CTNF 18/940,819 CTNF 98976 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election without traverse of species B (claims 1-4, 7-8, 11-12, 14-30) in the reply filed on 04/24/2026 is acknowledged. Therefore, claims 5-6, 9-10, 13 are withdrawn from further consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Tobias (US 20140368988; “Tobias” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 1 , Tobias discloses: an apparatus comprising: a Dual In-Line Memory Module (DIMM) retention frame (700, fig. 13) coupled to a top portion (see annotated fig. 13 below) of a DIMM (see annotated fig. 13 below) ; and a plurality of fasteners (712, fig. 13) to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) (¶[0050]) . PNG media_image1.png 368 748 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, and further discloses: wherein the top portion of the DIMM comprises at least two top corners (see annotated fig. 13 above) of the DIMM. Regarding claim 3 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, and further discloses: wherein the top portion of the DIMM comprises an entire top edge of the DIMM (see annotated fig. 13 above) . Regarding claim 4 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, and further discloses: wherein the plurality of fasteners comprises one or more of: a soldered through hole mount clip, a threaded screw (712, fig 13, ¶[0050]) , a thumb screw, a Plated-Through-Hole (PTH) clip, a Surface Mount Technology (SMT) clip or hook, a locking tab, or a locking pen . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of North et al (US 6629855; “North” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 7 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein a side wall of the DIMM retention frame comprises one or more cutouts. However, North teaches: a side wall (15, 16, figs. 1 and 3) of a DIMM retention frame (70, fig. 1) comprises one or more cutouts (35, fig. 3) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobia’s frame and include North’s cutouts, such that a side wall of the DIMM retention frame comprises one or more cutouts, in order to provide air flow for cooling purposes of the DIMM (col. 5, lines 54-58) . Regarding claim 8 , Tobias in view of North discloses the limitation of claim 7, and North further teaches: wherein the one or more cutouts are to allow for air flow to provide air cooling (col. 5, lines 54-58) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Gooi et al (US 20220399682; “Gooi” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 11 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein a top surface of the DIMM retention frame, adjacent to a top edge of the DIMM, comprises one or more cutouts. However, Gooi teaches: a top surface (1908) of a DIMM retention frame (1904, fig. 19) , adjacent to a top edge of a DIMM (1302, figs. 15-17, ¶[0157]) , comprises one or more cutouts (1922, fig. 19) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobia’s frame and include Gooi’s cutouts, such that a top surface of the DIMM retention frame, adjacent to a top edge of the DIMM, comprises one or more cutouts, in order to provide air flow for cooling purposes of the DIMM (¶[0160]) . Regarding claim 12 , Tobias in view of Gooi discloses the limitation of claim 11, and Gooi further teaches: wherein the one or more cutouts are to allow for air flow to provide air cooling (¶[0160]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Shaw et al (US 20180042149; “Shaw” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 14 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a chassis base pan through the PCB. However, Shaw teaches: a chassis base pan (14, fig. 1) coupled to a PCB (16, fig. 1) by a fastener (12 and 30, figs. 1-2, ¶[0026]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to apply and include Shaw’s teaching of a chassis base pan coupled to a PCB, and modify Tobias such that the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a chassis base pan through the PCB by way of Tobias’s fasteners, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of fastening chassis elements to PCB was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Shaw. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Shaw et al (US 20180042149; “Shaw” hereinafter), and further in view of Li et al (US 20080212293; “Li” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 15 , Tobias in view of Shaw teaches the limitation of claim 14, but does not explicitly disclose: further comprising a plurality of standoffs coupled between the chassis base pan and the PCB. However, Li teaches: a standoff (40, figs. 1-3) coupled between a chassis base pan (90, figs. 1-3) and a PCB (80, fig. 3) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobia’s in view of Shaw, and include Li’s standoff, such a plurality of standoffs coupled between the chassis base pan and the PCB, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of fastening chassis elements to a PCB via standoffs was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Li. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143). The modification would allow a separation between the chassis base pan and PCB for enhanced cooling effects . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16-17 are is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Shaw et al (US 20180042149; “Shaw” hereinafter), and Li et al (US 20080212293; “Li” hereinafter), and further in view of Li et al (US 20200327912; “Li2” hereinafter) and Linthout (US 3680897; “Linthout” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 16 , Tobias in view of Shaw and Li teaches the limitation of claim 15, but does not explicitly disclose: further comprising a plurality of studs to provide a feature to align a back plate and the plurality of standoffs. However, Li2 teaches: plurality of fasteners (424, fig. 4) are to physically attach a DIMM connector (420, fig. 4) to a back plate (440, fig. 4) disposed on a bottom side of a PCB (410, fig. 4) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobias in view of Shaw and Li and include a back plate disposed on a bottom side of the PCB as taught by Li2, in order to increase the stiffness of the PCB for the advantage of reducing the likelihood of damaging the DIMM retention frame (¶[0052]) . Tobias in view of Shaw and Li and Li2 does not explicitly disclose: a plurality of studs to provide a feature to align the back plate and the plurality of standoffs. However, Linthout teaches: a stud (2, fig. 1) to provide a feature (6, fig. 1) to align a back plate (1, fig. 1, col. 2, lines 14-17; col. 3, lines 20-37, 46-51) and a standoff (5, fig. 1) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the back plate of Tobias as modified by Shaw and Li and Li2, and include Linthout’s stud, such that a plurality of studs to provide a feature to align the back plate and the plurality of standoffs, in order to provide a rigid connection between the back plate and the standoffs (col. 1, lines 49-54) . Regarding claim 17 , Tobias in view of Shaw, Li, Li2 and Linthout teaches the limitation of 16, and Tobias further teaches: wherein the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a top side of the PCB (see annotated fig. 13 above) , wherein the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to the PCB (see annotated fig. 13 above, ¶[0050]) . Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang does not explicitly teach: the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a back plate disposed on a bottom side of the PCB. However, Li2 teaches: plurality of fasteners (424, fig. 4) are to physically attach a DIMM connector (420, fig. 4) to a back plate (440, fig. 4) disposed on a bottom side of a PCB (410, fig. 4) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobias in view of Shaw, Li, Li2 and Linthout and include a back plate as taught by Li2, such that the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a back plate disposed on a bottom side of the PCB, in order to increase the stiffness of the PCB for the advantage of reducing the likelihood of damaging the DIMM retention frame (¶[0052]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Li et al (US 20230273654; “Xiang” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 21 , Tobias discloses the limitation of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein the DIMM has a height of up to 58 mm. However, Xiang teaches: a DIMM (102, fig. 1) has a height of up to 58 mm (“In one example, a 2U DIMM has a maximum height of 58 mm”, ¶[0017]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to set the DIMM height of up to 58 mm as taught by Xiang, in order to enable more memory chips to be mounted onto the faces of the DIMM, and thus enable an increase in memory capacity (¶[0014]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 18, 23-25, 27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Gooi et al (US 20220399682; “Gooi” hereinafter), and further in view of Li et al (US 20230273654; “Xiang” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 18 , Tobias teaches: a system comprising: a Dual In-Line Memory Module (DIMM) (see annotated fig. 13 below); a DIMM retention frame (701, fig. 13) coupled to a top portion of the DIMM (see annotated fig. 13 below) ; and a plurality of fasteners (712, fig. 13) to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) (¶[0050]) . PNG media_image1.png 368 748 media_image1.png Greyscale Tobias does not explicitly teach: a processor to execute one or more instructions; wherein the processor is attached to the PCB; the DIMM module having a height greater than a height of a 1U DIMM. However, Gooi teaches: a processor (104, fig. 1) to execute one or more instructions (¶[0004]) ; wherein the processor is attached to the PCB (¶[0059]) ; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Tobia’s and include Gooi’s processor, such that the processor is attached to the PCB, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of processors attached to a PCB to execute one or more instructions, was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Gooi. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143). Tobias in view of Gooi does not explicitly teach: the DIMM module having a height greater than a height of a 1U DIMM. However, Xiang teaches: a DIMM module (102, fig. 1) secured by a frame (301, figs. 3A-3F) , and having a height greater than a height of a 1U DIMM (¶[0014]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Tobias in view of Gooi, with Xiang’s teaching, such that the DIMM module comprises a height greater than a height of a 1U DIMM, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of retaining means for DIMM modules to a PCB , was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Xiang. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143). Regarding claim 22 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang teaches the limitations of claim 18, and Tobias further teaches: wherein the DIMM retention frame constrains at least two top corners of the DIMM (see annotated fig. 13 above) . Regarding claim 23, Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, and Xiang further teaches: wherein the DIMM is a 2U DIMM (¶[0014]) . Regarding claim 24 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, and Xiang further teaches: wherein the DIMM has a height of 58 mm (“In one example, a 2U DIMM has a maximum height of 58 mm”, ¶[0017]) . Regarding claim 25 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, and Xiang further teaches: system of claim 18, wherein the height of the DIMM is at least twice the height of a 1U DIMM (¶[0014]) . Regarding claim 27 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein a top surface of the DIMM retention frame, adjacent to a top edge of the DIMM, comprises one or more cutouts. However, Gooi teaches: a top surface (1908) of a DIMM retention frame (1904, fig. 19) , adjacent to a top edge of a DIMM (1302, figs. 15-17, ¶[0157]) , comprises one or more cutouts (1922, fig. 19) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobia’s frame and include Gooi’s cutouts, such that a top surface of the DIMM retention frame, adjacent to a top edge of the DIMM, comprises one or more cutouts, in order to provide air flow for cooling purposes of the DIMM (¶[0160]) . Regarding claim 30 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang teaches the limitations of claim 18, and Tobias further teaches: wherein the plurality of fasteners comprises one or more of: a threaded screw (712, fig 13, ¶[0050]) , a thumb screw, a Plated-Through-Hole (PTH) clip, a Surface Mount Technology (SMT) clip or hook, a locking tab, or a locking pen . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Gooi et al (US 20220399682; “Gooi” hereinafter), and Li et al (US 20230273654; “Xiang” hereinafter), and further in view of Li et al (US20200327912; “Li2” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 19 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, and Tobias further teaches: wherein the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a top side of the PCB (see annotated fig. 13 above) , wherein the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to the PCB (see annotated fig. 13 above, ¶[0050]) . Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang does not explicitly teach: the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a back plate disposed on a bottom side of the PCB. However, Li2 teaches: plurality of fasteners (424, fig. 4) are to physically attach a DIMM connector (420, fig. 4) to a back plate (440, fig. 4) disposed on a bottom side of a PCB (410, fig. 4) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang and include a back plate as taught by Li2, such that the plurality of fasteners are to physically attach the DIMM retention frame to a back plate disposed on a bottom side of the PCB, in order to increase the stiffness of the PCB for the advantage of reducing the likelihood of damaging the DIMM retention frame (¶[0052]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 20 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang, and further in view of Shaw . Regarding claim 20 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a chassis base pan through the PCB. However, Shaw teaches: a chassis base pan (14, fig. 1) coupled to a PCB (16, fig. 1) by a fastener (12 and 30, figs. 1-2, ¶[0026]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to apply and include Shaw’s teaching of a chassis base pan coupled to a PCB, and modify Tobias such that the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a chassis base pan through the PCB by way of Tobias’s fasteners, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of fastening chassis elements to PCB was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Shaw. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143). Regarding claim 28 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, but does not explicitly disclose: further comprising a chassis, wherein the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a base pan of the chassis through the PCB. However, Shaw teaches: a base pan (14, fig. 1) of a chassis (“a chassis mounting plate 14 of a chassis of a piece of electronic equipment”, ¶[0026]) coupled to a PCB (16, fig. 1) by a fastener (12 and 30, figs. 1-2, ¶[0026]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to apply and include Shaw’s teaching of a chassis comprising a base pan coupled to a PCB, and modify Tobias such that the DIMM retention frame is coupled to a base pan of a chassis through the PCB by way of Tobias’s fasteners, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of fastening chassis elements to PCB was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Shaw. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143). Regarding claim 29 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, but does not explicitly disclose: further comprising a chassis, wherein the PCB is disposed in the chassis. However, Shaw teaches: a chassis (“a chassis mounting plate 14 of a chassis of a piece of electronic equipment, and a COTS circuit board 16”, ¶[0026]) , wherein a PCB (16, fig. 3) is disposed in the chassis (¶[0026]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to apply and include Shaw’s teaching of a chassis, wherein the PCB is disposed in the chassis into Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique of disposing a PCB within a chassis was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Shaw. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of a plurality of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (§MPEP 2143) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobias, in view of Gooi and Xiang, and further in view of North et al (US 6629855; “North” hereinafter) . Regarding claim 26 , Tobias in view of Gooi and Xiang discloses the limitation of claim 18, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein a side wall of the DIMM retention frame comprises one or more cutouts. However, North teaches: a side wall (15, 16, figs. 1 and 3) of a DIMM retention frame (70, fig. 1) comprises one or more cutouts (35, fig. 3) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tobia’s frame and include North’s cutouts, such that a side wall of the DIMM retention frame comprises one or more cutouts, in order to provide air flow for cooling purposes of the DIMM (col. 5, lines 54-58) . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is: US 20160132238 A1 Extended Height DIMM. This invention relates generally to an extended-height DIMM for use in a memory system having slots designed to receive DIMMs that comply with a JEDEC standard that specifies a maximum height for the DIMM and a maximum number of devices allowed to reside on the DIMM. US 5980295A Electrical Connector with a Board Retaining Means. This invention generally relates to an electrical connector for electrically connecting a daughter board and a mother board, and particularly to an electrical connector having a board retaining means for reliably and releasably latching an inserted daughter board. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER KRIM whose telephone number is (703)756-1246. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am -4:30pm. 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. /P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 2 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 3 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 4 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 5 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 6 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 7 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 8 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 9 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 10 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 11 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 12 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 13 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 14 Art Unit: 2841 Application/Control Number: 18/940,819 Page 15 Art Unit: 2841
Prosecution Insights