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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 5/5/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 5, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 3 - 4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korta et. al (US 20230077114 A1) hereafter referred to as Korta in view of Chen et. al (US 20180249589 A1) hereafter referred to as Chen.
Regarding claim 1, Korta teaches the electronic device, comprising:
a chassis (100 rack assembly unit);
a primary system board (not numbered, PCB ¶113, located in 130 control unit housing) mounted to the chassis (¶113 Figs 2A-D) and comprising processing circuitry (¶113, PCB);
a set of support members (111 and 112 side walls, Fig 3C and 3D) coupled to the chassis and defining at least one bay (area inside chassis where 150 tray slides into, Fig 3D, ¶64-65),
wherein a first support member of the set of support members comprises a front face (113 rear wall) a first connector (135-1 connector) directly mounted and electrically connected to the primary system board (¶56, Fig 2A-2D), comprising
a first support wall (portion of 111 side wall that abuts 205 hinge see annotated Fig 3C below),
a second support wall (portion of 112 side wall that abuts 205 hinge see annotated Fig 3C below),
PNG
media_image1.png
447
409
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and
a first pin (430 guide pin) protruding from a side face of the first support wall and extending along a first direction (¶80 Fig 5E, extends in the Y direction);
a second connector (135-2 connector) comprising a cable electrically connected to the primary system board (FFC flat flexible cable, ¶56, Fig 8D),
a third support wall (111 side wall Fig 3A-D),
a fourth support wall (112 side wall Fig 3A-D),
a first hole (410 guide slot) formed at a side face of the third support wall (¶80 Fig 5B), and
a second hole (440 second guide pin) formed at a rear face of the fourth support wall (¶80, Fig 5E),
wherein the first pin protrudes at least partially into the first hole to removably couple the second connector to the first connector (¶80, Fig 5E and 8B); and
a second pin (420 guide pin, ¶81) protruding from the front face (¶80, Fig 8B) and extending along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (¶82, guide pines extend outwardly at right angles to the external surfaces 151-2 and 152-2) and
wherein the second pin (440 guide pin) protrudes into the second hole (420 guide slot, ¶82, Fig 8B) to removably couple the second connector to the first support member (¶81-82) and
wherein the first and second holes allow the second connector to move along the first direction relative to the first and second pins (¶82, Fig 7A).
Korta fails to teach at least one electronic module is insertable into the at least one bay to detachably couple with at least one of the first and second connectors to electrically connect the at least one electronic module to the primary system board via one of the first and second connectors.
However, Chen teaches at least one electronic module (100 server device) is insertable into the at least one bay (area where sled slides into, Fig 2) to detachably couple with at least one of the first and second connectors (145 and 146 connectors) to electrically connect the at least one electronic module to the primary system board (130 backplane board) via one of the first and second connectors (¶18-19). Korta and Chen are both in the industry of server chassis with connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta to include the slideable connection of Chen in order to minimize damage to the connectors when sliding into place due to misalignment (Chen ¶3)
Regarding claim 3, Korta in view of Chen teach the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the set of support members (111 and 112 side walls) further comprises a second support member (112 side wall) disposed spaced apart from the first support member (Fig 3A-C) to define a first bay of the at least one bay (area inside chassis where 150 tray slides into), and wherein the at least one electronic module comprises an open compute program (OCP) module (¶142 unit module 130) having a large form factor that is insertable into the first bay such that the OCP module is engaged with and supported by the first and second support members (Fig 10) and a first complementary connector (135-1 connector) and a second complementary connector of the OCP module (135-2) is detachably coupled to the first connector and the second connector, respectively (¶56).
Regarding claim 4, Korta in view of Chen teach the electronic device of claim 3.
Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the first support member comprises a first guide rail, the second support member comprises a second guide rail, wherein each sidewall of the OCP module comprises a third guide rail, and wherein, as the OCP module is inserted into the first bay, the third guide rails slidingly engage with the first and second guide rails to guide the OCP module into the first bay and to removably couple the OCP module to the electronic device in the combination of claim 3.
However, Chen teaches the first support member (220 slideable structure) comprises a first guide rail (205 slots), the second support member (220 slideable structure) comprises a second guide rail (205 slots), wherein each sidewall of the OCP module comprises a third guide rail (205 slots), and wherein, as the OCP module is inserted into the first bay, the third guide rails slidingly engage with the first and second guide rails to guide the OCP module into the first bay and to removably couple the OCP module to the electronic device (¶26-28). Korta and Chen are both in the industry of server chassis with connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta to include the guide slots of Chen in order to align the PCB connector with the corresponding backplane board electrical connector while sliding into place (Chen ¶26)
Regarding claim 7, Korta in view of Chen teach electronic device of claim 1, wherein the primary system board (not numbered, PCB ¶113) comprises a first edge connector (166F connector) electrically connected to the first connector (¶123) and a surface mount connector electrically connected to the cable (¶56); wherein a first side of the first connector is mounted to an edge of the primary system board at the first edge connector (¶123) and a second side of the first connector comprises a first receptacle (135 rear connector) configured to receive a second edge connector of one of the at least one electronic module (¶126-126); and wherein a first side of the second connector is coupled to the cable and a second side of the second connector comprises a second receptacle configured to receive a third edge connector of one of the at least one electronic module (¶127).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korta in view of Chen, and further in view of Henderson et. al (US 20200078110 A1) hereafter referred to as Henderson.
Regarding claim 2, Korta in view of Chen teach the electronic device of claim 1.
Korta and Chen fail to teach wherein the second hole has a first diameter, and wherein the second pin has a second diameter smaller than the first diameter to allow the second connector to move along the first direction.
However, Henderson teaches the second hole has a first diameter (11704 electrical contact, ¶367), and wherein the second pin has a second diameter (pin, ¶365) smaller than the first diameter to allow the second connector to move along the first direction (¶365 and 367).wherein the second hole has a first diameter (11704 electrical contact, ¶367), and wherein the second pin has a second diameter (pin, ¶365) smaller than the first diameter to allow the second connector to move along the first direction (¶365 and 367). Korta, Chen and Henderson are all in the industry of connector systems with contacts therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta and Chen to include the smaller size pin of Henderson in order to ensure the connector can engage with the correct connect when engaging (Henderson ¶365)
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korta in view of Chen, and further in view of Norton (EP 3589097 B1)
Regarding claim 5, Korta in view of Chen teaches the electronic device of claim 1.
Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the set of support members further comprises a second support member (201R side wall) and third support member (300 vertical divider), where each of the first, second, and third support members are disposed spaced apart from each other to define a first bay and a second bay of the at least one bay (Fig 4B), wherein the at least one electronic module comprises a first open compute program (OCP) module (600 resource modules) and a second OCP module (900 resource modules), each having a small form factor, and wherein the first OCP module and the second OCP module are insertable into the first bay and second bay (Fig 11A), respectively, such that a first complementary connector (500 connector) of the first OCP module is detachably coupled to the first connector (405 connector frame) and a second complementary connector (500 connector) of the second OCP module is detachably coupled to the second connector (405 connector frame). Korta, Chen, and Norton are all in the industry of removable module chassis systems, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta and Chen to include the support member structure of Norton in order to reinforce and provide support for the module when inserted (Norton, Pg 2 ¶8, Pg 3 ¶2)
Regarding claim 6, Korta in view of Chen teach electronic device of claim 5.
Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the first support member comprises a first guide rail, the second support member comprises a second guide rail, and the third support member comprises a third guide rail and a fourth guide rail, each formed on a corresponding side of the third support member, wherein each sidewall of the first OCP module comprises a fifth guide rail and each sidewall of the second OCP module comprises a sixth guide rail, and wherein, as the first OCP module is inserted into the first bay, the fifth guide rails engage with the first and third guide rails to guide the first OCP module into the first bay and to removably couple the first OCP module to the electronic device, and wherein, as the second OCP module is inserted into the second bay, the sixth guide rails engage with the second and fourth guide rails to guide the second OCP module into the second bay and to removably couple the second OCP module to the electronic device.
However, Norton teaches the first support member (201L side wall) comprises a first guide rail (210 second rails), the second support member (201R side wall) comprises a second guide rail (210 second rails), and the third support member (300 vertical divider) comprises a third guide rail (310 third rails) and a fourth guide rail, each formed on a corresponding side of the third support member (Fig 4B, ¶), wherein each sidewall of the first OCP module comprises a fifth guide rail (610 engagement feature) and each sidewall of the second OCP module comprises a sixth guide rail (610 engagement feature), and wherein, as the first OCP module is inserted into the first bay, the fifth guide rails engage with the first and third guide rails to guide the first OCP module into the first bay (Fig 11A-B) and to removably couple the first OCP module to the electronic device, and wherein, as the second OCP module is inserted into the second bay, the sixth guide rails engage with the second and fourth guide rails to guide the second OCP module into the second bay and to removably couple the second OCP module to the electronic device. (Fig 11A-B) Korta, Chen, and Norton are all in the industry of removable module chassis systems, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta and Chen to include the guide rail structure of Norton in order to reinforce and provide support for the module when inserted (Norton, Pg 2 ¶8)
Claim 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korta in view of Chen, and further in view of Horning (US 20230033815 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Korta in view of Chen teach the electronic device of claim 7, wherein there is a first connector (145 connector), second connector (146 connector), and a PCB with a fourth edge connector (166F connector).
Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the connector comprises a set of contacts on the first side of the first connector electrically connected to the edge connector, a set of contacts on the first side of the connector electrically connected to the edge connector, and a set of contacts disposed in the receptacle to electrically connect with the edge connector. However, Horning teaches the connector (102 socket connector) comprises a set of contacts (140 contact) on the first side of the first connector electrically connected to the edge connector (114 socket ¶29), a set of contacts (140 contact) on the first side of the connector electrically connected to the edge connector (116 socket ¶29), and a set of contacts disposed in the receptacle to electrically connect with the edge connector (¶31). Korta, Chen, and Horning are all in the industry of chassis with connectors, therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Korta and Chen to include the connector assembly of Horning in order to allow for seamless coupling and uncoupling as the housing receives the module, Horning ¶6)
Regarding claim 9, Korta in view of Chen teach the electronic device of claim 7, wherein there is a first connector (145 connector), second connector (146 connector), and a PCB with a fourth edge connector (166F connector).
Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the first connector comprises a set of first contacts on the first side of the first connector electrically connected to the first edge connector and a set of second contacts disposed in the first receptacle to electrically connect with the second edge connector; and wherein the second connector comprises a set of third contacts on the first side of the second connector soldered to the cable and a set of fourth contacts disposed in the second receptacle to electrically connect with the third edge connector.
However, Horning teaches Korta in view of Chen fail to teach the first connector comprises a set of first contacts (140 contact) on the first side of the first connector electrically connected to the first edge connector (116 socket, ¶29) and a set of second contacts disposed in the first receptacle (140 contacts) to electrically connect with the second edge connector (116 socket); and wherein the second connector comprises a set of third contacts (140 contacts) on the first side of the second connector (¶29) soldered to the cable (118 cable, ¶27) and a set of fourth contacts disposed in the second receptacle to electrically connect with the third edge connector (¶27-28).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xie (CN 200710138656 A) teaches a card connector assembly configured to attach an electronic device to a circuit board.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELISA SASSERATH whose telephone number is (703)756-5847. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights