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 § 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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sutherland et al. (US 2004/0145063 A1) in view of Marsala (US 2005/0121180 A1).
Regarding claims 1 -2 and 4-7, Sutherland et al. teach a method of removing heat from an electronic heat source that is associated with a housing having a cavity (Fig. 1- 2), the method comprising: placing graphite foam (106]) into the cavity; operating the electronic heat source; and using the solid or semi-solid foam in the cavity to draw heat out of the electronic heat source (Fig 1 -2; 102 dies, 100, integrated assembly module; see claims and [0037]-[0045]). However, Sutherland et all fail to teach waiting for the liquid foam to cure into a solid or semi-solid foam inside the cavity.
In the same field of endeavor, pertaining to cooling using graphite foam, Marsala teaches cooling of electrical and electronic components, and more particularly, to use of graphite foam materials in a pumped liquid two phase cooling system having one or more cold plate/evaporators in thermal contact with the electrical or electronic components to be cooled ([0002]), and a liquid refrigerant pump circulates refrigerant to cold plate/evaporators which are in thermal contact with the electrical or electronic component to be cooled. The liquid refrigerant is then partially or completely evaporated by the heat generated by the component. The vapor is condensed by a conventional condenser coil, and the condensed liquid, along with any unevaporated liquid, is returned to the pump. By replacing or adding to a convoluted fin structure in a two-phase cold plate with a graphite foam material, the available surface area is increased many times over that of the fin structure ([0011]; Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention was made to have modified method of removing heat from electronic as taught by Sutherland et al. with injecting liquid foams, as taught by Marsala, for the benefit of removing heat from the electronic device. Furthermore, based on the type of foam used for cooling, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the applicant’s invention was made to have modified above with desired type of foam (that traps CO2), thereby solidifying the foam if necessary to obtain similar cooling of the electronic device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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 closest prior art above fails to teach further comprising :providing a first container containing a first epoxy part and a first blowing agent part; providing a second container containing a second epoxy part and a second blowing agent part; and mixing contents of the first container and contents of the second container in a nozzle to form the liquid foam, the blowing including blowing the liquid foam into the cavity from the nozzle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2023/0413481 A1; US 2025/0287543 A1 - a method of cooling a data storage device removably housed in an enclosure, the method comprising: immersing or wetting an electronic component with a non-conductive liquid; immersing or wetting a foam heat sink attached to a heat emitting surface of the electronic component; and transferring heat from the electronic component to the non-conductive liquid via the foam heat sink, a porosity of the foam heat sink increasing a coolant heat absorption rate from the heat emitting surface to the non-conductive liquid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAHIDA SULTANA whose telephone number is (571)270-1925. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday (8:30 AM -5:00 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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
NAHIDA SULTANA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1743
/NAHIDA SULTANA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights