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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
Plurality of spacers extending between the first and second load plates as in claim 34,
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 34 recites, “wherein the spacer is one of a plurality of spacers extending between the first and second load plates” which appears to be new matter not supported by the originally filed specification. None of the originally filed written description, claims, or drawings, provide support for the above-mentioned limitation.
Clarification or amendment are required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stocken et al. (US 7,023,701 – hereinafter, “Stocken”) in view of Lin (US 2012/0162919).
With respect to claims 9, Stocken teaches (In Fig 2) an apparatus, comprising: a plurality of DIMMs (5, ¶ 0016, “The memory chips of the DIMM modules”) including a first DIMM (Right most 5 in Fig 2) and a second DIMM (Second to right most 5 in Fig 2), the first and second DIMMs adjacent to one another with no other DIMM therebetween (See Fig 2, the rightmost 5 and the second to right most 5 are adjacent to one another with no other DIMM between them, see Fig A below); a first heat spreader (Left 12 on the right most DIMM in Fig 2, see Fig A below) that is thermally coupled to respective memory chips (8) of a first side (Left side) of the first DIMM; a second heat spreader (Right 12 on the second to right most DIMM in Fig 2, see Fig A below) that is thermally coupled to respective memory chips (8) of a second side (Right side) of the second DIMM (See Fig 2), both the first and second heat spreaders between the first and second DIMMs (See Fig A below); a spring (11) between the first heat spreader and the second heat spreader (See Fig 2); a first load plate (Right vertical member of 10); a second load plate (Left vertical member of 10) coupled to the first load plate (See Fig 2), the plurality of DIMMs (5) between the first load plate and the second load plate (See Fig 2); and a heat sink (Top horizontal member of 10) the first DIMM to be between the heat sink and a connector (6) that the first DIMM is to plug into (See Fig 2), the heat sink to receive heat from the first and second heat spreaders (¶ 0014, “The contact area 12 can produce a connection between basic body 10 and the memory chips 8, which connection can ensure a good heat flow”), the heat sink having thermal transfer structures to facilitate thermal transfer between the heat sink and the heat sink’s ambient.
Stocken fails to specifically teach or suggest that the first and second load plates to be urged towards one another.
Lin, however, teaches (In Figs 1-2) first (Left 120) and second (Right 120) load plates urged towards one another (Via 200).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lin with that of Stocken, such that, in Stocken the first and second load plates are urged toward one another, as taught by Lin, since doing so would assure good thermal conduction between the chips on the DIMM and the heat sink element.
PNG
media_image1.png
500
654
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25, 30-33, 35-44 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claim 25, see pp. 4-5 of the non-final rejection dated 1/16/2026
With respect to claims 30-33, 35-44, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 30 and at least in part because claim 30 recites, “tightening hardware to couple the first load plate to the second load plate, the tightening hardware to urge the first and second load plates towards one another to urge the first and second DIMMs towards the first and second heat spreaders respectively”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 30 are believed to render said claim 30 patentable over the art of record.
While Stocken teaches many of the limitations of claim 30 as per the above rejection to claim 9, neither Stocken nor Lin nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest the above-mentioned limitations of claim 30.
Claims 27-29 are 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.
With respect to claim 27, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 27 and at least in part because claim 27 recites, “wherein the spring is to urge the first heat spreader towards the first DIMM and to urge the second heat spreader towards the second DIMM”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 27 are believed to render said claim 27 patentable over the art of record.
While Stocken and Lin teaches many of the limitations of claim 27 as per the above rejection to claim 9, neither Stocken nor Lin nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest the above-mentioned limitations of claim 27.
With respect to claim 28, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 28 and at least in part because claim 28 recites, “the first load plate is adjustably moveable relative to the second load plate and adjustably moveable relative to the heat sink, and the second load plate is adjustably moveable relative to the heat sink”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 28 are believed to render said claim 28 patentable over the art of record.
While Stocken and Lin teaches many of the limitations of claim 28 as per the above rejection to claim 9, neither Stocken nor Lin nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest the above-mentioned limitations of claim 28.
With respect to claim 29, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in dependent claim 29 and at least in part because claim 29 recites, “the first and second load plates are a first distance apart, and the heat sink extends a second distance in a direction transverse to the first and second load plates, the second distance greater than the first distance”.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 29 are believed to render said claim 29 patentable over the art of record.
While Stocken and Lin teaches many of the limitations of claim 29 as per the above rejection to claim 9, neither Stocken nor Lin nor any other art of record – either alone or in combination – teach or suggest the above-mentioned limitations of claim 29.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
With respect to the Applicant’s remarks to claim 9 that, “As agreed during the Examiner Interview held on March 24, 2026, none of the cited references teach or suggest the recitations of claim 9. Accordingly, claim 9 and all claims depending therefrom are in condition for allowance.” (Present remarks page 7) the Examiner respectfully notes that current claim 9 was never presented to the Examiner for consideration during the interview on 3/24/26 and no agreement was reached on the allowability of said claim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY M PAPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2201. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am - 6pm EST.
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, Jayprakash N Gandhi can be reached at 571-272-3740. 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.
/ZACHARY PAPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835