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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al. (US Patent No. 9607660 B2 and Bennett hereinafter) in view of Marcade et al (US Patent No. 7139166 B2 and Marcade hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 1, Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) a structural drive assembly, comprising: a storage device (116) having a first mounting feature (holes) on a first side of the storage device and a second mounting feature (324-327) on a second side of the storage device (col 4, lines 1-10); and a carrier (118) connected to the storage device and comprising a top portion (310) and a bottom portion (312), wherein: the top portion is attached to the first side of the storage device by a connection component (protrusions) configured to interface with the first mounting feature (fig.4); the bottom portion is attached to the second side of the storage device by a connection component (protrusions) configured to interface with the second mounting feature; and the top portion and bottom portion have front extensions and rear extensions (306 and 308) for anchoring the structural drive assembly to a server chassis (100) wherein the carrier is fixedly (by 206) connected to the storage device (fig.2). Bennett does not explicitly disclose a carrier fixedly connected to the storage device. However, Marcade teaches (fig.1) a carrier (including 12 and 14) fixedly (screws) connected to the storage device (30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a carrier fixedly connected to the storage device of Marcade to device of Bennett in order to securely attach the drive to the carrier that positioned in a front or forward position in which the hard drive is closer to the bezel (Marcade and col-4, lines 5-10)
Regarding Claim 2, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 1. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the carrier further comprises: a first bracket connecting the top portion and the bottom portion together configured to provide structural rigidity to the carrier.
PNG
media_image1.png
234
489
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 2. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the first bracket is narrower than the width of the storage device (fig.4).
Regarding Claim 4, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 2. Marcade teaches (fig.1) wherein the carrier further comprises: a second bracket (32) connecting the top portion and the bottom portion together, wherein the second bracket is at an opposite end of the carrier from the first bracket. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a second bracket of Marcade to device of Bennett in order to securely attach the drive to the carrier that positioned in a front or forward position in which the hard drive is closer to the bezel (Marcade and col-4, lines 5-10)
Regarding Claim 5, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 1. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the front extensions to anchor with a front section of the server chassis and the rear extensions are configured to anchor with a rear section of the server chassis.
Regarding Claim 6, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 5. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the front extensions and rear extensions of the top portion and bottom portion extend beyond a length of the storage device.
PNG
media_image2.png
730
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 1. Marcade discloses wherein the connection components are screws (36, 36) connecting with the first and second mounting features. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine carrier that is connected to the storage device by screws of Marcade to device of Bennett in order to securely attach the drive to the carrier that positioned in a front or forward position in which the hard drive is closer to the bezel (Marcade and col-4, lines 5-10)
Regarding Claim 9, Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) a server system comprising a server chassis, wherein the server chassis has no structural bracing in a front section of the server chassis; and
a structural drive assembly, comprising: a storage device (116) having a first mounting feature (holes) on a first side of the storage device and
a second mounting feature (324-327) on a second side of the storage device; and
a carrier (118) connected to the storage device and comprising a top portion (310) and a bottom portion (312),
wherein: the top portion is attached to the first side of the storage device by a connection component configured to interface with the first mounting feature (fig.4);
the bottom portion is configured to attach to the second side of the storage device by a connection component configured to interface with the second mounting feature; and wherein the carrier is fixedly connected to the storage device; and wherein the top portion and bottom portion have front extensions and rear extensions (306 and 308) for anchoring the structural drive assembly to the server chassis,
the rear extensions through an interface component of the server chassis, and provide structural rigidity to the server chassis. Bennett does not explicitly disclose a carrier fixedly connected to the storage device. However, Marcade teaches (fig.1) a carrier (including 12 and 14) fixedly (screws) connected to the storage device (30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a carrier fixedly connected to the storage device of Marcade to device of Bennett in order to securely attach the drive to the carrier that positioned in a front or forward position in which the hard drive is closer to the bezel (Marcade and col-4, lines 5-10)
Regarding Claim 10, Bennett/Marcade discloses the server system of claim 9 . Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the carrier further comprises: a first bracket connecting the top portion and the bottom portion together configured to provide structural rigidity to the carrier.
PNG
media_image1.png
234
489
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, Bennett/Marcade discloses the server system of claim 10. Marcade teaches (fig.1) wherein the carrier further comprises: a second bracket (32) connecting the top portion and the bottom portion together, wherein the second bracket is at an opposite end of the carrier from the first bracket. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a second bracket of Marcade to device of Bennett in order to securely attach the drive to the carrier that positioned in a front or forward position in which the hard drive is closer to the bezel (Marcade and col-4, lines 5-10)
Regarding Claim 12, Bennett/Marcade discloses the server system of claim 9. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the front extensions and rear extensions of the top portion and bottom portion extend beyond a length of the storage device.
Regarding Claim 13, Bennett/Marcade discloses the server system of claim 12. Bennett discloses (figs. 1-5) wherein the rear extensions connect portion of the top portion and bottom portion connects with the interface component at a rear section of the server chassis.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al. in view of Marcade et al and further in view of Chen et al (US Patent No. 6592327 B2 and Chen hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 8, Bennett/Marcade discloses the structural drive assembly of claim 1 but fails to disclose wherein the top portion further includes a T-flange disposed on the top portion. However, Chen teaches (figs. 1-2) wherein the top portion further includes a
PNG
media_image3.png
518
372
media_image3.png
Greyscale
T-flange disposed on the top portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine T-flange disposed on the top portion of Chen to device of Bennett/Marcade in order to conveniently install the drive in the chassis (Chen and Col 3, lines 30-35)
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al. in view of Marcade et al and further in view of Conn et al (US Pub No. 2016/0057887 A1 and Conn hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 14, Bennett/Marcade discloses the server system of claim 12 but fails to disclose wherein the server chassis further comprises: a drive latch mechanism disposed at a front of the server chassis configured to attach to a front of the carrier to anchor the structural drive assembly to the server chassis. However, Conn teaches (figs. 1-10) wherein the server chassis further comprises: a drive latch mechanism (160) disposed at a front of the server chassis configured to attach to a front of the carrier (230) to anchor the structural drive assembly to the server chassis (280). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a drive latch mechanism of Conn to device of Bennett/Marcade in order to provide a locking mechanism to lock/unlock the drive (Conn and [0023])
Regarding Claim 15, Bennett/Marcade/Conn discloses the server system of claim 14. Conn further teaches (figs. 1-10) wherein the drive latch mechanism is hingidly (263) connected to the server chassis and configured to rotate over the carrier to anchor the structural drive assembly to the server chassis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine he drive latch mechanism is hingidly connected to the server chassis of Conn to device of Bennett/Marcade in order to move into the proper position in the chassis (Conn and [0030])
Regarding Claim 16, Bennett/Marcade/Conn discloses the server system of claim 14. Conn further teaches (figs. 1-10) wherein the drive latch mechanism comprises two separate drive latch mechanisms (162 and 162) configured to anchor the structural drive assembly to the server chassis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the drive latch mechanism is hingidly connected to the server chassis of Conn to device of Bennett/Marcade in order to move into the proper position in the chassis (Conn and [0030])
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett et al. in view of Marcade et al in view of Conn et al and further in view of Peng et al (US Patent No. 7611328 B2 and Peng hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 17, Bennett/Marcade/Conn discloses the server system of claim 16 but fails to disclose wherein a first drive latch mechanism is disposed at a bottom of the server chassis and a second drive latch mechanism is disposed at a top of the server chassis. However, Peng teaches (figs. 1-5) wherein a first drive latch mechanism (30) is disposed at a bottom of the server chassis (10) and a second drive latch mechanism (30) is disposed at a top of the server chassis. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a first/second drive latch mechanism of Peng to device of Bennett/Marcade/Conn in order to provide two locking members disposed within the bracket as a unit, thereby the drive is secured within the lock (Peng and Col 2, lines 45-50)
Regarding Claim 18, Bennett/Marcade/Conn/Peng discloses the server system of claim 17. Conn discloses (figs. 1-10) wherein the first drive latch mechanism and the second drive latch mechanism (162 and 162) are hingidly connected to the server chassis and configured to rotate over the carrier to anchor the structural drive assembly to the server chassis (230). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the drive latch mechanism is hingidly connected to the server chassis of Conn to device of Bennett/Marcade/Peng in order to move into the proper position in the chassis (Conn and [0030])
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of the references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
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 L 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.
/ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841