DETAILED ACTION
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 1-11 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.
In claim 1, the final lines, lines 8-12, contain several errors.
In line 8, “with continuous edge” should read ‘with a continuous edge’.
In line 9, “the section difference” lacks antecedent basis.
In line 10, it is unclear what it means to refer to “the smooth form” in this way rather than simply ‘the wick’. The meaning of this choice to the metes and bounds of the claim are unknown.
In line 11, the word “respectively” serves no purpose.
In lines 10-12, referring to the measurement in the width direction of the wick as a “maximum length” even when it is being described as decreasing along the axial direction is confusing as the length can by definition not be ‘maximum’ anymore.
For purposes of compact prosecution, the final 5 lines of claim 1 have been interpreted as follows in order to allow for application of art:
“wherein the wick structure has a smooth form with a continuous edge and without sectional differences along the axial direction,
wherein the wick decreases in width along the axial direction.”
Claims 2-11 are also rejected for depending from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-4, 7, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (US 2012/0031588).
Regarding claim 1, Huang teaches a heat pipe comprising: a flat tube having an axial (longest) direction (Fig. 3), width direction (second longest), and height direction (thinnest) perpendicular to each other (Fig. 3); the length of the width direction is greater than the height (Fig. 3); the tube includes a hollow chamber (102) and opposite sealed ends (opposite ends in the axial direction; Fig. 3); and a wick structure (any one of 210 in Fig. 3) disposed in the hollow chamber and extending along the axial direction (Fig. 3); the wick has a smooth form with a continuous edge without sectional differences (any of the wicks 210; see Fig. 3); the wick decreases in width along the axial direction (each decreases from its maximum width when measured at different points along the axial direction; Fig. 3).
Huang further teaches that: the axial direction is greater than the height (Fig. 3), per claim 2; the length is greater than the width (Fig. 3), per claim 3; the wick is disconnected from the opposite sealed ends int eh axial direction (see, e.g. Fig. 5c showing a cross-section with such disconnection), per claim 4; the wick contacts a bottom wall of the flat tube (Para. [0020]), per claim 7; a cross-section of the flat tube is rectangular (Fig. 3), per claim 10; the wick structure includes at least a support portion pressing an inner wall of the flat tube (Para. [0020]), per claim 11.
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(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Cho (US 2004/0040696).
Regarding claims 8-9, Huang does not teach wick variations in thickness (i.e. height) axially.
Cho teaches that it is old and well-known to vary the thickness of a wick structure along its axis (Figs. 11b, 11c).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the wick of Huang with thickness (height) variation along its axial direction, as taught by Cho, in order to optimize flow between vaporization and condensation portions of the heat pipe.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Lee (US 2010/0266864).
Huang does not specify that the wick structure is spaced apart from the sidewalls and the top surface of the tube.
Lee teaches that it is old and well-known to space the wick structure (12) from the side walls (Fig. 2) and the top surface (Para. [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to form the device of Huang with the spacings of Lee in order to increase vapor mobility in the device, as taught by Lee.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Devon Lane whose telephone number is (571)270-1858. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 9-4.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571.270.5054. 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.
/DEVON LANE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights