CTNF 18/750,720 CTNF 90393 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. DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 1. In the event that 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 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. 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 AIA Claim(s) 1, 5, 8, 9, 13 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by WOLFF US2018/0259573 . Per claim 1 WOLFF teaches an apparatus (300, see fig.1) for housing and cooling a memory device (220, see fig.2; [0025], [0028]), the apparatus comprising: a device shroud (201, see fig.1-2) operable to receive the memory device (see fig.1-2) and to guide air over the memory device to cool the memory device during operation thereof (see fig.1-2; [0032]-[0033]); and a cooling system (230a-d & 240a-d; [0032]-[0035]) comprising: a first fan (230a-d) disposed on a bottom surface of the device shroud ([0033], see fig.6) and operable to blow air into the device shroud ([0032]-[0033]), wherein the air is guided over a surface of the memory device by the device shroud (see fig.1-6; [0032]-[0033]); and a second fan (240a-d) disposed on a top surface of the device shroud and operable to blow the air out of the device shroud ([0033]-[0035]). Per claim 5 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the memory device comprises a temperature sensor (305), and wherein the cooling system is operable to cool the memory device according to a measurement of the temperature sensor ([0028]). Per claim 8 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the memory device comprises a solid state drive (SSD) ([0025]). Per claim 9 WOLFF teaches an apparatus for housing and cooling a memory device (220, see fig.1-2; [0025], [0028]), the apparatus comprising: a device shroud (201, see fig.1-2) operable to receive the memory device (see fig.1-2) and to guide air over the memory device to cool the memory device during operation thereof (See fig.1-2; [0032]-[0033]), wherein a front of the device shroud comprises an opening operable to intake air from outside the device shroud (see fig.1-2), and wherein the device shroud comprises internal fins (250a, see fig.2; [0034])) operable to guide air longitudinally along the memory device (see fig.2); and a cooling system (230a-d & 240a-d; [0032]-[0035]) comprising: a first fan (230a-d) disposed on a first surface of the device shroud ([0033], see fig.6) and operable to blow air out of the device shroud ([0032]-[0033]); and a second fan (24a-d) disposed on a second surface of the device shroud and operable to blow air out of the device shroud (see fig.6; [0033]-[0035]). Per claim 13 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 9, wherein the memory device comprises a temperature sensor (305), and wherein the cooling system is operable to cool the memory device according to a measurement of the temperature sensor ([0028]). Per claim 16 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 9, wherein the memory device comprises a solid state drive (SSD) ([0025]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 2. In the event that 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 2-3 & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WOLFF US2018/0259573 in view of JUN et al. US2024/0201763 . Per claim 2 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the device shroud is further operable to receive a memory device (220, see fig.2; [0025], [0028]) WOLFF does not explicitly teach comprising one of: a double-width device; and a single-width device with a device adapter. JUN et al. however discloses comprising one of: a double-width device ([0086], [0102], [0106]); and a single-width device with a device adapter. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a double width device as taught by JUN et al. in the apparatus of WOLFF because they enable double communication bandwidth between processor and memory, thus enabling improved system performance in memory-intensive tasks. Per claim 3 WOLFF in view of JUN et al. teaches the apparatus of Claim 2, wherein the single-width device comprises an E3.S 1T device, and the double-width device comprises an E3.S 2T device ([0086]). Per claim 10 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 9, wherein the device shroud is further operable to receive a memory device (220, see fig.2; [0025], [0028]) WOLFF does not explicitly teach comprising one of: a double-width device; and a single-width device with a device adapter. JUN et al. however discloses comprising one of: a double-width device ([0086], [0102], [0106]); and a single-width device with a device adapter. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a double width device as taught by JUN et al. in the apparatus of WOLFF because they enable double communication bandwidth between processor and memory, thus enabling improved system performance in memory-intensive tasks . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 6 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WOLFF US2018/0259573 in view of Chiu et al. US2021/0292083 . Per claim 6 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, WOLFF does not explicitly teach wherein the device shroud comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials. Chiu et al. however discloses wherein the device cover comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials ([0023]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a cover that comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials, because it prevents damage to sensitive electronic components by controlling static electricity. Per claim 14 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 9, WOLFF does not explicitly teach wherein the device shroud comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials. Chiu et al. however discloses wherein the device cover comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials ([0023]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a cover that comprises electrostatic discharge (ESD) materials, because it prevents damage to sensitive electronic components by controlling static electricity . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WOLFF US2018/0259573 in view of Piper US2022/0102092 . Per claim 7 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, WOLFF does not explicitly teach wherein the device shroud is 3D printed. Piper however discloses wherein the device shroud is 3D printed ([0047]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to 3D print the device shroud because it enables precise, customized structure, thus enables better quality and reducing warping. Per claim 15 WOLFF teaches the apparatus of Claim 9, WOLFF does not explicitly teach wherein the device shroud is 3D printed. Piper however discloses wherein the device shroud is 3D printed ([0047]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to 3D print the device shroud because it enables precise, customized structure, thus enables better quality and reducing warping . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WOLFF US2018/0259573 in view of Piper US2022/0102092 . Per claim 11 WOLFF discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for the apparatus of Claim 10, wherein the single-width device is approximately 7.5 mm wide, and wherein the double-width device is approximately 16.8 mm wide. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a 16.8mm double-width device, because it enables superior storage density, thus enabling increased performance, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose , 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) . Allowable Subject matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 3. Claim s 4 & 12 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. Claim 4, includes allowable subject matter because of the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a device housing operable to house the device shroud, wherein the device housing comprises: a display device operable to display a temperature of the memory device; and a plurality of user control inputs operable to control operation of the cooling system. Claim 12, includes allowable subject matter because of the apparatus of Claim 9, further comprising a device housing operable to house the device shroud, wherein the device housing comprises: a display device operable to display a temperature of the memory device; and a plurality of user control inputs operable to control operation of the cooling system , and wherein further the first surface is a top surface and the second surface is a bottom surface. Claims 17 - 20 are allowable Regarding Independent claim 17, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed combination of elements and features of: a consumer electronic product for housing and cooling a memory device, the product comprising: a housing comprising: a display device operable to display a temperature of the memory device; and a plurality of user control buttons; a device shroud disposed within the housing and operable to secure the memory device within the housing and to guide air over a surface of the memory device to cool the memory device during operation ; and a cooling system operable to cool the memory device according to input received via the user control buttons, the cooling system comprising: a first fan disposed on a top surface of the housing; and a second fan disposed on a bottom surface of the housing, wherein the first and second fans are operable to cool the memory device during operation thereof. Claims 18-20 depends on claim 17, therefore allowable for the same reason. Email Communication 4. Applicant is encouraged to authorize the Examiner to communicate via email by filing form PTO/SB/439 either via USPS, Central Fax, or EFS-Web. See MPEP 502.01, 502, 502.05. Conclusion 07-96 AIA 5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Curtis US2024/0134425 discloses an air shroud may include a plurality of channels including at least a first channel configured to direct airflow driven by one or more chassis-level air movers from outside a chassis enclosing the air shroud into the chassis and into the first channel and a second channel configured to direct airflow driven by the one or more chassis-level air movers from outside the chassis into the chassis and into the second channel. Chen US2007/0236882 discloses an air shroud for dissipating heat from an electronic component is composed of an air shroud of a roughly U-shaped cross section, whose left and right sides are formed into a first and a second opening, respectively. A passage is formed between the first and second openings, enabling air to flow along a specific direction. Applicants are directed to consider additional pertinent prior are included on the Notice of References Cited (PTOL 892) attached herewith. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A MATEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5 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, JAYPRAKASH GANDHI can be reached at 5712723740. 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. /MICHAEL A MATEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 2 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 3 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 4 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 5 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 6 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 7 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 8 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 9 Art Unit: 2835 Application/Control Number: 18/750,720 Page 10 Art Unit: 2835
Prosecution Insights