DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment received on 03/17/2026. Amended claims 17, 23 and 26 are acknowledged. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-10, 12-17 and 21-26 are pending. Claims 4, 7, 11 and 18-20 are cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 24-25 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 24-25, in line 3 of each claim, “the top casing” and “the bottom casing” should read –the first casing—and –the second casing--, respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vanderwees (US 2020/0221605).
Regarding claim 23, Vanderwees discloses:
a passive thermal management device (10) (figs. 1-5) (it is noted, element -10- is a vapor chamber, which is passive thermal management device, well known in the art) [par. 0059] comprising:
a first casing (12) (fig. 5);
a second casing (14) (fig. 5) where outer peripheries of the second casing (14) are hermetically sealed with outer peripheries of the first casing (12) to form a housing to for a cavity (34) (figs. 2 and 5) (the working principle of a heat pipe requires the pipe to be hermetically sealed, known in the art);
a mesh (16: of passages 72 plus areas 64) comprising a plurality of deformed mesh portions (16 of areas 64) disposed between the first casing (12) and the second casing (14) [par. 0078], each of the plurality of deformed mesh portions (16 of areas 64) separated by an artery (passages 72) (seen in fig. 5), and each artery (72) comprises a mesh structure (wick 16 of passages 72) that has a higher porosity than the surrounding deformed mesh (wick 16 of passages 64) [par. 0091], wherein the mesh (16) comprises a sheet [par. 0078] with nonordered array of holes (pores) (it is known in the art that pores of a sintered metal powder mesh, like Vanderwees’, are generally in a disorder arrangement) in the sheet; and
a working fluid filled between the first casing (12) and the second casing (14) [par. 0040].
The recitation "…a sheet with…array of holes etched in the sheet" 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 Vanderwees, is the same as or makes the product claimed obvious, meeting this limitation of the claim.
Regarding claim 25, Vanderwees discloses:
each of the plurality of deformed mesh portions (16 of areas 64) comprising an internal artery that do not extend from the top casing (12) to the bottom casing (14) (seen in fig. 5, where deformed mesh portion 16 does not extend from the top casing to the bottom casing).
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanderwees.
Regarding claim 24, Vanderwees does not disclose:
each of the plurality of deformed mesh portions (16 of areas 64) comprising an internal artery that extends from the top casing (12) to the bottom casing (14).
However, Vanderwees alludes to the option of the deformed mesh (16 of areas 64) having different physical features including the option of adjusting the thickness of any portion of the mesh (16: of passages 72 plus areas 64) [par. 0092] in order to optimize heat transfer according to the user’s needs. It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adjust the thickness of the deformed mesh (16 of areas 64), as a matter of an obvious design choice, according to the user’s needs. Further, Applicant has not disclosed any criticality on sizing the deformed mesh and it appears to be a sizing preference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-10, 12-17, 21-22 and 26 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
The rejection of claims 20 and 23-26 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph as set forth in the Office Action mailed 12/18/2025, are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they do not apply to the new grounds of rejection.
For clarity, Applicant argues on page 2 that Vanderwees does not teach a mesh comprising either a sheet with ordered or nonordered array of holes etched in the sheet or an ordered distribution of fibers, as claimed in newly amended claim 23. Applicant is reminded that the patentability of a product claim does not depend on its method of production. Please refer to the rejection, above.
Regarding claim 26, the claim is allowable by virtue of its dependency on claim 1.
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
/JENNA M MARONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights