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
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) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omote (US 20190373750; “Omote” hereinafter) in view of Tran (US 8379381; “Tran” hereinafter), and further view of Ko (US 20070030639: “Ko” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Omote discloses an apparatus (100), comprising: a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (410) of an electronic module (figs 2A-3); and a damper (500) configured to: receive the PCBA (410); contact the PCBA, wherein a first damper portion (510 and upper portion of 530 as depicted by “first damper portion” in the annotated fig. 5 below) contacts a first surface of the PCBA (510 contacts the upper surface of the board 410, fig. 5) and a second damper portion (520 and lower portion of 530 as depicted by “first damper portion” in the annotated fig. 5 below) contacts a second surface of the PCBA (520 contacts the lower surface of the board 410, fig. 5); contact an enclosure (200, 300) of the apparatus (fig. 5); and damp shock impulses applied to the PCBA (410) (500 improves absorption and/or vibration suppression between the enclosure and the board 410, par. [0059]), wherein the number of damper portions are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“the interconnecting portion 533A is elastically deformed to prevent an excessive load from being transmitted to the inner peripheral portion 531A”, par. [0048], also see par. [0045]-535 is configured to deform).
Omote does not explicitly disclose the electronic module is a SSD; the damper being configured to: receive the PCBA via a number of pre-loaded spring portions of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion contacts a first surface of the PCBA and a second pre-loaded spring portion contacts a second surface of the PCBA.
Tran teaches a solid state drive (10), wherein the SSD comprising a damper (40) configured to damp shock impulses applied to the SSD (“Above and below PC board 18, and inside enclosure 11 is silicone gel 20, which dampens vibrations that drive 10 may suffer”, Col. 2: lines 1-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device to use the damping mechanism of Omote in a solid state drive as taught by Tran as such modification absorb vibration or any external shock transfer to the circuit board assembly of the SSD and prevents any damage to the circuit board assembly caused by and the external shock or vibration.
Ko teaches an electronic device (50) comprising a damper (30; “those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection”, par. [0022]); wherein the damper being configured to: receive an assembly (20) via a number of pre-loaded spring portions (32, 321) of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion (elastic projections 321 on the upper side of the frames 30, fig. 2) contacts a first surface of the assembly (20) (figs 2-3) and a second pre-loaded spring portion (elastic projections 321 that are disposed in the lower side of the frames 30) contacts a second surface of the assembly (figs. 2-3); contact an enclosure (52, 53) of the assembly (fig. 4); and damp shock impulses applied to the electronic device (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022]), wherein the number of pre-loaded spring portions (321) are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Omote in view of Tran to have the damper being configured to: receive the PCBA via a number of pre-loaded spring portions of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion contacts a first surface of the PCBA and a second pre-loaded spring portion contacts a second surface of the PCBA as suggested by Ko because such modification in addition to provide shock protection, it also provides EMI protection and grounding (par. [0022]).
.
PNG
media_image1.png
670
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses wherein the damper is configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022], Ko; at least elastic projections 321 deform or compress in response to shock impulses).
Regarding claim 3, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses wherein the damper is coupled to the enclosure mechanically or via an adhesive (damper 500 is mechanically coupled to the groove formed in between the casings 200 and 300 as taught by Omote; Ko further teaches the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses the apparatus or device as claimed in claim 1.
Omote in view of Tran and Ko does not explicitly disclose wherein the damper is formed from the enclosure.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the damper an integral part of or formed from the enclosure, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to make plural parts unitary as a matter of engineering design choice. In re Larson, 144 USPQ 347 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 5, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses wherein the enclosure includes a first portion and a second portion (200 and 300, Omote).
Regarding claim 6, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses wherein the damper is a spring (321 is a spring, Ko; according to Merriam-webster dictionary, spring is defined as, “to be resilient or elastic” and 321 is elastic and configured to compressed, par. [0022]).
Regarding claim 7, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses wherein the damper is formed from at least one of conductive material (“conducting frames 30”, par. [0019]).
Omote in view of Tran and Ko does not explicitly disclose wherein the damper is formed from at least one of: metal, plastic, rubber, or foam.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have the damper made from at least one of: metal, plastic, rubber, or foam, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 8, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Ko) discloses wherein the damper includes a pedestal portion (portion of parallel portions 32 that ae disposed between the elastic projections 321, fig. 2), wherein the pedestal portion (32) is configured to prevent the assembly (20) from contacting the enclosure (52, 53).
Regarding claim 9, Omote discloses a method, comprising: removably coupling a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (410) of an electronic module (figs 2-3) to an enclosure (200, 300) via a damper (500) with a first damper portion (510 and upper portion of 530 as depicted by “first damper portion” in the annotated fig. 5 below) configured to contact a first surface of the PCBA (fig. 5) and a second damper portion (520 and lower portion of 530 as depicted by “first damper portion” in the annotated fig. 5 below) configured to contact a second surface of the PCBA (fig. 5); and damping a shock impulse between the enclosure and the PCBA via the damper (500 improves absorption and/or vibration suppression between the enclosure and the board 410, par. [0059]), wherein the first damper portion and the second damper portion are configured to deform in response to the shock impulse (“the interconnecting portion 533A is elastically deformed to prevent an excessive load from being transmitted to the inner peripheral portion 531A”, par. [0048], also see par. [0045]-535 is configured to deform).
Omote does not explicitly disclose the electronic module is a SSD; the damper being configured to: receive the PCBA via a number of pre-loaded spring portions of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion contacts a first surface of the PCBA and a second pre-loaded spring portion contacts a second surface of the PCBA.
Tran teaches a solid state drive (10), wherein the SSD comprising a damper (40) configured to damp shock impulses applied to the SSD (“Above and below PC board 18, and inside enclosure 11 is silicone gel 20, which dampens vibrations that drive 10 may suffer”, Col. 2: lines 1-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device to use the damping mechanism of Omote in a solid state drive as taught by Tran as such modification absorb vibration or any external shock transfer to the circuit board assembly of the SSD and prevents any damage to the circuit board assembly caused by and the external shock or vibration.
Ko teaches an electronic device (50) comprising a damper (30; “those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection”, par. [0022]); wherein the damper being configured to: receive an assembly (20) via a number of pre-loaded spring portions (32, 321) of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion (elastic projections 321 on the upper side of the frames 30, fig. 2) contacts a first surface of the assembly (20) (figs 2-3) and a second pre-loaded spring portion (elastic projections 321 that are disposed in the lower side of the frames 30) contacts a second surface of the assembly (figs. 2-3); contact an enclosure (52, 53) of the assembly (20) (fig. 4); and damp shock impulses applied to the electronic device (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022]), wherein the number of pre-loaded spring portions (321) are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Omote in view of Tran to have the damper being configured to: receive the PCBA via a number of pre-loaded spring portions of the damper; wherein a first pre-loaded spring portion contacts a first surface of the PCBA and a second pre-loaded spring portion contacts a second surface of the PCBA as suggested by Ko because such modification in addition to provide shock protection, it also provides EMI protection and grounding (par. [0022]).
Regarding claim 10, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising coupling the damper (500) to the PCBA mechanically (board 410 is mechanically couple to the channel or groove formed along the inner peripheral 531, figs 3-6) or via an adhesive prior to removably coupling the PCBA to the enclosure via the damper (figs. 2A-2C, 4) (Ko also teaches the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 10, further comprising removably coupling the PCBA (401) to the enclosure (200, 300) via the damper (500) by inserting the PCBA coupled to the damper into a first portion (groove or stepped portion formed in the inner upper portion of the 300) of the enclosure (fig. 4) (Ko also teaches module 20 is removably inserted into the damper 30 and the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising coupling the damper (500) to a first portion (groove or stepped portion formed in the inner upper portion of the 300) of the enclosure mechanically (damper 500 mechanically couple in the groove or stepped portion formed in the inner upper portion of the 300) or via an adhesive prior to removably coupling the PCBA to the enclosure via the damper (500) (fig. 4) (Ko also teaches the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Regarding claim 13, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 12, further comprising removably coupling the PCBA (410) to the enclosure via the damper (500) by coupling the PCBA (410) to the damper (figs 2A-4) (Ko also teaches module 20 is removably inserted into the damper 30 and the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising the damper (500) disposed in a first portion (groove or stepped portion formed in the inner upper portion of the 300) of the enclosure (figs. 4-6) (Ko also teaches module 20 is removably inserted into the damper 30 and the damper 30 is mechanically coupled to the casing 52 via a screw 60, fig. 4).
Omote in view of Tran and Ko does not explicitly disclose wherein the damper is formed from a first portion of the enclosure.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the damper an integral part of or formed from a first portion of the enclosure, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to make plural parts unitary as a matter of engineering design choice. In re Larson, 144 USPQ 347 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 15, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising removably coupling the PCBA (401) to the enclosure (200, 300) via the damper (500) by inserting the PCBA coupled to the damper into a first portion (groove or stepped portion formed in the inner upper portion of the 300) of the enclosure (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 16, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Omote) discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising removably coupling the PCBA (410) to the enclosure (200, 300) via the damper (500) by coupling a second portion (200) of the enclosure to a first portion (300) of the enclosure (fig. 4), wherein the PCBA (410) is enclosed by the first portion (300) and the second portion (200) of the enclosure in response to coupling the second portion to the first portion (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 17, Omote in view of Tran and Ko discloses the method of claim 16.
Ko further teaches a different damper (second frame 30) contacting the assembly (20) prior to coupling the second portion (52) of the enclosure to the first portion (53) of the enclosure (figs. 3-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Omote in view of Tran and Ko to incorporate a different damper contacting the PCBA prior to coupling the second portion of the enclosure to the first portion of the enclosure as suggested by Ko because such modification enhances the shock protection of the PCBA or the apparatus.
Regarding claim 18, Omote in view of Tran and Ko (relied on Ko) discloses the method of claim 17, further comprising coupling the different damper (second instant of frame 30) to the second portion (52) of the enclosure prior (second frame 30 is coupled to the second case 52 via a screw 60, figs 3-4) to coupling the second portion (52) of the enclosure to the first portion (53) of the enclosure (figs 3-4).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omote (US 20190373750; “Omote” hereinafter) in view of Ko (US 20070030639: “Ko” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 19, Omote discloses a system, comprising: a damper (500) with a number of damper portions (a “first damper portion” and a “second damper portion”, annotated fig. 5 above); a printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) (410); and a first and second portion (200, 300) of an enclosure configured to enclose the damper and the PCBA (figs 2A-4), wherein the number of damper portions of the damper are configured to receive the PCBA by contacting a first surface and a second surface of the PCBA (first damper portion contacts the upper surface of the board 410 and the second damper portion contacts the lower surface of the board 410, annotated fig. 5, and figs 2A-6) and damp shock impulses applied to the system (500 improves absorption and/or vibration suppression between the enclosure and the board 410, par. [0059]), and wherein the number of damper portions are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“the interconnecting portion 533A is elastically deformed to prevent an excessive load from being transmitted to the inner peripheral portion 531A”, par. [0048], also see par. [0045]-535 is configured to deform).
Omote does not explicitly disclose a damper with a number of pre-loaded spring portions; wherein the number of pre-loaded spring portions are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses.
Ko teaches an electronic device (50) comprising a damper (30; “those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection”, par. [0022]); wherein the damper being configured to: receive an assembly (20) via a number of pre-loaded spring portions (32, 321) of the damper; wherein a number of pre-loaded spring portions (elastic projections 321 on the upper side of the frames 30, fig. 2) contacts a first surface (upper surface of 20) and a second surface (lower surface of 20) of the assembly (20) (figs 2-3); contact an enclosure (52, 53) of the assembly (fig. 4); and wherein the number of pre-loaded spring portions (321) are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses (“those elastic projections 321 on the lower part of the two conducting will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock protection… those elastic projections 321 on the upper part of the two conducting frames 30 will be compressed to further achieve the purpose of shock”, par. [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Omote to have a damper provided with a number of pre-loaded spring portions and wherein the number of pre-loaded spring portions are configured to deform in response to the shock impulses as suggested by Ko because such modification in addition to provide shock protection, it also provides EMI protection and grounding (par. [0022]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omote in view of Ko as applied to claim 19 and in further view of Tran.
Regarding claim 20, Omote in view of Ko discloses the system as claimed in claim 19.
Omote in view of Ko does not explicitly disclose wherein the system is a solid state drive (SSD).
Tran teaches a solid state drive (10), wherein the SSD comprising a damper (40) configured to damp shock impulses applied to the SSD (“Above and below PC board 18, and inside enclosure 11 is silicone gel 20, which dampens vibrations that drive 10 may suffer”, Col. 2: lines 1-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the system to use the damping mechanism of Omote in view of Ko in a solid state drive as taught by Tran as such modification absorb vibration or any external shock transfer to the circuit board assembly of the SSD and prevents any damage to the circuit board assembly caused by and the external shock or vibration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot; whereas new rejections have been presented to read on the amended claim language.
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 SAGAR SHRESTHA whose telephone number is (571)270-1236. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am-6:30 pm, Monday-Friday.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/SAGAR SHRESTHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841