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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed November 10, 2025 have been entered. Applicant’s amendments have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Action mailed August 11, 2025. Claims 1-8 remain pending, but stand rejected for the reasons detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 10, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the information handling resource bay does not include a first side and a second side, wherein the mechanical guard is connected to the first side and the second side, because fool-proof member 230 is mounted to top plate 213 (Arguments, pages 5-6). However, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, Examiner submits the amendments do not prevent fool proof member 230 from being interpreted as being coupled, via its connection with top plate 213, to a first and second side of slot 211, considering top plate 213 defines a rear end of slot 211 (see annotated Figure 6A below; see also Paragraph [0025]). Specifically, a first half of member 230 is connected/coupled to a first half of slot 211, and a second half of member 230 is connected/coupled to a second half of slot 211.
PNG
media_image1.png
552
544
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, even if the claims clarified the mechanical guard was directly coupled to a first and second sidewall defining the information handling resource bay, as suggested by Examiner in the Interview on November 5, 2025 (see Interview Summary Record mailed November 7, 2025), Examiner notes Hartman (US Publication No. 2016/0205804) teaches a similar configuration, where brace 246 is directly coupled to sidewalls defining an information handling resource bay (220, 238; see Figures 2-3 below). Cowles (US Publication No. 2013/0288494) also teaches a similar configuration (see base plate 27 in Figures 2-4).
PNG
media_image2.png
540
800
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
542
556
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the compatible information handling resource" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner will interpret the cited limitation as --a compatible information handling resource-- for the purposes of examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin (US Publication No. 2021/0126400).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses an information handling system comprising: a motherboard (Figures 6A-6B, circuit board 220); an information handling resource bay (slot 211, including portion of plate 213 defining rear of 211) comprising a first side (first half of 211) opposite to a second side (second half of 211); a first connector (connector 221) coupled to the motherboard (220) and configured to electrically couple to a compatible information handling resource (Paragraph [0029]-[0030], electronic device 100 with insert member 130 coded to engage with fool proof member 230) inserted into the information handling resource bay (211); and a mechanical guard (fool-proof member 230) coupled to the first side (first half of 211) and the second side (second half of 211) of the information handling resource bay (211) such that the mechanical guard (230) covers a portion of an opening (rear opening of 211) of the information handling resource bay (211) proximate to the first connector (221, where connector 221 is also located at a rear of slot 211), wherein the mechanical guard (230) is arranged relative to the opening (rear opening of 211) such that when an attempt is made to insert an incompatible information handling resource (Paragraphs [0029]-[0030], electronic device 100 with insert member 130 not coded to engage with fool proof member 230) into the information handling resource bay (211), the mechanical guard (230) mechanically interferes with an interference feature (uncoded 130) of the incompatible information handling resource (100 with uncoded 130) to prevent full insertion of a second connector (connector 120 of electronic device 100 with uncoded 130) of the incompatible information handling resource (100 with uncoded 130) into the first connector (221).
Regarding claim 3, Lin discloses a system comprising: an information handling resource bay (slot 211, including portion of plate 213 defining rear of 211) comprising a first side (first half of 211) opposite to a second side (second half of 211); and a mechanical guard (fool-proof member 230) coupled to the first side (first half of 211) and the second side (second half of 211) of the information handling resource bay (211) such that the mechanical guard (230) covers a portion of an opening (rear opening of 211) of the information handling resource bay (211) proximate to a first connector (electrical connector 221, where connector 221 and fool-proof member 230 are both located at a rear of slot 211), wherein the mechanical guard (230) is arranged relative to the opening (rear opening of 211) such that when an attempt is made to insert an incompatible information handling resource (Paragraph [0029]-[0030], electronic device with insert member 130 not coded to engage with fool proof member 230) into the information handling resource bay (211), the mechanical guard (230) mechanically interferes with an interference feature (insert member 130) of the incompatible information handling resource (100 with uncoded 130) to prevent full insertion of a second connector (electrical connector 120 of electronic device 100 with uncoded 130) of the incompatible information handling resource (100 with uncoded 130) into the first connector (electrical connector 221) proximate to the opening (rear opening of 211).
Regarding claim 5, Lin discloses an information handling resource, comprising: a housing (main body 110); a first connector (electrical connector 120) extending from the housing (110) at a connector end (see Figure 6A) of the housing (110); and a mechanical interference feature (insert member 130) at the connector end (see Figure 6A) of the housing (110) configured to, when an attempt is made to insert the information handling resource (Paragraph [0029]-[0030], electronic device 100 with insert member 130 not coded to engage with fool proof member 230) into a second connector (electrical connector 221) incompatible with the first connector (120), mechanically interfere with a mechanical guard (fool-proof member 230) of an information handling resource bay (slot 211, including portion of plate 213 defining rear of 211) to prevent full insertion of the first connector (120) into the second connector (221), wherein the information handling resource bay (211) comprises a first side (first half of 211) opposite to a second side (second half of 211) and the mechanical guard (230) is coupled to the first side (first half of 211) and the second side (second half of 211) of the information handling resource bay (211).
Regarding claim 7, Lin discloses the information handling resource of Claim 5, and further discloses wherein the mechanical interference feature (130) is formed in the housing (110; where 130 is fit in holes 112 of housing 110).
Regarding claim 8, Lin discloses the information handling resource of Claim 5, and further discloses wherein the mechanical interference feature (130) comprises a mechanical feature (Figure 4, buckle structure 133) mechanically attached to the housing (110; see Paragraph [0021]).
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 2, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US Publication No. 2021/0126400) in view of Cowles (US Publication No. 2013/0288494).
Regarding claim 2, Lin discloses the information handling system of Claim 1, and suggests wherein the compatible information handling resource (electronic device 100) is a compatible power supply unit (Paragraph [0015], wherein devices 100 are part of a power distribution apparatus) configured to be inserted into the information handling resource bay (211) and the first connector (221).
However, Cowles explicitly teaches wherein a compatible information handling resource (device 11) is a compatible power supply unit (see Paragraph [0012]) configured to be inserted into the information handling resource bay (device bay 15 within shelf 10, corresponding to slots 211 within shelf 200 in Lin) and the first connector (connector 65).
Because Lin and Cowles both teach electronic devices being inserted into a power supply device (see Figure 1 in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin), 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 electronic device of Lin for the power supply device of Cowles according to known methods to yield the predictable results of using interference features on devices inserted into power supply housings (see Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0001]-[0002], [0012] in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin).
Regarding claim 4 (as best understood), Lin discloses the system of Claim 3, and suggests wherein a compatible information handling resource (electronic device 100) is a compatible power supply unit (Paragraph [0015], wherein devices 100 are part of a power distribution apparatus) configured to be inserted into the information handling resource bay (211) and the first connector (221).
However, Cowles explicitly teaches wherein a compatible information handling resource (device 11) is a compatible power supply unit (see Paragraph [0012]) configured to be inserted into the information handling resource bay (device bay 15 within shelf 10, corresponding to slots 211 within shelf 200 in Lin) and the first connector (connector 65).
Because Lin and Cowles both teach electronic devices being inserted into a power supply device (see Figure 1 in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin), 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 electronic device of Lin for the power supply device of Cowles according to known methods to yield the predictable results of using interference features on devices inserted into power supply housings (see Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0001]-[0002], [0012] in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin).
Regarding claim 6, Lin discloses the information handling resource of Claim 5, and suggests wherein the information handling resource comprises a power supply unit (see Paragraph [0015]).
However, Cowles explicitly teaches an information handling resource (device 20), an interference feature (key slot 29) coupled to the information handling resource (20), wherein the information handling resource (20) comprises a power supply unit (see Paragraphs [0001]-[0002], [0012])
Because Lin and Cowles both teach electronic devices being inserted into a power supply device (see Figure 1 in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin), 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 electronic device of Lin for the power supply device of Cowles according to known methods to yield the predictable results of using interference features on devices inserted into power supply housings (see Figure 1 and Paragraphs [0001]-[0002], [0012] in Cowles; see Paragraph [0015] in Lin).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Klikic (US Publication No. 2017/0265325) also teaches compatible power supply units being installed into a power shelf.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
gsc
Prosecution Insights