heat generation determined, as well as predicted future heat and intake temperature that rejects heat, see P8, P4, Ogawa).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating determination of heat for future instances, as taught by Ogawa.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better control and manage temperature by predicting heat generation to manage temperature mitigation (see P8, P4, Ogawa).
Claim 25 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 6.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ge, in view of Gary, in further view of Ogawa, and in further view of Chinese Patent Publication No. CN109189190B to Cui et al., (hereinafter Cui. English translation of CN109189190B is included and cited in this office action).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ge, Gary, and Ogawa teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches a rack group of a plurality of rack groups including the rack group (racks, see P8, P2, Ge), a water cooling (Liquid cooling, see P8, p27, 26, Ge) and air-cooling system (Air cooling, see P8, Ge).
Ge does not explicitly teach wherein an amount of heat generated at a plurality of future time instances is determined using a computer utilization ratio and a model trained with training data comprising training samples comprising a total cooling load of a cooling system and computer utilization ratio.
However, Cui from the same or similar field of data center thermal management teaches wherein an amount of heat generated at a plurality of future time instances is determined using a computer utilization ratio and a model trained with training data comprising training samples comprising a total cooling load of a cooling system and computer utilization ratio (Temperature heat generation at future times is predicted by using training data and cpu (computer) utilization ratio, see Pg. 2 Technical solution; Cui).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating prediction with training and utilization ration, as taught by Cui.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better ascertain probable temperature forecast so at to better manage temperature of devices and datacenter (see Pg. 2, Cui).
Claims 8, 9, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ge, in view of Gary, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2016/0234972 to Billet et al., (hereinafter Billet).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches an amount of heat generated (Heat generated electronic components in data center comprised of server racks, see P5, P8, Ge), a first amount of heat generated and first amount heat rejected (Air cooling used to reject an amount of heat, thus there is a first amount of heat generated and rejected by cooling, see P8, Ge), and a second amount of heat generated and a second amount of heat rejected (Liquid cooling used to reject another amount of heat, thus there is a second amount of heat generated and rejected by cooling see P8, p27, 26, Ge)
Ge does not explicitly teach wherein allocating an amount of heat generated into an amount of heat to be rejected comprises finding a solution to an optimization problem subjected to a load balance constraint that requires balance between (i) the amount of heat generated and (ii) the amount of heat to be rejected.
However, Bilet from the same or similar field of data center temperature control, teaches wherein allocating an amount of heat generated into an amount of heat to be rejected comprises finding a solution to an optimization problem subjected to a load balance constraint that requires balance between (i) the amount of heat generated and (ii) the amount of heat to be rejected (A balance is reached between the amount of heat generated by components and the amount of heat rejected by cooling in a data center by constraining temperatures related to devices to a range and by solving an optimization so as to determine setpoints solutions for the cooling system, see P6, P50, Billet).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating solving an optimization problem, as taught by Billet.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better control and manage temperature of a system to specified criteria while considering objectives and constraints that should be adhered to, such as determining the amount of cooling setpoints of a cooling system that will reject sufficient heat generated by components so as to attain a temperature in a desired range (see P6, p50, Billet).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ge, Gary, and Billet teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge further teaches an air cooling and liquid cooling system (Air cooling and Liquid cooling, see P8, p27, 26, Ge)
Billet further teaches optimization problem is to minimize an objective function comprising at least one of: a first amount of electrical energy consumed by a cooling system; a first amount of water consumed by the air cooling system and a second amount of water consumed by the water cooling system; or a first amount of greenhouse gas emissions caused by operating the air cooling system and second amount of greenhouse gas emissions caused by operating the water cooling system (Minimizing of total cooling system energy consumption in solving functions, see P6, P50, P90-91, Billet).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination including Ge and incorporating minimizing an objective, as taught by Billet.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better control and manage temperature of a system to specified criteria while considering objectives and constraints that should be adhered to, such as determining the amount of cooling setpoints of a cooling system that will reject sufficient heat generated by components so as to attain a temperature in a desired range, while attempting minimize the amount of energy wasted so as to pollute less and provide cost savings (see P6, p50, Billet).
Claim 26 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ge, in view of Gary, and in further view of US Patent Publication No. 2012/0303166 to Chang (hereinafter Chang).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ge and Gary teaches all the limitations of the base claim as outlined above, and are analyzed as previously discussed with regard to that claim.
Ge does not explicitly teach wherein a rack group is of a plurality of rack groups, one or more processing circuits further configured to generate a user interface comprising an indication of heat rejected from each rack group of the plurality of rack groups.
However, Chang from the same or similar field of data centers and heat consideration, teaches wherein a rack group is of a plurality of rack groups, one or more processing circuits further configured to generate a user interface comprising an indication of heat rejected from each rack group of the plurality of rack group (A multi rack system with display indicative of heat dissipation (i.e. rejected), see P134, Fig. 7, Chang).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cooling and thermal management as described by the combination that includes Ge and incorporating an interface indicative of heat rejected, as taught by Chang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to better provide information that can help discern the effectiveness of heat rejection/dissipation of a system so as to know if the system is working as intended (see P134, Fig. 7, Chang).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 27-29 are allowed.
Claim 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
While Ge discloses hybrid parallel cooling of racks by use of air cooling and water cooling to reject and amount of generated heat by the air cooling and an amount of generated heat by the water cooling discloses, and while Gary teaches consideration of an amount of cooling capacity that needs to be reserved as a safety margin and cooling with air cooling for a first period of time, none of these references, discovered within the allotted time for search and consideration, taken either alone or in combination with the prior art of record disclose:
(Claim 10) “…the one or more processing circuits further configured to: generate a timer constraint that requires at least one of: a currently operating equipment of a water cooling system or an air cooling system remain operating for a first period of time; or an equipment currently not operating of the water cooling system or the air cooling system remain not operating for a second period of time; and generate a switching constraint that, for an equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system, requires at least one of: the equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system transitions from operating to not operating a first number of times less than a switching threshold during a third time period; or the equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system transitions from not operating to operating a second number of times less than the switching threshold during the third time period; wherein allocating the amount of heat generated into the first amount of heat to be rejected and the second amount of heat to be rejected further uses the timer constraint and the switching constraint.”,
(Claim 23) “…generate a switching constraint that, for an equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system, requires at least one of: the equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system transitions from operating to not operating a first number of times less than a switching threshold during a third time period; or the equipment of the water cooling system or the air cooling system transitions from not operating to operating a second number of times less than the switching threshold during the third time period; and allocate the amount of heat generated into the first amount of heat to be rejected and the second amount of heat to be rejected using the switching constraint.”, and
in combination with the remaining elements and features of the claimed invention. It is for these reasons that the applicant’s invention defines over the prior art of record.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nagimov et al., US Patent Publication No. 2025/0035346 teaches device cooling that uses selective heat transfer loops with liquid cooling and air cooling capacities, and considers a temperature margin.
Martin et al., US Patent Publication No. 2024/0341067 teaches a modular cooling system for a data center where choosing which of chilling modules to activate is performed by minimizing a cooling capacity provided by an activated chiller module or combination of chiller modules subject to subject to a constraint that a cooling capacity is equal to or exceeds a require cooling capacity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILIO J SAAVEDRA whose telephone number is (571)270-5617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-5:30pm (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, Robert E Fennema can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/EMILIO J SAAVEDRA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights