DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment received on 10/22/2025. Amended claims 1, 10 and 13-15 are acknowledged. Claims 1-10 and 13-28 are pending. Claims 11-12 are cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “wherein the plurality of the plurality of deformed…” should read –wherein the plurality of deformed…--.
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 20 and 22 is 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 20, in line 2, it is unclear what “a sheet” the claim is referring to. Per paragraphs 0084, 0087, 0109 and 0111 of the instant specification PG Pub, a planar mesh (210 of figs. 2, 8A, 19A, 32A and 38; 510 of figs. 5A-5B; 1110 of figs. 11A-11B and 12A; and 1415 of fig. 14) made of nonwoven mesh may comprise an ordered or nonordered arrays of holes etched in the mesh. Nowhere in the instant specification there is reference to the deformed mesh (which is the “the mesh” of line 1 of claim 20) comprising an ordered or nonordered arrays of holes etched in the mesh.
For the purpose of this examination and based on the instant specification and figures 11A-11B, the claim has been interpreted to mean:
--wherein the thermal ground plane further comprises a planar mesh with ordered or nonordered array of holes etched in the planar mesh.--
Regarding claim 22, it is unclear if the “the deformed mesh” of lines 5-6 is the same as the “a mesh” of line 5.
In line 7, it is unclear what “a sheet” the claim is referring to. Per paragraphs 0084, 0087, 0109 and 0111 of the instant specification PG Pub, a planar mesh (210 of figs. 2, 8A, 19A, 32A and 38; 510 of figs. 5A-5B; 1110 of figs. 11A-11B and 12A; and 1415 of fig. 14) made of nonwoven mesh may comprise an ordered or nonordered arrays of holes etched in the mesh. Nowhere in the instant specification there is reference to the deformed mesh comprising an ordered or nonordered arrays of holes etched in the mesh.
For the purpose of this examination, the claim has been interpreted to mean:
--A thermal ground plane, including:
a first casing layer;
a second casing layer where outer peripheries of the second casing layer are hermetically sealed with outer peripheries of the first casing layer to form a housing case;
a planar mesh with ordered or nonordered array of holes etched in the planar mesh;
a deformed mesh disposed between the first casing layer and the second casing layer, the deformed mesh comprising:
a plurality of undeformed portions, wherein the plurality of undeformed portions form a plurality of ridges; and
a plurality of deformed portions that are compressed relative to the undeformed portions; and
a working fluid filled between the first casing layer and the second casing layer.--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102:
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 1-9, 15, 17-18 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hsu (US 2006/0162905).
Regarding claim 1, Hsu discloses:
a thermal ground plane (1) (figs. 6-8) (it is noted, element -1- is a plate-line planar heat pipe, which is a type of vapor chamber/thermal ground plane, known in the art) [abs., lines 1-2] comprising:
a first casing layer (top plate of 1) (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, below);
a second casing layer (bottom plate of 1) where outer peripheries of the second casing layer (bottom of 1) are hermetically sealed with outer peripheries of the first casing layer (top of 1) to form a
a deformed mesh (11) (mesh 11 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) disposed between the first casing layer (top of 1) and the second casing layer (bottom of 1) (figs. 6-8),
the deformed mesh (11) comprising:
a plurality of undeformed portions (111) (fig. 8); and
a plurality of deformed portions (110) (mesh 110 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) that are compressed relative to the undeformed portions (111) (compressed, since the deformed portions 110 are compressed/flattened during manufacturing, seen figures 6-7);
wherein outer edges of the deformed mesh extend toward the outer peripheries of the first casing layer and outer peripheries of the second casing layer (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, below); and
a working fluid filled between the first casing layer (top of 1) and the second casing layer (bottom of 1) [par. 0021].
PNG
media_image1.png
323
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Hsu discloses:
the plurality of undeformed portions (111) comprising a plurality of pillars (figs. 6-8).
Regarding claim 3, Hsu discloses:
the plurality of undeformed portions (111) forming a plurality of ridges (the elongated pillars are read as ridges) (figs. 6-8).
Regarding claim 4, Hsu discloses:
The deformed mesh (11) comprising a porous mesh (the mesh 11, being a metallic web mesh, par. 0018, is read as a porous mesh).
Regarding claim 5, Hsu discloses:
the plurality of deformed portions (110) being formed from plastic deformation (figs. 6-8) (since plastic deformation is defined as: the permanent distortion that occurs when a material is subjected to tensile, compressive, bending, or torsion stresses that exceed its yield strength and cause it to elongate, compress, buckle, bend, or twist).
Regarding claim 6, The recitation "the plurality of deformed portions are formed from inelastic deformation" is considered to be a product by process limitation (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the product taught by Hsu, is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim.
Regarding claim 7, Hsu discloses:
a permeable wick (10) (permeable, since wick 10 comprises a metallic web, par. 0018) disposed between the first casing (top of 1) and the second casing (bottom of 1) (figs. 6-8).
Regarding claim 8, Hsu discloses:
the deformed mesh (11) comprising a woven mesh [par. 0108].
Regarding claim 9, Hsu discloses:
the deformed mesh (11) including a plurality of channels (the vapor channels formed in between portions 111, seen in fig. 7) [par. 0021].
Regarding claim 15, Hsu discloses:
the plurality of undeformed portions (111) being arranged in a pattern (of arteries with vapor channels) (seen in fig. 8) [par. 0021].
Regarding claim 17, Hsu discloses:
the deformed mesh (11) comprises a plurality of mesh layers (layer of portion 110 and layer of portion 111, for instance) (figs. 6-8).
Regarding claim 18, Hsu does not disclose:
The deformed mesh (11) including at least two different mesh layers (110 and 11) (figs. 6-8).
Regarding claim 20, Hsu discloses:
the thermal ground plane (1) further comprising a planar mesh (10) with ordered or nonordered array of holes etched in the planar mesh (10) (figs. 6-8) (since the planar mesh 10 is a metallic web, par. 0018, and metallic webs of heat pipes are known to have perforations or etches to optimize capillary action and fluid transport).
Regarding claim 21, Hsu discloses:
the (deformed) mesh (11) comprising a mesh (110) that is flattened prior to deformation [par. 0020, as it applies to the embodiment of figs. 6-8].
Regarding claim 22, Hsu discloses:
a thermal ground plane (1) (figs. 6-8) (it is noted, element -1- is a plate-line planar heat pipe, which is a type of vapor chamber/thermal ground plane, known in the art) [abs., lines 1-2] comprising:
a first casing layer (top plate of 1) (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, page 4);
a second casing layer (bottom plate of 1) where outer peripheries of the second casing layer (bottom of 1) are hermetically sealed with outer peripheries of the first casing layer (top of 1) to form a housing case (1) (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, page 4);
a planar mesh (10) with ordered or nonordered array of holes etched in the planar mesh (10) (figs. 6-8) (since the planar mesh 10 is a metallic web, par. 0018, and metallic webs of heat pipes are known to have perforations or etches to optimize capillary action and fluid transport);
a deformed mesh (11) (mesh 11 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) disposed between the first casing layer (top of 1) and the second casing layer (bottom of 1) (figs. 6-8),
the deformed mesh (11) comprising:
a plurality of undeformed portions (111), wherein the plurality of undeformed portions (111) form a plurality of ridges (seen in fig. 7); and
a plurality of deformed portions (110) (mesh 110 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) that are compressed relative to the undeformed portions (111) (compressed, since the deformed portions 110 are compressed/flattened during manufacturing, seen figures 6-7); and
a working fluid filled between the first casing layer (top of 1) and the second casing layer (bottom of 1) [par. 0021].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103:
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.
Claims 10 and 23-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu in view of Chang and Carter.
Regarding claim 10, Hsu does not disclose:
the plurality of undeformed portions (110) having a height less than about 0.2 mm.
However, although the specific height of the plurality of undeformed portions is not disclosed in Hsu, the thickness of thermal ground planes (TGP) is designed to optimize heat transfer and to make the TGP suitable to be used within an electronic component. Chang, for instance, also directed to a thermal ground plane, teaches that heights of casings of TGP’s like heat pipes should not be larger than 2.0 mm in order to accommodate light weight requirements of electronic products [col. 2, lines 45-49]. Following this rationale, the thickness of any wick structure provided in the heat pipe's housing case will be smaller than the thickness of the pipe (it is noted that Chang's wick 13 thickness is smaller than 0.1mm, col. 3, lines 3-6). Further, the ultimate performance of a TGP wick will depend on several design parameters, including the material choice, overall structural geometry, thickness, pore size and spacing, and surface treatments or coatings. Proper optimization of these parameters, in turn, will depend on the physical and chemical properties of the working fluid, including its viscosity, density, conductivity, temperature, and polarity, as taught by Carter [col. 8, lines 26-43]. This is, the thickness of the wick structure is considered to be an obvious design expedient, wherein a person of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would design the thickness of the wick according to the user's heat transfer requirements. Therefore, absent criticality or unexpected results of the claimed range, the thickness of the wick structure is considered a result-effective variable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the thickness of the wick structure through routine experimentation to arrive at a value which create the desired heat transfer capacity while having the TGP suitable to be used within an electronic component since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II).
Regarding claim 23, Hsu discloses:
a thermal ground plane (1) (figs. 6-8) (it is noted, element -1- is a plate-line planar heat pipe, which is a type of vapor chamber/thermal ground plane, known in the art) [abs., lines 1-2] comprising:
a first casing layer (top plate of 1) (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, page 4);
a second casing layer (bottom plate of 1) where outer peripheries of the second casing layer (bottom of 1) are hermetically sealed with outer peripheries of the first casing layer (top of 1) to form a housing case (1) (see annotated fig. 7-HSU, page 4);
a deformed mesh (11) (mesh 11 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) disposed between the first casing layer (top of 1) and the second casing layer (bottom of 1) (figs. 6-8),
the deformed mesh (11) comprising:
a plurality of undeformed portions (111) (figs. 6-8); and
a plurality of deformed portions (110) (mesh 110 is deformed/flattened during manufacturing, from figure 6 to 7) that are compressed relative to the undeformed portions (111) (compressed, since the deformed portions 110 are compressed/flattened during manufacturing, seen figures 6-7);
a permeable wick (10) (permeable, since wick 10 comprises a metallic web, par. 0018) disposed in the housing case (1) (figs. 6-8), and
a working fluid disposed in the housing case (1) [par. 0006].
Hsu does not disclose:
The height of the undeformed portions being greater than the sum of the thickness of the deformed portions and the permeable wick.
However, although the specific height of the undeformed portions is not disclosed in Hsu, the thickness of thermal ground planes (TGP) is designed to optimize heat transfer and to make the TGP suitable to be used within an electronic component. Chang, for instance, also directed to a thermal ground plane, teaches that heights of casings of TGP’s like heat pipes should not be larger than 2.0 mm in order to accommodate light weight requirements of electronic products [col. 2, lines 45-49]. Further, the ultimate performance of a TGP wick will depend on several design parameters, including the material choice, overall structural geometry, thickness/height, pore size and spacing, and surface treatments or coatings. Proper optimization of these parameters, in turn, will depend on the physical and chemical properties of the working fluid, including its viscosity, density, conductivity, temperature, and polarity, as taught by Carter [col. 8, lines 26-43]. This is, the thickness (height) of the wick structure is considered to be an obvious design expedient, wherein a person of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would design the thickness of the wick according to the user's heat transfer requirements. Therefore, absent criticality or unexpected results of the height claimed, the thickness/height of the wick structure is considered a result-effective variable, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the thickness of the wick structure through routine experimentation to arrive at a value which create the desired heat transfer capacity while having the TGP suitable to be used within an electronic component since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II).
Regarding claim 24, Hsu discloses:
The deformed mesh (11) comprising a porous mesh (the mesh 11, being a metallic web mesh, par. 0018, is read as a porous mesh).
Regarding claim 25, Hsu discloses:
the plurality of deformed portions (110) being formed from plastic deformation (figs. 6-8) (since plastic deformation is defined as: the permanent distortion that occurs when a material is subjected to tensile, compressive, bending, or torsion stresses that exceed its yield strength and cause it to elongate, compress, buckle, bend, or twist).
Regarding claim 26, The recitation "the plurality of deformed portions are formed from inelastic deformation" is considered to be a product by process limitation (emphasis added). MPEP 2113 clearly states "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In this instance, the product taught by Hsu, is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim.
Regarding claim 27, Hsu discloses:
the deformed mesh (11) comprising a woven mesh [par. 0108].
Regarding claim 28, Hsu discloses:
the deformed mesh (11) including a plurality of channels (the vapor channels formed in between portions 111, seen in fig. 7) [par. 0021].
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu in view of Carter.
Regarding claims 13-14, Hsu does not disclose:
the plurality of deformed portions having a width less than about 2 mm, as claimed in claim 13, and a center-to-center pitch less than about 0.2 mm, as claimed in claim 14.
However, the ultimate performance of a TGP wick will depend on several design parameters, including the material choice, overall structural geometry, thickness, pore size and spacing, and surface treatments or coatings. Proper optimization of these parameters, in turn, will depend on the physical and chemical properties of the working fluid, including its viscosity, density, conductivity, temperature, and polarity, as taught by Carter [col. 8, lines 26-43]. This is, the width of the wick structure is considered to be an obvious design expedient, wherein a person of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would design the width of the wick according to the user's heat transfer requirements. Therefore, absent criticality or unexpected results of the claimed range, the width of the wick structure and the center-to-center pitch are considered result-effective variables, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust width of the wick structure through routine experimentation to arrive at a value which create the desired heat transfer capacity since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05, Section II).
Claims 16 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu.
Regarding claims 16 and 19, Hsu does not disclose:
the deformed mesh (11) comprising a metallic polymer, metal coated polymer, ceramic coated polymer, ALD coated polymer, copper coated steel, or copper coated stainless steel, as claimed in claim 16; or comprising copper, steel, copper-coated polymer or ceramic-coated metal, as claimed in claim 19.
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice of mesh-type capillary structures comprising a metallic polymer, a metal coated polymer, a ceramic coated polymer, an ALD coated polymer, a copper coated steel, a copper coated stainless steel, copper, steel, copper-coated polymer or ceramic-coated metal, for their use in the heat pipe/vacuum chamber art and the selection of any of these known materials would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, the election of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.07.
Response to Arguments
The objections to claims 10-15, as set forth in the Office Action mailed 10/01/2025, are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specifically, in pages 7-8, Applicant argues that Hsu does not show outer edges of the deformed mesh extending toward the outer peripheries of the first casing layer and outer peripheries of the second casing layer, as amended. Please refer to the rejection above (including annotated fig. 7-HSU, page 4) for an explanation on how Hsu reads on the newly added limitation of claim 1. It is noted, the overly broad language of the newly amended limitation allows a broad interpretation of the claim which reference Hsu reads on.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA whose telephone number is (571)272-6018. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5:30pm.
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.
/GUSTAVO A HINCAPIE SERNA/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763