Ex Parte Tilak et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 27, 2012

12276498 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 27, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte VINAYAK TILAK,
KAUSTUBH RAVINDRA NAGARKAR,
LOUCAS TSAKALAKOS, and
TODD GARRETT WETZEL
____________________

Appeal 2011-008395
Application 12/276,498
Technology Center 2800
____________________

Before MARC S. HOFF, CARLA M. KRIVAK, and
ANDREW J. DILLON, Administrative Patent Judges

KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-10. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

Appeal 2011-008395
Application 12/276,498

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a thermal management
system with a graphene-based thermal interface material having individual
graphene sheets aligned perpendicularly to a plane of microchips, heat
spreaders, or heat sinks, providing a superior thermal conduction path from
chip to sink (Spec. ¶ [0001]).
Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative.
1. A thermal interface material comprising a plurality of
sheets of graphene paper bonded together using a bonding
agent, wherein the plurality of sheets are oriented substantially
parallel to each other.

REFERENCE and REJECTIONS
The Examiner rejected claims 1-4 and 6-8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as
being anticipated by Chen (Chen et al., “Graphene-based Thermal Interface
Materials (TIM),” A proposal submitted to CTRC (Cooling Technologies
Research Center), Purdue University, October 2008,
www.physics.purdue.edu/quantum/files/grapheneCTRC_oct2008a.ppt).
The Examiner rejected claims 5, 9, and 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
based upon the teachings of Chen.

ANALYSIS
The Examiner finds Chen teaches a plurality of graphene paper sheets
bonded together using a bonding agent (polysterene composite), as shown in
Approach 2 (Ans. 3).
Appellants contend, although Chen discloses a graphene-based
thermal interface material, Approach 2 of Chen discloses a graphene
Appeal 2011-008395
Application 12/276,498

3
composite as being the graphene-based thermal interface material, not a
bonding agent as suggested by the Examiner (App. Br. 10). We agree. That
is, Approach 2 of Chen shows graphene composites between two substrates,
not graphene sheets. Additionally, Approach 1 shows vertically grown
graphene sheets using CVD but does not show or disclose sheets of
graphene paper bonded together using a bonding agent. Rather, Approach 1
merely teaches “graphene bonded to substrate surface” (Chen 4; Approach
1). Thus, as neither of these “Approaches” teaches the limitations of
Appellants’ claim 1, we conclude claim 1 and claims 2-4 dependent
therefrom, are not anticipated by Chen. Additionally, we conclude claim 6,
which includes substantially the same limitations as claim 1, and claims 7
and 8 are also not anticipated by Chen.
Claims 5, 9, and 10 are dependent claims and thus, are not obvious
over Chen.

CONCLUSION
The Examiner erred in rejecting claims1-4, and 6-8 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(a).
The Examiner erred in rejecting claims 5, 9, and 10 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a).
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-10 is reversed.

REVERSED

Vsh/peb