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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the plug-in connection between the first plug-in portion and the second plug-in portion as described in claim 1, the first power connector and second power connector as described in claim 14, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. It is not understood how the first plug-in portion and the second plug-in portion plug-in with each other, since they are shown are spaced apart and do not plug in to each other in the submitted drawings, but more specifically figure 2.
Claims 2-20 are rejected by virtue of dependency to claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Lines 13-14 cite “the first plug-in portion is plugged into the second plug-in portion”
It is not understood how the first plug-in portion and the second plug-in portion plug-in with each other, since they are shown spaced apart and do not plug in to each other, as depicted in figure 2.
For the purpose of examination, the office will interpret this limitation as “the first plug-in portion is plugged into the second plug-in portion via an electrical connection assembly”.
Claims 2-20 are rejected by virtue of dependency to claim 1.
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 1-4, 7, 12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 116257118A; “Zhang” hereinafter) in view of Li et al (CN116991783A; “Li” hereinafter), and further in view of An et al (US 12167560; “An” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches: An electronic device (1000), comprising:
a computer case (10, fig. 1);
a cross-beam assembly (101, fig. 1C) provided in the computer case (fig. 1B), wherein the cross-beam assembly comprises a cross-beam body (structure between 1011, fig. 1C), two ends of the cross-beam body (1011, fig. 1C) along a first direction (X-axis) are connected to two opposite side walls (112, fig. 1A, 2) of the computer case, respectively, the cross-beam body and the computer case cooperatively enclose an accommodating cavity (where GPU 30 us disposed in fig. 3), the cross-beam body comprises a first connecting portion (1020, ¶[n0099]) and a first wire attachment portion (109, fig. 2 and annotated fig. 3 below) that are staggered on the first direction; and
PNG
media_image1.png
578
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a GPU assembly (30 and 40) provided in the accommodating cavity (fig. 3), wherein the GPU assembly comprises a GPU video card (30, fig. 4A) and a first bracket (40, fig. 4A), the GPU video card has a first end (301, figs. 3 and 4A) facing the cross-beam assembly, the first end comprises a second plug-in portion (see annotated fig. 3 below), the first bracket is provided at the first end (figs. 3 and 4A) and comprises a second connecting portion (4010, 4012 and 402, fig. 4A), the second plug-in portion and the second connecting portion are staggered in the first direction (fig. 4A), and the first connecting portion is connected to the second connecting portion (fig. 3, ¶[n0099]).
PNG
media_image2.png
571
585
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Zhang does not explicitly disclose:
the first wire attachment portion being a first plug-in portion,
the first plug-in portion is plugged into the second plug-in portion.
However, Li teaches:
a first plug-in portion (53) disposed in a cross-beam assembly (5) that plugs in with a second plug-in portion (43) of a GPU assembly (4, ¶[n0068], [n0070], [n0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang’s cross-beam body and substitute the first wire attachment portion for Li’s first plug-in portion such that the cross-beam body comprises a first plug-in portion as taught by Li, that is staggered with respect to the first connecting portion in the first direction so as to not interfere with the first connecting portion, in order to realize signal and/or power connection between the GPU assembly and the cross-beam assembly. The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique 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).
Zhang in view of Li does not disclose:
the first plug-in portion is plugged into the second plug-in portion.
However, An teaches:
an electrical connection assembly (202, 204, 206, fig. 2B), connecting a first plug-in portion (500) with a second plug in portion (210, fig. 3B) of a GPU assembly (130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include An’s connector 206 in Zhang’s first plug-in portion, An’s connector 202 connected to Zhang’s second plug-in portion including connecting wire 204, in order to establish power connection between the GPU assembly and the electrical device (col. 3, lines 60-61). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by An. 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 2, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teaches:
wherein the first bracket further comprises a first mounting portion (71, fig. 4A) and a second mounting portion (73, fig. 4A), the first mounting portion is spaced apart from the second plug-in portion along a second direction (Z-axis), the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction, the second mounting portion is provided on a side of the first mounting portion (fig. 4A), the second mounting portion extends from the first mounting portion toward the cross-beam assembly (fig. 4B), the second connecting portion is provided on a side of the second mounting portion away from the first mounting portion (fig. 4B), so that the first mounting portion and the second connecting portion are staggered in the first direction (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 2, and Zhang further teaches:
wherein the second connecting portion extends from the second mounting portion toward the cross-beam assembly (figs. 3 and 4A), so that the second connecting portion is connected to the first connecting portion (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 2, and Zhang further teaches:
wherein the cross-beam body further comprises a first guiding portion (108, fig. 4B) facing the first end (fig.3, ¶[n0126]), the first guiding portion is in guiding cooperation with a side of the second mounting portion away from the first mounting portion, and the first guiding portion is configured to guide a movement of the first bracket along the second direction (this limitation is disclosed upon examination of figs. 3-4B, ¶[n0126]).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teaches:
wherein the cross-beam body is provided with a first ventilation hole (107, fig. 4B, ¶[n0129]) in communication with the accommodating cavity (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teaches:
wherein two opposite side walls of the computer case are each provided with a second guiding portion (unnumbered, see annotated fig. 3 below), the second guiding portion is in guiding cooperation with an end of the cross-beam body along the first direction (unnumbered, see annotated fig. 4B below), and the second guiding portion is configured to guide a movement of the cross-beam body along a second direction (as disclosed upon examination of figures 3 and 4B).
PNG
media_image3.png
583
348
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
316
282
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and An further teaches:
wherein the first plug-in portion is provided with a first power connector (206, fig. 2B), the second plug-in portion is provided with a second power connector (202, fig. 2B), and the first power connector is electrically connected to the second power connector (via 204, col. 3, lines 60-61).
Regarding claim 15, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and the combination further teaches:
wherein a plurality of first plug-in portions and a plurality of first connecting portions are provided (via the combination of Li into Zhang), the plurality of first plug-in portions and the plurality of first connecting portions are alternately arranged along the first direction (via the combination of Li into Zhang defined in claim 1), a plurality of GPU assemblies are provided (Zhang fig. 3), the plurality of GPU assemblies are arranged along the first direction (Zhang fig. 3), a plurality of second plug-in portions and a plurality of second connecting portions are alternately arranged along the first direction (Zhang fig. 3), the plurality of first plug-in portions are plugged into the plurality of second plug-in portions in a one-to-one correspondence (via the combination of An into Zhang as modified by Li defined in claim 1), and the plurality of first connecting portions are connected to the plurality of second connecting portions in a one-to-one correspondence (Zhang fig. 3).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 116257118A; “Zhang” hereinafter) in view of Li et al (CN116991783A; “Li” hereinafter), An et al (US 12167560; “An” hereinafter), as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Lin et al (US 20240334638; “Lin” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 4, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first guiding portion is provided with a guiding slot extending along the second direction, a notch of the guiding slot faces the first end, a top wall of the first guiding portion along the second direction is provided with a first insertion opening in communication with the guiding slot, and the side of the second mounting portion away from the first mounting portion is provided in the guiding slot through the first insertion opening.
However, Lin teaches:
a first guiding portion (121, fig. 5) is provided with a guiding slot (1211, fig. 5), the guiding slot comprises a notch of the guiding slot (see annotated fig. 5 below), a top wall of the first guiding portion is provided with a first insertion opening (see annotated fig. 5 below) in communication with the guiding slot, and a side of a second mounting portion (400, i.e. functional module, fig. 2) is provided in the guiding slot through the first insertion opening (figs. 4 and 7, ¶[0048]).
PNG
media_image5.png
310
471
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang’s cross-beam in view of Li and An, and replace Zhang’s first guiding portion with Lin’s first guiding portion teaching, such that the first guiding portion is provided with a guiding slot extending along the second direction, a notch of the guiding slot faces the first end, a top wall of the first guiding portion along the second direction is provided with a first insertion opening in communication with the guiding slot, and the side of the second mounting portion away from the first mounting portion is provided in the guiding slot through the first insertion opening, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Lin. 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).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 116257118A; “Zhang” hereinafter) in view of Li et al (CN116991783A; “Li” hereinafter), An et al (US 12167560; “An” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Sun et al (CN221281488U; “Sun” hereinafter) and Peterson et al (US 20150351233; “Peterson” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 6, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teaches: the top portion of the cross-beam body is lower than a bottom portion of the second plug-in portion in the second direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (fig. 3 teaches this limitation).
Zhang in view of Li and An does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first connecting portion and the first plug-in portion are provided on a top portion of the cross-beam body along a second direction
However, Sun teaches:
wherein a first connecting portion (117, fig. 15) provided on a top portion (where 117 and 118 are disposed, fig. 15) of a cross-beam body (10, fig. 11) and connecting with a second connecting portion (31 and 32).
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 second connecting section and the cross-beam body of Zhang, with Sun’s teaching, such that the first connecting portion is provided on a top portion of the cross-beam body and connecting with the second connecting portion along a second direction, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Sun. 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).
Zhang in view of Li, An and Sun does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first plug-in portion is provided on a top portion of the cross-beam body along a second direction.
However, Peterson teaches:
a first plug-in portion (2, 24, 28, 30, fig. 1A), is provided on a top portion of a cross-beam body (16, fig. 1A).
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 cross-beam body of Zhang as modified by Sun, with Peterson’s teaching, such that the first plug-in portion, is provided on a top portion of a cross-beam body along a second direction, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Peterson. 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).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 116257118A; “Zhang” hereinafter) in view of Li et al (CN116991783A; “Li” hereinafter), An et al (US 12167560; “An” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Sun et al (CN221281488U; “Sun” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein both ends of the cross-beam body along the first direction are each provided with a limiting groove, the limiting groove extends along a second direction, a bottom wall of the limiting groove along the second direction is provided with a second insertion opening in communication with the limiting groove, two opposite side walls of the computer case are each provided with a limiting member, and the limiting member is provided in the limiting groove through the second insertion opening.
However, Sun teaches:
wherein both ends (112, fig. 7) of a cross-beam body along a first direction are each provided with a limiting groove (113, fig. 7), the limiting groove extends along a second direction (fig. 7), a bottom wall of the limiting groove along the second direction is provided with a second insertion opening (see annotated fig. 7 below) in communication with the limiting groove, two opposite side walls of the computer case are each provided with a limiting member (21, fig. 12), and the limiting member is provided in the limiting groove through the second insertion opening (fig. 2).
PNG
media_image6.png
418
481
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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 cross-beam body ends of Zhang as modified by Sun, with Sun’s teaching, such both ends of the cross-beam body along the first direction are each provided with a limiting groove, the limiting groove extends along a second direction, a bottom wall of the limiting groove along the second direction is provided with a second insertion opening in communication with the limiting groove, two opposite side walls of the computer case are each provided with a limiting member, and the limiting member is provided in the limiting groove through the second insertion opening, since the claim would have been obvious because the particular known fastening technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Sun. 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).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 116257118A; “Zhang” hereinafter) in view of Li et al (CN116991783A; “Li” hereinafter), An et al (US 12167560; “An” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Tsorng et al (US 20200068740; “Tsorng” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 16, Zhang in view of Li and An teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Zhang further teaches:
further comprising a GPU card (20) that is accommodated in the accommodating cavity (fig. 2), and the GPU card is electrically connected to the GPU video card (¶[n0131]).
Zhang in view of Li and An does not explicitly teach:
a tray that is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, wherein the tray is located below the GPU video card along a second direction, the GPU card is connected to a side of the tray facing the GPU video card.
However, Tsorng teaches:
a tray (222, figs. 2-3) that is accommodated in an accommodating cavity (inside 102, fig. 2), wherein the tray is located below a GPU video card (104, fig. 2, ¶[0033]) along a second direction (vertical direction of the assembly shown in fig. 2), a GPU card (108, fig. 5B) is connected to a side of the tray facing the GPU video card (figs. 2-3 show a side of the tray facing the GPU video cards 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to include a tray that is accommodated in the accommodating cavity, wherein the tray is located below the GPU video card along a second direction, the GPU card is connected to a side of the tray facing the GPU video card, in order to allow the GPU assembly to be removed without removing all components within the electronic device (¶[0003]-[0004]). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known fastening technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Tsorng. 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).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11, 17-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest,
in combination with other limitations recited in claim 1, a combination of limitations that teaches: wherein the computer case comprises a housing and a cover, a top portion of the housing in a second direction is provided with a first opening, the cover is provided in the first opening, the cover is capable of moving on the housing along a third direction, the cover is provided with a latch assembly, the latch assembly is provided with a locking hole, the first direction, the second direction, the third direction are perpendicular to each other, the cross-beam assembly further comprises a guiding member, the guiding member is provided on the cross-beam body along the second direction, and an end of the guiding member away from the cross-beam body is provided in the locking hole. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Claims 9-11 are objected to by virtue of dependency to claim 8
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest,
in combination with other limitations recited in claims 1 and 16, a combination of limitations that teaches: wherein the tray is provided with a first area, the first area is provided with a first group of holes and a second group of holes, the first group of holes are configured to mount a switch card, and the second group of holes are configured to mount a HBA (Host Bus Adapter) card. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Claims 18 and 20 are objected to by virtue of dependency to claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest,
in combination with other limitations recited in claims 1 and 16, a combination of limitations that teaches: wherein the tray is provided with a first gourd hole, the first gourd hole comprises a first hole and a second hole, a diameter of the first hole is less than a diameter of the second hole, the first hole and the second hole are arranged along a third direction, the first hole is in communication with the second hole, the computer case has a bottom wall, the bottom wall is provided with a fixing member provided in the first gourd hole, the fixing member is capable of moving in the first gourd hole along the third direction, so that the tray has a locked state and an unlocked state, the fixing member is provided in the first hole when the tray is in the locked state, and the fixing member is provided in the second hole when the tray is in the unlocked state. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is:
US 20210209718 A1 Power Conversion Apparatus. This invention relates generally to a GPU with specific shape of casing and a host casing hardware configuration. Body of the casing of the GPU includes a rectangle of a notch, the notch is located on a corner of the rectangle and is in a right trapezoid shape.
US 20250169017 A1 Chassis Architecture and Server Comprising the Same. This invention generally relates to a PCIE module layer, a threading layer and a computing layer. The threading layer is provided with a plurality of first threading holes, allowing a passage of PCIE cables connected to PCIE modules.
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
/SAGAR SHRESTHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights