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 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 4, 5-7, 14-15 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 4 recites wherein a plurality of adjustment components comprise a first adjustment component which renders claim 4 indefinite. Claim 4 is interpreted to recite a duplication of the first adjustment component of claim 4.
Claims 5-7 recite “a plurality of liquid connectors” (see claim 5, line 6) but it is unclear if said recitation refers to “a liquid connector” of claim 1 (see line 14). Claims 5-7 are interpreted such that said recitation refers to the liquid connector of claim 1.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the phase-change liquid immersion cooling system-based CDU"" in line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 is interpreted to refer to the “coolant distribution unit (CDU)” of claim 1. Claims 14-15 are similarly rejected.
Claim 14 further recites heat exchange pipes but it is unclear if said condensation component comprises said heat exchange pipes. Claim 14 is interpreted such that the condensation component comprises said heat exchange pipes.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-13, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell (US20110315353).
Regarding claim 1,
Referring to Fig. 6A, Campbell teaches a coolant distribution unit(CDU) 400 (see par. 30), comprising: a device chassis 410 comprising a back surface (not labeled); a vapor introduction port 442 disposed on the device chassis and comprising a first connector (e.g. via quick connectors 501 and vapor hoses 500); a liquid introduction port 441 disposed on the device chassis and comprising a second connector (e.g. via manifold 620); and a housing 460 disposed on the back surface and comprising: a condensation component 462; and a front surface configured as a condensation region wall surface (e.g. the surface via connectors 501), disposed opposite to the condensation component in a front-rear direction, and comprising: a liquid connector (e.g. the connector to liquid manifold 620 via pump 600 to ports 441) disposed on the condensation region wall surface and further disposed opposite to and coupled to the second connector (e.g. via manifold 620 and liquid inlet hoses 443); and a vapor connector 501 disposed on the condensation region wall surface and further disposed opposite to and coupled to the first connector (e.g. disposed opposite ports 442 comprising the first connector, via hose 500).
Regarding claim 5,
Campbell teaches a liquid storage part 610; a flow distribution manifold 620 disposed on the housing, and configured to communicate with the liquid storage part; and a plurality of liquid connectors disposed and inserted into the flow distribution manifold.
Regarding claim 6,
Campbell does not teach wherein the flow distribution manifold is fastened on the front surface.
However, please note that a claim to a fluid transporting vehicle was rejected as obvious over a prior art reference which differed from the prior art in claiming a brake drum integral with a clamping means, whereas the brake disc and clamp of the prior art comprise several parts rigidly secured together as a single unit. The court affirmed the rejection holding, among other reasons, “that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” (see MPEP 2144.04 V B).
Regarding claim 7,
Campbell teaches wherein the liquid storage part comprises a liquid coolant 411, and wherein the phase-change liquid immersion cooling system-based CDU further comprises a liquid supply pump 600 configured to transport the liquid coolant to the flow distribution manifold.
Regarding claim 8,
Campbell teaches a plurality of groups of liquid connectors and vapor connectors disposed on the condensation region wall surface (e.g. via manifold 620) wherein each of the groups of liquid connectors and vapor connectors comprises at least one liquid connector and at least one vapor connector.
Regarding claim 9,
Campbell teaches wherein the groups of liquid connectors and vapor connectors are sequentially disposed from atop to a bottom of the condensation region wall surface, and wherein the liquid connectors and the vapor connectors are quick connectors (see par. 59).
Regarding claim 10,
Campbell teaches wherein the condensation component 462 comprises a water inlet pipe 451 (see par. 58), a water outlet pipe 452 and a heat exchange member (see par. 64) separately in communication with the water inlet pipe and water outlet pipe, and comprising a cooling water flow channel (not labeled) in communication with the water inlet pipe and the water outlet pipe.
Regarding claim 11,
Campbell does not teach at least two condensation components disposed in the housing and comprising water inlet pipes and water outlet pipes that are in parallel communication.
However, it is noted that it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI B. Since applicant has not disclosed that placing a second condensation component within the system does anything more than produce predictable results (i.e. providing for multiple locations of condensation of vapor coolant within the system), the mere duplication of the condensation component in the system is not considered to have patentable significance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention, to modify Campbell to include at least a second condensation components in order to predictably provide multiple locations of condensation in a single system.
Regarding claim 12,
Campbell teaches wherein the heat exchange member is a heat exchange pipe 465, and wherein the vapor connector is disposed opposite to the heat exchange pipe in the front-rear direction.
Regarding claim 13,
Campbell teaches wherein the heat exchange pipe comprises a main body comprising a surface (not labeled), and wherein the vapor connector comprises: a through-flow center intersecting with a center of a corresponding heat exchange pipe (wherein said recitation “intersecting” refers to a geometric line such that the ‘center’ of the vapor connector geometrically intersects with a ‘center’ of the heat exchange pipe); or a through-flow section of the vapor connector at least partially overlapping the surface.
Regarding claim 16,
Campbell teaches the heat exchange pipe comprises a pipe body that is inclined (e.g. relative to an inclined axis).
Regarding claim 17,
Campbell teaches wherein the condensation component comprises a water outlet pipe 452 and a water inlet pipe 451, and wherein a top or a bottom of the housing comprises a cooling water outlet in communication with the water outlet pipe; and a cooling water inlet in communication with the water inlet pipe (not labeled, see Fig. 6A).
Regarding claim 18,
Campbell teaches a liquid storage part 610 disposed at a bottom of the housing, wherein the condensation component is located above the liquid storage part.
Regarding claims 19-20,
The subject matter of claims 19-20 are directed towards essentially the same subject matter as at least claim 1 and has been addressed in the rejection of at least claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of La (CN204810780U).
Regarding claim 2,
Campbell teaches wherein the housing further comprises a first internal cavity (not labeled), but does not teach wherein the CDU further comprises a first adjustment component, wherein the first adjustment component comprises a main body comprising a second internal cavity, wherein the second internal cavity comprises an internal cavity side and an accommodating space, wherein the main body is configured to deform under an action of a pressure on the internal cavity side to change the accommodating space, and wherein the second internal cavity is in communication with the first internal cavity.
La, directed to chassis and server components employing immersion cooling, teaches a first adjustment component 3, wherein the first adjustment component comprises a main body comprising a second internal cavity (not labeled, see par. 9, Fig. 6), wherein the second internal cavity comprises an internal cavity side and an accommodating space (not labeled, see par. 9, Fig. 6), wherein the main body is configured to deform under an action of a pressure on the internal cavity side to change the accommodating space (see pars. 9, 35), and wherein the second internal cavity is in communication with a first internal cavity 2 (see pars. 9, 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Campbell by La with the motivation of compensating for a fluctuation of internal pressure and keeping an internal pressure close to a normal pressure (e.g. and further preventing a seal from failing, see La pars. 40, 52).
Regarding claim 3,
Campbell as modified above teaches wherein the housing further comprises a rear side (not labeled), wherein the first adjustment component is located on the rear side (e.g. the side on which the adjustment component is located, wherein La teaches that adjustment component 3 should be located at a side opposite to any device chassis, wherein a heat exchanger influences an internal pressure, see La fig. 3), and is configured to extend and contract in the front-rear direction to change the accommodating space.
Regarding claim 4,
Campbell as modified above teaches all of the claimed features except for duplication of the first adjustment component. It is noted that it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced, see MPEP 2144.04 VI B. Since applicant has not disclosed that placing multiple adjustment components within the system (e.g. instead of a single adjustment component) does anything more than produce predictable results (i.e. providing for multiple components for pressure regulation), the mere duplication of the first adjustment component in the system is not considered to have patentable significance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention, to modify Campbell as modified above to include duplicate adjustment components in order to predictably provide multiple components for pressure regulation in a single system.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell.
Regarding claims 14-15,
Campbell teaches wherein the water inlet pipe and the water outlet pipe are disposed in a vertical direction but does not teach wherein the phase-change liquid immersion cooling system-based CDU further comprises heat exchange pipes, and wherein each of the heat exchange pipes comprises a horizontally extended pipe section, and further comprising a flow guiding baffle disposed below the horizontally extended pipe section and comprising an extension end located on a side of a corresponding heat exchange pipe.
However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of, and advtanges of, heat exchange pipes comprising horizontally extended pipe sections further comprising a flow guiding baffle with an extension end would be well known in the art and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify Campbell to comprise heat exchange pipes, and wherein each of the heat exchange pipes comprises a horizontally extended pipe section and a flow guiding baffle with an extension end with the motivation of, for example, increasing the condensation surface area while fixing the pipe sections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Campbell (‘3099, ‘2099, ‘5122, ‘4524, ‘1759), Edmunds, Shelnutt teach a CDU.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE S TANENBAUM whose telephone number is (313)446-6522. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 AM - 7 PM.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at (571) 272-6681. 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.
/Steve S TANENBAUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights