13242309 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 17, 2018)

Ex Parte Masefield et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 17, 2018

13242309 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 17, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/242,309 09/23/2011 37476 7590 12/17/2018 WHITE-WELKER & WELKER, LLC P.O. BOX 199 CLEAR SPRING, MD 21722-0199 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Benjamin Masefield UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. Tylerind-HS 8776 EXAMINER FLANIGAN, ALLEN J ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3763 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 12/17/2018 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte BENJAMIN MASEFIELD and BRIAN FARRELL Appeal2018-003243 Application 13/242,309 Technology Center 3700 Before MICHELLE R. OSINSKI, JEREMY M. PLENZLER, and JEFFREY A. STEPHENS, Administrative Patent Judges. PLENZLER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134(a) of the Examiner's Decision rejecting claims 1-12 and 14--17, which are all the claims pending in the application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b). We AFFIRM. Appeal2018-003243 Application 13/242,309 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER Claims 1, 14, and 17 are independent, with claims 2-12 depending from claim 1 and claims 15 and 16 depending from claim 14. Claim 1 is reproduced below: 1. A heat dissipation device comprising: a base; a heat exchanger, the heat exchanger being thermally coupled to a top surface of the base; a housing having a chamber formed therein, the housing being placed over the base with the heat exchanger enclosed within the chamber; the chamber further comprised of an inlet chamber and outlet chamber; an inlet connected to the inlet chamber for directing heat transfer medium into the heat dissipation device; and an outlet connected to the outlet chamber for discharging the heat transfer medium from the heat dissipation device; wherein the heat exchanger has a core, a plurality of plates and a plurality of spacers stacked and press fit onto the core, thereby providing for a plurality of channels, the channels allowing for heat transfer medium to flow around the core in a clockwise and counter-clockwise direction. REJECTIONS 1. Claims 1-8, 12, and 14--17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as unpatentable over Oikawa (US 7,021,367 B2, issued Apr. 4, 2006) and New (US 3,277,957, issued Oct. 11, 1966). 2. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as unpatentable over Oikawa, New, and Werner (US 7,021,369 B2, issued Apr. 4 2006). 3. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as unpatentable over Oikawa, New, and Lai (US 2007/0221364 Al, published Sept. 27, 2007). 2 Appeal2018-003243 Application 13/242,309 4. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ I03(a) as unpatentable over Oikawa, New, and Verteletsky (WO 2009/038490 Al, published Mar. 26, 2009). OPINION Appellants argue claims 1-8, 12, and 14--17 as a group. Appeal Br. 8-23. We select claim 1 as representative. Claims 2-8, 12, and 14--17 stand or fall with claim 1. See 37 C.F.R. Â§ 4I.37(c)(l)(iv). Claims 9-11 depend from claim 1, and Appellants' contentions regarding the patentability of those claims are based on the contentions set forth regarding claim 1. Appeal Br. 23. The Examiner finds that Oikawa teaches each limitation recited in claim 1, including the "plates" and "spacers," but not that those "plates and ... spacers" are "press fit onto the core." Non-Final Act. 2-3. 1 The Examiner finds that New teaches the "plates and ... spacers ... press fit onto the core." Id. at 3. The Examiner explains that "New ... disclose[s] a finned cylindrical body for cooling electronic components which utilizes just such a construction to provide evenly spaced fin members similar to those employed in Oikawa" and reasons that "it would have been obvious ... to use such a well-known method of attaching fins to a cylindrical base 1 This decision references the Non-Final Action entered September 7, 2016 (the "Non-Final Action") because the Final Action entered March 22, 2017 ( the "3/22 Final Action") does not include the Examiner's explanation of the rejection, only a reference to the Non-Final Action. See 3/22 Final Act. 2. That Non-Final Action also refers back to the previous Final Action mailed April 8, 2016 (the "4/8 Final Action") for portions not explained in detail in the Non-Final Action. 3 Appeal2018-003243 Application 13/242,309 member to provide even spacing and good thermal contact to attach the fins 203 to the base 202 of Oikawa." Id. at 3--4. "inlet chamber" and "outlet chamber" Claim 1 recites "a chamber ... with the heat exchanger enclosed within the chamber" and "the chamber further comprised of an inlet chamber and outlet chamber" with "an inlet connected to the inlet chamber for directing heat transfer medium into the heat dissipation device" and "an outlet connected to the outlet chamber for discharging the heat transfer medium from the heat dissipation device." The Specification does not define the term "chamber." The Examiner determines that "the 'broadest reasonable interpretation' of the term 'chamber' ... cover[s] any enclosed space or cavity within a body." Ans. 7. Consistent with the Examiner's construction, a dictionary definition for "chamber" is: "An enclosed space or compartment: the chamber of a pump; a compression chamber." The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, "chamber" ( 6th Ed. 2016), https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/hmdictenglang/ chamber/O?institutionld=7 43 (last visited December 3, 2018). That definition is consistent with Appellants' Specification, which does not define any structure for its chambers other than stating, for example, that "[ t ]he top wall 310 and sidewall 320" of housing 300 "define a chamber" that "preferably has a heat exchange chamber 410, an inlet chamber 420, and an outlet chamber 430." Spec. 5: 10-12. Appellants contend that to be a "chamber," there must be "a region where the fluid velocity decreases and the static pressure increases." Appeal Br. 10. As the Examiner notes, however, "Appellants ... offer no evidence in the form of clear and explicit definitions found in the specification, or 4 Appeal2018-003243 Application 13/242,309 extrinsic evidence (such as technical or ordinary dictionaries, etc.) [that] contradicts the Office's interpretation of this term given above." Ans. 11. We agree. Appellants provide no reason for such a limited reading of the term, either from the plain and ordinary meaning of that term, or why such a reading is required in order to be consistent with Appellants' Specification. Indeed, Appellants do not even reference their Specification. The Examiner provides an annotated version of Oikawa's Figure 1, reproduced below, illustrating the portions considered the inlet and outlet chambers. Non-Final Act. 3. Chamber 1. ~. ! in!et OuUet r"