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 December 19, 2025 have been entered. Applicant’s amendments have overcome each and every claim objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Action mailed September 24, 2025. Claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-22 remain pending, but stand rejected for the reasons detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-22 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 clarify the partition bracket includes a latching element configured to engage with a groove in the electronic module. Examiner agrees this limitation overcomes the prior art of record, but submits Lin (US Publication No. 2024/0147647) teaches the cited limitation (see Figures 2-3 below). Because the primary reference, Hendrix, teaches partition plates with guide rails similar to Lin, Examiner submits it would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to have combined the latch element and groove of Lin to the partition plates and electronic modules of Hendrix, respectively, to secure the electronic modules within the chassis. For these reasons, and the reasons detailed below, claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-22 stand rejected.
PNG
media_image1.png
658
568
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
596
486
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 1-5, 8, 10-14, 17, and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hendrix (US Publication No. 2007/0119792) in view of Ice (US Patent No. 7099160) and Lin (US Publication No. 2024/0147647).
Regarding claim 1, Hendrix discloses a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B), comprising: a base (enclosure bottom 322B); and a modular panel section (see Figure 3A-4B) comprising: a pair of vertical support members (side supports 323L, 323R) coupled to the base (322B) and defining an opening (space between 323L and 323R) therebetween; a horizontal support structure (Figure 3D, support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) extending between and coupled to the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) to divide the opening (space between 323L, 323R) into a first region and a second region (see Figure 3D); one or more partition brackets (removable supports 329); and a plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) in the first region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or in the second region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein each of the bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) comprises one or more mounting elements (channels 328C and locking features 328L) configured to, on condition of one of the partition brackets (329) being disposed at a respective bracket mounting location (areas corresponding to 329), connect a respective partition bracket (329) to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 322L, 322R) and/or the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein the partition brackets (329) are disposed at respective bracket mounting locations (respective areas corresponding to 329) of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) and removably coupled to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 322L, 322R) and/or to the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and divide the first region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) into a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325), and wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is configured to receive an electronic module (blade 325) of a plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325).
Hendrix does not explicitly disclose where each bay of the plurality of bays is configured to allow the electronic module to be electrically connected to a primary system board of the information processing device.
However, Ice teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figure 1) where each bay of a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating functional modules 400) is configured to allow the electronic module (400) to be electrically connected (via back plate 106) to a primary system board (PCB 108C) of the information processing device (see Figure 1).
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 backplane and system board of Ice to the electronic modules and base of the chassis in Hendrix. Doing so would have allowed the electronic modules of Hendrix to be interconnected via a primary system board of the information processing device (see col. 3, ln. 55-67 and Figure 1 in Ice).
Hendrix in view of Ice does not teach wherein each partition bracket comprises a latching element configured to detachably engage with a groove of the electronic module to secure the electronic module in a corresponding bay of the plurality of bays.
However, Lin teaches a partition bracket (Figure 2, guide tracks 11, corresponding to 329 in Hendrix), wherein each partition bracket (11) comprises a latching element (comprised of limiting element 12, handle 13, and resilient member 14) configured to detachably engage with a groove (Figure 3, first opening 152) of the electronic module (expansion plate 15) to secure the electronic module (15) in a corresponding bay (see Figure 1).
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 latching elements and grooves of Lin to the guide members of the partition brackets and electronic modules of Hendrix as modified by Ice. Doing so would have secured the electronic modules within the bays (see Paragraph [0024] in Lin).
Regarding claim 2, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 1, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein at least one of respective sizes of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), respective locations of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), or a number of the bays among the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is reconfigurable by at least one of: disposing an additional partition bracket (second 329) at one of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) removing one of the partition brackets (329); or changing which of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) the one or more partition brackets (329) are installed at (see Figure 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 3, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 1, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein each vertical support member of the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) comprises a first guide member (blade slots 323B), wherein each partition bracket (329) comprises a second guide member (blade slots 329B), wherein the first guide members (323B) and the second guide members (329B) are configured to engage with third guide members (protruding edges of 325) of the electronic module (325) as the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) is inserted into the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) to mount the plurality of electronic modules (325) to the information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 4, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 3, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein a first bay (Figure 3D, space accommodating first 325-C) of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is defined between a first vertical support member (323L) and a first partition bracket (first 329), and wherein the first guide member (323B of 323L) of the first vertical support member (323L) and the second guide member (329B of 329) of the first partition bracket (first 329) are configured to engage with the third guide members (protruding edges of 325) of a first electronic module (first 325-C) of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) to mount the first electronic module (first 325-C) to the information processing device (see Figure 3D).
Regarding claim 5, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 4, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein a second bay (Figure 3D, space accommodating second 325-C) of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is defined between the first partition bracket (first 329) and a second partition bracket (second 329), and wherein the second guide members (329B) of the first and second partition brackets (first and second 329) are configured to engage with the third guide members (protruding edges of 325) of a second electronic module (second 325-C) of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) to mount the second electronic module (second 325-C) to the information processing device (see Figure 3D).
Regarding claim 8, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 1, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) forms or is a part of a rear panel (Figure 4B, rear panel of 301) of the information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 10, Hendrix discloses an information processing device comprising: a chassis (rack mount chassis 320) comprising a base (enclosure bottom 322B) and a modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B); a plurality of electronic modules (blades 325) configured to removably install in the chassis (320) through the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B), wherein the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) comprises: a pair of vertical support members (side supports 323L, 323R) coupled to the base (bottom 328) and defining an opening therebetween (space between 323L, 323R); a horizontal support structure (Figure 3D, support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) extending between and coupled to the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) to divide the opening (space between 323L, 323R) into a first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and a second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C); one or more partition brackets (removable supports 329); and a plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) in the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or in the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein each of the bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) comprises one or more mounting elements (locking features 328L and mounting slots 328C) configured to, on condition of one of the partition brackets (329) being disposed at a respective bracket mounting location (areas corresponding to 329), connect a respective partition bracket (329) to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 323L, 323R) and/or the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein the partition brackets (329) are disposed at respective bracket mounting locations of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) and removably coupled to the base (322B) and/or to the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and divide the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) into a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325), and wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (space accommodating 325) located in one of the first (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) or second regions (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) is configured to receive a corresponding electronic module of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325).
Hendrix does not disclose each electronic module comprising one or more first electrical connectors; and a primary system board coupled to the base and comprising one or more second electrical connectors, wherein each bay of the plurality of bays located in one of the first or second regions is aligned to the one or more second electrical connectors, and allow the one or more first electrical connectors to be electrically connected to corresponding one or more second electrical connectors.
However, Ice teaches an information processing device comprising a chassis (housing 102) and a plurality of electronic modules (functional devices 400), each electronic module (400) comprising one or more first electrical connectors (portion of 400 connected to connectors 106A; see Figure 3); and a primary system board (comprised of PCB 108C and backplane 106) coupled to the base of the chassis (floor 102A of chassis 102; see Figure 3) and comprising one or more second electrical connectors (comprised of backplane 106 and connectors 106A), wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 400) located in one of the first or second regions (see Figure 1) is aligned to the one or more second electrical connectors (106A of 106), and allow the one or more first electrical connectors (portion of 400 connected to connectors 106A) to be electrically connected to corresponding one or more second electrical connectors (106A of 106).
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 backplane and system board of Ice to the electronic modules and base of the chassis in Hendrix. Doing so would have allowed the electronic modules of Hendrix to be interconnected via a primary system board of the information processing device (see col. 3, ln. 55-67 and Figure 1 in Ice).
Hendrix in view of Ice does not teach wherein the electronic modules comprises a groove, and wherein each partition bracket comprises a latching element configured to detachably engage with a groove of the electronic module to secure the electronic module in a corresponding bay of the plurality of bays.
However, Lin teaches an electronic module (Figure 3, expansion plate 15) comprising a groove (first opening 152); and a partition bracket (Figure 2, guide tracks 11, corresponding to 329 in Hendrix), wherein each partition bracket (11) comprises a latching element (comprised of limiting element 12, handle 13, and resilient member 14) configured to detachably engage with the groove (152) of the electronic module (expansion plate 15) to secure the electronic module (15) in a corresponding bay (see Figure 1).
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 latching elements and grooves of Lin to the guide members of the partition brackets and electronic modules of Hendrix as modified by Ice. Doing so would have secured the electronic modules within the bays (see Paragraph [0024] in Lin).
Regarding claim 11, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 10, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein at least one of respective sizes of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), respective locations of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), or a number of the bays among the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is reconfigurable by at least one of: disposing an additional partition bracket (second 329) at one of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) or removing one of the partition brackets (329); or changing which of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) the one or more partition brackets (329) are installed at (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 12, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 10, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein each vertical support member of the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) comprises a first guide member (blade slots 323B), wherein each partition bracket (329) comprises second guide members (blade slots 329B), wherein the first guide members (323B) and the second guide members (329B) are configured to engage with third guide members (protruding edges of 325 aligned with 323B, 329B) of the corresponding electronic module (325) as the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) is inserted into the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) to mount the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) to the information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 13, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 12, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein a first bay (Figure 3D, space accommodating first 325-C) of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is defined between a first vertical support member (323L) and a first partition bracket (first 329 connected to first 325-C), and wherein the first guide member (323B) of the first vertical support member (323L) and the second guide member (329B) of the first partition bracket (first 329) are configured to engage with the third guide members (protruding edges of 325-C) of a first electronic module (first 325-C) of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) to mount the first electronic module (first 325-C) to the information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 14, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 13, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein a second bay (Figure 3D, space accommodating second 325-C) of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is defined between the first partition bracket (first 329) and a second partition bracket (second 329), and wherein the second guide members (329B) of the first and second partition brackets (first and second 329) are configured to engage with the third guide members (protruding edges of 325) of a second electronic module (second 325-C) of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325) to mount the second electronic module (second 325) to the information processing device (see Figure 3D).
Regarding claim 17, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 10, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) forms or is a part of a rear panel (Figure 4B, rear panel of 301) of the information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 19, Hendrix discloses a method of configuring a chassis (rackmount housing 350) of an information processing device (rackmount component 320) by a modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B), comprising: coupling a pair of vertical support members (side supports 323L, 323R) of the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) to a base (base 322B) of the chassis (350) to define an opening (space between 323L, 323R) therebetween; coupling a horizontal support structure (Figure 3D, support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) of the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) to the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) to divide the opening (space between 323L, 323R) into a first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and a second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) comprises a plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to removable supports 329), each comprising one or more mounting elements (locking features 328L and mounting slots 328C); disposing partition brackets (removable supports 329) of the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) at a respective bracket mounting location of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329); and removably coupling the partition brackets (329) to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 323L, 323R) and/or the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) using the one or more mounting elements (locking features 328L and mounting slots 328C) to divide the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) into a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) of the chassis (350), wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is configured to receive an electronic module of a plurality of electronic modules (blades 325), and removably install the electronic module (325) to the chassis (350).
Hendrix does not explicitly disclose wherein each bay of the plurality of bays are configured to electrically connect the electronic module to a primary system board of the information processing device.
However, Ice teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figure 1) where each bay of a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating functional modules 400) is configured to allow the electronic module (400) to be electrically connected (via backplane 106) to a primary system board (PCB 108C) of the information processing device (see Figure 1).
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 backplane and system board of Ice to the electronic modules and base of the chassis in Hendrix. Doing so would have allowed the electronic modules of Hendrix to be interconnected via a primary system board of the information processing device (see col. 3, ln. 55-67 and Figure 1 in Ice).
Hendrix in view of Ice does not teach wherein each partition bracket comprises a latching element configured to detachably engage with a groove of the electronic module to secure the electronic module in a corresponding bay of the plurality of bays.
However, Lin teaches a partition bracket (Figure 2, guide tracks 11, corresponding to 329 in Hendrix), wherein each partition bracket (11) comprises a latching element (comprised of limiting element 12, handle 13, and resilient member 14) configured to detachably engage with a groove (Figure 3, first opening 152) of the electronic module (expansion plate 15) to secure the electronic module (15) in a corresponding bay (see Figure 1).
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 latching elements and grooves of Lin to the guide members of the partition brackets and electronic modules of Hendrix as modified by Ice. Doing so would have secured the electronic modules within the bays (see Paragraph [0024] in Lin).
Regarding claim 20, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the method of claim 19, and further teaches (in Hendrix) wherein at least one of respective sizes of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), respective locations of the bays (spaces accommodating 325), or a number of the bays among the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is reconfigurable by at least one of: disposing an additional partition bracket (second 329) at one of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) or removing one of the partition brackets (329); or changing which of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) the one or more partition brackets (329) are installed at (see Figure 3A-4B).
Regarding claim 21, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 3, and further teaches (in Lin) wherein the groove (152) is formed on at least one of the third guide members (guide portions 151) of the electronic module (15) such that the groove (15) is formed in a peripheral sidewall of the electronic module (sidewall of 15).
Regarding claim 22, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 12, and further teaches (in Lin) wherein the groove (152) is formed on at least one of the third guide members (guide portions 151) of the corresponding electronic module (15) such that the groove (152) is formed in a peripheral sidewall of the corresponding electronic module (sidewall of 15).
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hendrix (US Publication No. 2007/0119792), Ice (US Patent No. 7099160), Lin (US Publication No. 2024/0147647), and in further view of Wu (US Publication No. 2010/0027214).
Regarding claim 6, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the chassis of claim 1, but does not teach a cage configured to house a power supply unit of the information processing device, and wherein one vertical support member of the pair of vertical support members is a part of the cage.
However, Wu teaches a chassis comprising a cage (comprised of walls of 52 and divider plate 114 defining space accommodating power supply 56) configured to house a power supply unit (56) of the information processing device (server 50), and wherein one vertical support member (114, corresponding to 323L in Hendrix) is a part of the cage (comprised of walls of 52 and divider plate 114 defining space accommodating power supply 56).
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 modified the chassis of Hendrix as modified by Ice and Lin to include the cage and power supply units of Wu. Doing so would have provided a space for which to accommodate power supplies configured to supply power to the expansion devices (see Figures 1-3 and Paragraphs [0027]-[0029] in Wu).
Regarding claim 15, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 10, but does not teach wherein the chassis further comprises a cage configured to house a power supply unit of the information processing device, and wherein one vertical support member of the pair of vertical support members is a part of the cage.
However, Wu teaches a chassis comprising a cage (comprised of walls of 52 and divider plate 114 defining space accommodating power supply 56) configured to house a power supply unit (56) of the information processing device (server 50), and wherein one vertical support member (114, corresponding to 323L in Hendrix) member is a part of the cage (comprised of walls of 52 and divider plate 114 defining space accommodating power supply 56).
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 modified the chassis of Hendrix as modified by Ice and Lin to include the cage and power supply units of Wu. Doing so would have provided a space for which to accommodate power supplies configured to supply power to the expansion devices (see Figures 1-3 and Paragraphs [0027]-[0029] in Wu).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hendrix (US Publication No. 2007/0119792), Ice (US Patent No. 7099160), Lin (US Publication No. 2024/0147647), and in further view of Norton (US Patent No. 10264701) and Ross (US Publication No. 2013/0155600).
Regarding claim 9, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 1, but does not teach wherein each bay formed in the second region allows the corresponding electronic module to be electrically connected to the primary system board via one or more cables.
However, Norton teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 7A-11B) where each bay of a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating modules 601-603) is configured to allow the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to a primary system board of the information processing device (col. 2, ln. 5-19, cables used to connect resource modules to main board of computing system via connectors 501-503; see also col. 8, ln. 44-57), wherein each bay (spaces accommodating 601-603) formed in the second region (chamber 250A; corresponding to space above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C in Hendrix) allows the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to the primary system board (see col. 2, ln. 5-19) via one or more cables (see col. 2, ln. 5-19; col. 8, ln. 44-57).
Because both Ice and Norton teach connecting a plurality of electronic modules to a primary board via primary board connectors, 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 rigid-backplane, primary board connector of Hendrix as modified by Ice and Lin for the cabled-backplane, primary board connector in Norton, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of electrically connecting a plurality of electronic modules to a circuit board (see col. 2, ln. 5-19 in Norton).
Hendrix in view of Ice, Lin, and Norton does not teach wherein each partition bracket has a half U space height.
However, Ross teaches wherein a partition bracket (portion of divider 191 between rails 194) has a half U space height (see Paragraph [0103]).
Because the information processing device of the claimed invention has similar structure and proportion to the information processing device of Hendrix as modified by Ice, Lin, and Norton, the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed size of the partition bracket as taught in Ross, because doing so would have allowed electronic modules having a half-U height to be disposed in the chassis without wasting space (see Paragraph [0103] in Ross).
Regarding claim 18, Hendrix in view of Ice and Lin teaches the information processing device of claim 10, but does not teach wherein each partition bracket has a half U space height, and wherein each bay formed in the second region allows the corresponding electronic module to be electrically connected to the primary system board via one or more cables.
However, Norton teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 7A-11B) comprising an electronic module (modules 601-603) comprising one or more first electrical connectors (portions of 601-602 connected to connectors 501-503); and a primary system board (comprised of circuit board 800 and connectors 501-503) coupled to a base (base of 701) and comprising one or more second electrical connectors (comprised of connectors 501-503), wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 601-603) located in one of the first or second regions (see Figures 7A-12) is aligned to the one or more second electrical connectors (connectors 501-503), and allow the one or more first electrical connectors (portions of 601-602 connected to connectors 501-503) to be electrically connected to corresponding one or more second electrical connectors (501-503), wherein each bay (spaces accommodating 601-603) formed in the second region (chamber 250A; corresponding to space above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C in Hendrix) allows the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to the primary system board (see col. 2, ln. 5-19) via one or more cables (see col. 2, ln. 5-19; col. 8, ln. 44-57).
Because both Ice and Norton teach connecting a plurality of electronic modules to a main board via connectors, 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 rigid-backplane, primary board connector of Hendrix as modified by Ice and Lin for the cabled-backplane, primary board connector in Norton, according to known methods to yield the predictable results of electrically connecting a plurality of electronic modules to a circuit board (see col. 2, ln. 5-19 in Norton).
Hendrix in view of Ice, Lin, and Norton does not teach wherein each partition bracket has a half U space height.
However, Ross teaches wherein a partition bracket (portion of divider 191 between rails 194) has a half U space height (see Paragraph [0103]).
Because the information processing device of the claimed invention has similar structure and proportion to the information processing device of Hendrix as modified by Ice, Lin, and Norton, the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed size of the partition bracket as taught in Ross, because doing so would have allowed electronic modules having a half-U height to be disposed in the chassis without wasting space (see Paragraph [0103] in Ross).
Alternatively, claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hendrix (US Publication No. 2007/0119792) in view of Norton (US Patent No. 10264701), Ross (US Publication No. 2013/0155600), and Lin (US Publication No. 2024/0147647).
Regarding claim 9, Hendrix discloses a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 3A-4B), comprising: a base (enclosure bottom 322B); a modular panel section (see Figure 3A-4B) comprising: a pair of vertical support members (side supports 323L, 323R) coupled to the base (322B) and defining an opening (space between 323L and 323R) therebetween; a horizontal support structure (Figure 3D, support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) extending between and coupled to the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) to divide the opening (space between 323L, 323R) into a first region and a second region (see Figure 3D); one or more partition brackets (removable supports 329); and a plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) in the first region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or in the second region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein each of the bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) comprises one or more mounting elements (channels 328C and locking features 328L) configured to, on condition of one of the partition brackets (329) being disposed at a respective bracket mounting location (areas corresponding to 329), connect a respective partition bracket (329) to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 322L, 322R) and/or the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein the partition brackets (329) are disposed at respective bracket mounting locations (respective areas corresponding to 329) of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) and removably coupled to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 322L, 322R) and/or to the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and divide the first region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) into a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325), and wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325) is configured to receive an electronic module (blade 325) of a plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325).
Hendrix does not explicitly disclose where each bay of the plurality of bays is configured to allow the electronic module to be electrically connected to a primary system board of the information processing device, wherein each bay formed in the second region allows the electronic module to be electrically connected to the primary system board via one or more cables.
However, Norton teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 7A-12) where each bay of a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating modules 601-603) is configured to allow the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to a primary system board of the information processing device (col. 2, ln. 5-19, cables used to connect resource modules to main board of computing system via connectors 501-503; see also col. 8, ln. 44-57), wherein each bay (spaces accommodating 601-603) formed in the second region (chamber 250A; corresponding to space above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C in Hendrix) allows the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to the primary system board (see col. 2, ln. 5-19 and Figure 12) via one or more cables (see Figure 12 and col. 2, ln. 5-19; col. 8, ln. 44-57).
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 connectors, cables, and primary system board of Norton to the electronic modules and base of Hendrix. Doing so would have allowed the electronic modules to be interconnected via a primary system board of the information processing device (see col. 2, ln. 5-19 in Norton).
Hendrix in view of Norton does not teach wherein each partition bracket has a half U space height.
However, Ross teaches wherein a partition bracket (portion of divider 191 between rails 194) has a half U space height (see Paragraph [0103]).
Because the information processing device of the claimed invention has similar structure and proportion to the information processing device of Hendrix as modified by Norton, the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed size of the partition bracket as taught in Ross, because doing so would have allowed electronic modules having a half-U height to be disposed in the chassis without wasting space (see Paragraph [0103] in Ross).
Hendrix in view of Norton and Ross does not teach wherein each partition bracket comprises a latching element configured to detachably engage with a groove of the electronic module to secure the electronic module in a corresponding bay of the plurality of bays.
However, Lin teaches a partition bracket (guide tracks 11, corresponding to 329 in Hendrix), wherein each partition bracket (11) comprises a latching element (comprised of limiting element 12, handle 13, and resilient member 14) configured to detachably engage with a groove (first opening 152) of the electronic module (expansion plate 15) to secure the electronic module (15) in a corresponding bay (see Figure 1).
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 latching elements and grooves of Lin to the guide members of the partition brackets and electronic modules of Hendrix as modified by Norton and Ross. Doing so would have secured the electronic modules within the bays (see Paragraph [0024] in Lin).
Regarding claim 18, Hendrix discloses an information processing device comprising: a chassis (rack mount chassis 320) comprising a base (enclosure bottom 322B) and a modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B); a plurality of electronic modules (blades 325) configured to removably install in the chassis (320) through the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B), wherein the modular panel section (see Figures 3A-4B) comprises: a pair of vertical support members (side supports 323L, 323R) coupled to the base (bottom 328) and defining an opening therebetween (space between 323L, 323R); a horizontal support structure (Figure 3D, support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) extending between and coupled to the pair of vertical support members (323L, 323R) to divide the opening (space between 323L, 323R) into a first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and a second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C); one or more partition brackets (removable supports 329); and a plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) in the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or in the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein each of the bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) comprises one or more mounting elements (locking features 328L and mounting slots 328C) configured to, on condition of one of the partition brackets (329) being disposed at a respective bracket mounting location (areas corresponding to 329), connect a respective partition bracket (329) to the base (322B, via connection with span 328 and supports 323L, 323R) and/or the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C), wherein the partition brackets (329) are disposed at respective bracket mounting locations of the plurality of bracket mounting locations (areas corresponding to 329) and removably coupled to the base (322B) and/or to the horizontal support structure (support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and divide the first region (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) and/or the second region (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) into a plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 325), and wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (space accommodating 325) located in one of the first (above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) or second regions (below support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C) is configured to receive a corresponding electronic module of the plurality of electronic modules (plurality of 325).
Hendrix does not disclose each electronic module comprising one or more first electrical connectors; and a primary system board coupled to the base and comprising one or more second electrical connectors, wherein each bay of the plurality of bays located in one of the first or second regions is aligned to the one or more second electrical connectors, and allow the one or more first electrical connectors to be electrically connected to corresponding one or more second electrical connectors.
However, Norton teaches a chassis of an information processing device (see Figures 7A-12) comprising an electronic module (modules 601-603) comprising one or more first electrical connectors (portions of 601-602 connected to connectors 501-503); and a primary system board (comprised of circuit board 800 and connectors 501-503) coupled to a base (base of 701, corresponding to 322 in Hendrix) and comprising one or more second electrical connectors (comprised of connectors 501-503), wherein each bay of the plurality of bays (spaces accommodating 601-603) located in one of the first or second regions (see Figures 7A-12) is aligned to the one or more second electrical connectors (501-503), and allow the one or more first electrical connectors (portions of 601-602 connected to connectors 501-503) to be electrically connected to corresponding one or more second electrical connectors (501-503), wherein each bay (spaces accommodating 601-603) formed in the second region (chamber 250A; corresponding to space above support span 328 accommodating blades 325-C in Hendrix) allows the electronic module (601-603) to be electrically connected to the primary system board (see Figure 12 and col. 2, ln. 5-19) via one or more cables (see Figure 12 and col. 2, ln. 5-19; col. 8, ln. 44-57).
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 connectors, cables, and primary system board of Norton to the electronic modules and base of Hendrix. Doing so would have allowed the electronic modules to be interconnected via a primary system board of the information processing device (see col. 2, ln. 5-19 in Norton).
Hendrix in view of Norton does not teach wherein each partition bracket has a half U space height.
However, Ross teaches wherein a partition bracket (portion of divider 191 between rails 194) has a half U space height (see Paragraph [0103]).
Because the information processing device of the claimed invention has similar structure and proportion to the information processing device of Hendrix as modified by Norton, the stated limitation is held to be merely a selection of optimal working parameters established through routine experimentation, and thus obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to formulate the claimed size of the partition bracket as taught in Ross, because doing so would have allowed electronic modules having a half-U height to be disposed in the chassis without wasting space (see Paragraph [0103] in Ross).
Hendrix in view of Norton and Ross does not teach wherein the electronic modules comprises a groove, and wherein each partition bracket comprises a latching element configured to detachably engage with a groove of the electronic module to secure the electronic module in a corresponding bay of the plurality of bays.
However, Lin teaches an electronic module (Figure 3, expansion plate 15) comprising a groove (first opening 152); and a partition bracket (Figure 2, guide tracks 11, corresponding to 329 in Hendrix), wherein each partition bracket (11) comprises a latching element (comprised of limiting element 12, handle 13, and resilient member 14) configured to detachably engage with the groove (152) of the electronic module (expansion plate 15) to secure the electronic module (15) in a corresponding bay (see Figure 1).
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 latching elements and grooves of Lin to the guide members of the partition brackets and electronic modules of Hendrix as modified by Norton and Ross. Doing so would have secured the electronic modules within the bays (see Paragraph [0024] in Lin).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fujimura (US Patent No. 8184442) also teaches a chassis similar to the claimed device.
Liu (US Patent No. 8628156) and Wang (US Patent No. 9635772) also teaches power supply cages similar to the claimed device.
Gupta (US Patent No. 10042396), Tsorng (US Patent No. 10782748), Kartadinata (US Publication No. 2023/0389211), Lin (US Patent No. 12429930), Chen (US Publication No. 2021/0153373), and Sauer (US Patent No. 10645835) also teach latch members similar to the claimed device.
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 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