CTNF 18/447,668 CTNF 89683 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings 06-36 AIA 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 corresponding electrical connector housed in a chassis of claims 4, 8, and 14 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. Specification The use of the terms “Dell Remote Access Controller” and “Integrated Dell Remote Access Controller,” which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, ℠, or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: The processing device in claims 1 and 17 (“a microprocessor, microcontroller, digital signal processor (DSP), application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or any other digital or analog circuitry configured to interpret and/or execute program instructions and/or process data”) The thermal control system in claim 1 (“any system, device, or apparatus configured to receive one or more signals indicative of one or more temperatures within information handling system 102 (e.g., one or more signals from temperature sensor 109 and/or temperature sensor 112), and based on such signals, calculate an air mover driving signal to maintain an appropriate level of cooling, increase cooling, or decrease cooling, as appropriate, and communicate such air mover driving signal to air mover 106”). Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Claim Rejections — 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Embleton et al. (US Pub. 2022/0030750) . Claim 1: Embleton discloses an information handling system (10) comprising: a chassis (100A); an air mover (194.2) housed within the chassis (evident from fig. 1.5) and configured to drive airflow within the chassis ( ibid. ); a heater (196.4) mechanically coupled to a body of a chassis mechanical feature of the chassis (fairly evident from fig. 1.3), wherein the heater is located within a path of the airflow driven by the air mover (evident from figs. 1.3 and 1.5); and a processing device (150) housed within the chassis and configured to implement a thermal control system for controlling the heater to regulate a temperature of the information handling system above a threshold minimum temperature (clearly evident from ¶ 158, “the environment control modification is implemented when the component's temperature, actual humidity, and/or relative humidity exceeds a preferred temperature range” (which would necessarily include a minimum temperature)). Claim 6: Embleton discloses the chassis mechanical feature comprising a temperature sensor (191) communicatively coupled to the processing device (clearly implied by ¶ 88) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 8–19 are allowed. 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 2–5 and 7 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The term “chassis” is a term of art which refers either to what is popularly understood as a “computer case,” or, more importantly with respect to this application, to an enclosure which houses a single server, e.g. inside a server rack which houses multiple chassis. This term of art is understood to contour how the “chassis mechanical feature” of claims 8 and 14 should be understood. Furthermore, the claimed “heater” is understood to be attached to the chassis mechanical feature directly, or indirectly with an element not overly distinct from a chassis itself. Graham et al. (US Pub. 2016/0123616) discloses a similar invention, but its processing device is not within the same chassis as the heater and fan. Berke (US Pub. 2015/0373876) is similar, but although there is a clear case for its heater being as claimed (particularly the one explicitly in the air path of the fan described in ¶ 33), it does not disclose that its heating element is attached to a chassis mechanical feature. Li (CN 108235629 A) is similar, but is not believed to disclose a chassis proper. Shabbir et al. (US Pat. 10,712,790) has all of its elements on a motherboard, which is distinct from a chassis. Embleton et al. (US Pub. 2022/0026968) is an example of a similar reference, particularly in how its chassis 100A has a chassis environmental manager 132, which may have heaters (see ¶ 70), including heaters placed at a front of the chassis ( ibid. ). However, Embleton does not give any insight into how these heaters are mounted within the chassis, and whether they would truly be mounted to the chassis. Zhou (CN 104375603 A), Park (KR 10-0807935 B1), Leblond (US Pub. 2010/0139290), Koshimizu (US Pub. 2013/0013937), Alissa et al. (US Pat. 10,667,435), Chen et al. (CN 107155279 B), Nikazm et al. (US Pub. 2021/0103305), Embleton et al. (US Pub. 2022/0030741), An et al. (US Pub. 2023/0156976), Tunks et al. (US Pat. 11,706,900) are all other similar that have one or more deficiencies compared to the claims, often matching those of the prior art above. Cai et al. (CN 201097302 Y) discloses an air shroud associated with a chassis Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John J. Norton whose telephone number is (571) 272-5174. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM 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, Edward (Ned) F. Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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. /JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 2 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 3 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 4 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 5 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 6 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 7 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/447,668 Page 8 Art Unit: 3761
Prosecution Insights