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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 11, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5-9, and 11-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s amendments are directed at clarifying a pair of second backplanes are capable of being connected to the drive bay, wherein the pair of second backplanes are stacked one on top of another. However, Examiner submits Huang (US Publication No. 2024/0304220) teaches a pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (backplanes 35), wherein the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) are configured to be positioned one on top of another (see Figures 3-4, reproduced below).
For these reasons, and the reasons detailed below, claims 1-3, 5-9, and 11-12 stand rejected.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5, line 3-4, “the second backplane disk bay backplane element” should read --the pair of the second backplane disk bay backplane elements--
In claim 11, line 3-4, “the second backplane disk bay backplane element” should read --the pair of the second backplane disk bay backplane elements--
Appropriate correction is 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.
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US Publication No. 2021/0007236) in view of Zhai (US Patent No. 10064305) and Huang (US Publication No. 2024/0304220).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a configurable bay device mounting system, comprising: a device bay (141), the device bay (141) being defined by a first side wall (first sidewall of 141), a second side wall (second sidewall of 141), a top plate (top wall of 141), and a bottom plate (bottom wall of 141, including portion connected to 23), the device bay (141) being configurable to mount a plurality of devices (41, 42) conforming to one or both of a first form factor (EDSFF form factor of 42) and a second form factor (HDD form factor of 41); and a first backplane disk bay backplane element (interface module 23) and a second backplane disk bay backplane element (riser card 3), the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) being configured to couple with a plurality of devices conforming to the first form factor (EDSFF; see Paragraph [0040]), the second backplane disk bay backplane element (riser card 3) being configured to couple with the plurality of devices (41) conforming to the second form factor (HDD form factor of 41), the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) including a first backplane attachment feature (latch 238), the first backplane attachment feature (238) coupling with a first attachment feature (wedge 124) of the device bay (141), the first attachment feature (124) being positioned on the bottom plate of the device bay (bottom wall of 141, including portion connected to 23).
Wu does not disclose a backplane disk bay mechanical insert, the backplane disk bay mechanical insert being configured to arrange a plurality of devices conforming to the second form factor according to the second form factor, the backplane disk bay mechanical insert defining a plurality of chambers, each of the plurality of chambers being configured to receive a respective device conforming to the second form factor, the plurality of chambers including a first row of chambers and a second row of chambers, the first row of chambers being arranged on top of the second row of chambers, the first row of chambers being configured to receive a first row of devices conforming to the second form factor, the second row of chambers being configured to receive a second row of devices conforming to the second form factor;
However, Zhai teaches a backplane disk bay mechanical insert (carrier 100), the backplane disk bay mechanical insert (100) being configured to arrange a plurality of devices (devices 104-1, 104-2, 104-3, 104-4) conforming to a second form factor (M.2) according to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), the backplane disk bay insert (carrier 100, including sub-carriers 106; corresponding to carrier 151 in Zhang) defining a plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating devices 104-1, 104-2, 104-3, 104-4), each of the plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating 104) being configured to receive a respective device (104) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), wherein the plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating 104) include a first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) and a second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2), the first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) being arranged on top of the second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2), the first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) being configured to receive a first row of devices (104-3, 104-4) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), the second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2) being configured to receive a second row of devices (104-1, 104-2) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the single HDD of Wu for the four SSD devices and sub-carriers of Zhai according to known methods to yield the predictable results of arranging a plurality of smaller memory devices within a standard form factor. Doing so would have also provided the system with a smaller, more compact, hot-pluggable memory device (see col. 4, ln. 1-19 in Zhai).
Wu in view of Zhai does not teach wherein the second backplane disk bay backplane element is a pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements, the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements being configured to be positioned one on top of another, the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements including respective second backplane attachment features, the respective second backplane attachment features coupling with respective second attachment features of the device bay, each of the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements including a plurality of backplane connectors and a backplane mounting plate, the plurality of backplane connectors being arranged in parallel across the backplane mounting plate, each of the plurality of backplane connectors including respective attachment backplane connector attachment features.
However, Huang teaches wherein the second backplane disk bay backplane element is a pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (backplanes 35), the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) being configured to be positioned one on top of another (see Figures 3-4), the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) including respective second backplane attachment features (edges of 35 engaged with latching elements), the respective second backplane attachment features (edges of 35 engaged with latching elements) coupling with respective second attachment features (latches of mounting cage 31; see annotated Figures 3 and 4 below) of the device bay (31), each of the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) including a plurality of backplane connectors (Paragraph [0025], plugs of 35) and a backplane mounting plate (substrate of 35), the plurality of backplane connectors (plugs of 35) being arranged in parallel across the backplane mounting plate (Paragraph [0025], plugs of 35 being aligned with plugs of 32), each of the plurality of backplane connectors (plugs of 35) including respective attachment backplane connector attachment features (portion of plug directly connected to connectors of 32).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
592
782
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the single second backplane of Wu as modified by Zhai for the pair of second backplanes and attachment features of Huang, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of electrically connecting a plurality of stacked storage devices within a drive bay, and considering it is well established that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP § 2144.04 and In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Doing so would have also increased the modularity of the system (see Figures 3-4 in Huang).
Regarding claim 5, Wu in view of Zhai and Huang teaches the configurable bay device mounting system of claim 1, and further teaches (in Wu) wherein: the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) and the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35 in Huang) are configured to be attached to a rear portion of the device bay (rear portion of rear portion of 141).
Regarding claim 6, Wu in view of Zhai and Huang teaches the configurable bay device mounting system of claim 1, further comprising (in Zhai) a disk bay insert (sub-carriers 106), the disk bay insert (106) functioning as a removable dividing partition (see Figures 1-3) for separating two or more of the plurality of devices (104).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US Publication No. 2021/0007236), Zhai (US Patent No. 10064305), Huang (US Publication No. 2024/0304220), and in further view of Grady (US Publication No. 2024/0288915).
Regarding claim 2, Wu in view of Zhai and Huang teaches the configurable bay device mounting system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein: the first form factor is substantially twice as tall as the second form factor and substantially half as wide as the second form factor; and, the second form factor is substantially half as tall as the first form factor and substantially twice as wide as the first form factor.
However, Grady teaches a plurality of devices (see Figures 1A-2B) conforming to one or both of a first form factor (Figure 2A, EDSFF E3.S 2T drive 200) and a second form factor (Figure 1D, EDSFF E1.S drive 160; see Paragraphs [0003]-[0007] and Table 1), wherein: the first form factor (E3) is substantially twice as tall as the second form factor (E1; where E3 has a width of 76.00mm, and E1 has a width of 33.75mm) and substantially half as wide as the second form factor (E1; where E3 has a thickness of 7.50mm, and E1 has a thickness of 15.00mm); and the second form factor (E1) is substantially half as tall as the first form factor (E3; where E1 has a width of 33.75mm and E3 has a width of 76.00mm) and substantially twice as wide as the first form factor (E3; where E1 has a thickness of 15.00mm and E3 has a thickness of 7.50mm) (NOTE: Paragraph [0026] of instant application defining “substantially” as +/- 20%).
Because Wu and Grady both teach incorporating memory modules of different sizes into a computing device, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the plurality of devices in Wu as modified by Zhai and Huang for the plurality of devices in Grady according to known methods to yield the predictable results of utilizing a plurality of different sized memory devices within a server (see Paragraphs [0032]-[0035] in Grady).
Regarding claim 3, Wu in view of Zhai, Huang, and Grady teaches the configurable bay device mounting system of claim 2, and further teaches (in Grady) wherein: the first form factor (E3) corresponds to an enterprise and datacenter standard form factor (EDSFF) E3 form factor (see Table 1, Paragraph [0047], and Figure 2A); and, the second form factor (E1) corresponds to an EDSFF E1 form factor (see Table 1, Paragraph [0045], and Figure 1D).
Claims 7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US Publication No. 2021/0007236) in view of Zhai (US Patent No. 10064305), Huang (US Publication No. 2024/0304220), and Ping (US Publication No. 2019/0272008).
Regarding claim 7, Wu discloses a configurable bay device mounting system, comprising: a device bay (141), the device bay (141) being defined by a first side wall (first sidewall of 141), a second side wall (second sidewall of 141), a top plate (top wall of 141), and a bottom plate (bottom wall of 141, including portion connected to 23), the device bay (141) being configurable to mount a plurality of devices (41, 42) conforming to one or both of a first form factor (EDSFF form factor of 42) and a second form factor (HDD form factor of 41); and a first backplane disk bay backplane element (interface module 23) and a second backplane disk bay backplane element (riser card 3), the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) being configured to couple with a plurality of devices conforming to the first form factor (EDSFF; see Paragraph [0040]), the second backplane disk bay backplane element (riser card 3) being configured to couple with the plurality of devices (41) conforming to the second form factor (HDD form factor of 41), the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) including a first backplane attachment feature (latch 238), the first backplane attachment feature (238) coupling with a first attachment feature (wedge 124) of the device bay (141), the first attachment feature (124) being positioned on the bottom plate of the device bay (bottom wall of 141, including portion connected to 23).
Wu does not disclose a backplane disk bay mechanical insert, the backplane disk bay mechanical insert being configured to arrange a plurality of devices conforming to the second form factor according to the second form factor, the backplane disk bay mechanical insert defining a plurality of chambers, each of the plurality of chambers being configured to receive a respective device conforming to the second form factor, the plurality of chambers including a first row of chambers and a second row of chambers, the first row of chambers being arranged on top of the second row of chambers, the first row of chambers being configured to receive a first row of devices conforming to the second form factor, the second row of chambers being configured to receive a second row of devices conforming to the second form factor;
However, Zhai teaches a backplane disk bay mechanical insert (carrier 100), the backplane disk bay mechanical insert (100) being configured to arrange a plurality of devices (devices 104-1, 104-2, 104-3, 104-4) conforming to a second form factor (M.2) according to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), the backplane disk bay insert (carrier 100, including sub-carriers 106; corresponding to carrier 151 in Zhang) defining a plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating devices 104-1, 104-2, 104-3, 104-4), each of the plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating 104) being configured to receive a respective device (104) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), wherein the plurality of chambers (spaces accommodating 104) include a first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) and a second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2), the first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) being arranged on top of the second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2), the first row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-3 and 104-4) being configured to receive a first row of devices (104-3, 104-4) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor), the second row of chambers (spaces accommodating 104-1 and 104-2) being configured to receive a second row of devices (104-1, 104-2) conforming to the second form factor (M.2 form factor).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the single HDD of Wu for the four SSD devices and sub-carriers of Zhai according to known methods to yield the predictable results of arranging a plurality of smaller memory devices within a standard form factor. Doing so would have also provided the system with a smaller, more compact, hot-pluggable memory device (see col. 4, ln. 1-19 in Zhai).
Wu in view of Zhai does not teach wherein the second backplane disk bay backplane element is a pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements, the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements being configured to be positioned one on top of another, the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements including respective second backplane attachment features, the respective second backplane attachment features coupling with respective second attachment features of the device bay, each of the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements including a plurality of backplane connectors and a backplane mounting plate, the plurality of backplane connectors being arranged in parallel across the backplane mounting plate, each of the plurality of backplane connectors including respective attachment backplane connector attachment features.
However, Huang teaches wherein the second backplane disk bay backplane element is a pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (backplanes 35), the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) being configured to be positioned one on top of another (see Figures 3-4), the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) including respective second backplane attachment features (edges of 35 engaged with latching elements), the respective second backplane attachment features (edges of 35 engaged with latching elements) coupling with respective second attachment features (latches of mounting cage 31; see annotated Figures 3 and 4 above) of the device bay (31), each of the pair of second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35) including a plurality of backplane connectors (Paragraph [0025], plugs of 35) and a backplane mounting plate (substrate of 35), the plurality of backplane connectors (plugs of 35) being arranged in parallel across the backplane mounting plate (Paragraph [0025], plugs of 35 being aligned with plugs of 32), each of the plurality of backplane connectors (plugs of 35) including respective attachment backplane connector attachment features (portion of plug directly connected to connectors of 32).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the single second backplane of Wu as modified by Zhai for the pair of second backplanes and attachment features of Huang, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of electrically connecting a plurality of stacked storage device within a drive bay, and considering it is well established that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP § 2144.04 and In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Doing so would have also increased the modularity of the system (see Figures 3-4 in Huang).
Wu in view of Zhai and Huang does not explicitly teach the system comprising: a processor; and a data bus coupled to the processor.
However, Ping teaches a system comprising a processor (Paragraph [0044] and Figure 7, processor 702 of motherboard 700); and a data bus (data bus 712) coupled to the processor (702); a configurable bay device mounting system comprising a device bay (Figure 3, chassis 106) including a plurality of devices (mass storage devices 708).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have combined the processor and data bus of Ping to the server system of Wu as modified by Zhai and Huang. Doing so would have allowed the data stored on the memory devices in Wu as modified by Zhai and Huang to be processed by the computing system (see Paragraphs [0045]-[0051] and Figure 7 in Ping).
Regarding claim 11, Wu in view of Zhai, Huang, and Ping teaches the system of claim 7, and further teaches (in Wu) wherein: the first backplane disk bay backplane element (23) and the pair of the second backplane disk bay backplane elements (35 in Huang) are configured to be attached to a rear portion of the device bay (rear portion 141).
Regarding claim 12, Wu in view of Zhai, Huang, and Ping teaches the system of claim 7, further comprising (in Zhai) a disk bay insert (sub-carriers 106), the disk bay insert (106) functioning as a removable dividing partition (see Figures 1-3) for separating two or more of the plurality of devices (104).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US Publication No. 2021/0007236), Zhai (US Patent No. 10064305), Huang (US Publication No. 2024/0304220), Ping (US Publication No. 2019/0272008), and in further view of Grady (US Publication No. 2024/0288915).
Regarding claim 8, Wu in view of Zhai, Huang, and Ping teaches the system of claim 7, but does not explicitly teach wherein: the first form factor is substantially twice as tall as the second form factor and substantially half as wide as the second form factor; and, the second form factor is substantially half as tall as the first form factor and substantially twice as wide as the first form factor.
However, Grady teaches a plurality of devices (see Figures 1A-2B) conforming to one or both of a first form factor (Figure 2A, EDSFF E3.S 2T drive 200) and a second form factor (Figure 1D, EDSFF E1.S drive 160; see Paragraphs [0003]-[0007] and Table 1), wherein: the first form factor (E3) is substantially twice as tall as the second form factor (E1; where E3 has a width of 76.00mm, and E1 has a width of 33.75mm) and substantially half as wide as the second form factor (E1; where E3 has a thickness of 7.50mm, and E1 has a thickness of 15.00mm); and the second form factor (E1) is substantially half as tall as the first form factor (E3; where E1 has a width of 33.75mm and E3 has a width of 76.00mm) and substantially twice as wide as the first form factor (E3; where E1 has a thickness of 15.00mm and E3 has a thickness of 7.50mm) (NOTE: Paragraph [0026] of instant application defining “substantially” as +/- 20%).
Because Wu and Grady both teach incorporating memory modules of different sizes into a computing device, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to have substituted the plurality of devices in Wu as modified by Zhai, Huang, and Ping for the plurality of devices in Grady according to known methods to yield the predictable results of utilizing a plurality of different sized memory devices within a server (see Paragraphs [0032]-[0035] in Grady).
Regarding claim 9, Wu in view of Zhai, Huang, Ping, and Grady teaches the system of claim 8, and further teaches (in Grady) wherein: the first form factor (E3) corresponds to an enterprise and datacenter standard form factor (EDSFF) E3 form factor (see Table 1, Paragraph [0047], and Figure 2A); and, the second form factor (E1) corresponds to an EDSFF E1 form factor (see Table 1, Paragraph [0045], and Figure 1D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAGE STEPHEN CRUM whose telephone number is (571)272-3373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 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, 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.
/GAGE CRUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
gsc
Prosecution Insights