Appeal No. 2006-0027 8
Application No. 10/287,889
400 on the chassis, a spring-biased latch pawl 144 for releasably engaging and holding
the handle in a closed position, and a latch pawl release button 135. In use,
As handle 130 is rotated as illustrated by the double-headed arrow
in FIG. 4, upper jaw 120 is also rotated. When chassis rail 400 (shown in
cross section views) is located within the opening of upper jaw 120 and
handle 130 is rotated to the closed and locked position, upper jaw 120
interlocks with chassis rail 400 to force PCBA 100 in to the electronic
system. When handle 130 is locked in position by handle pawl 144, PCBA
100 is locked in the electronic system. Lower jaw 115 operates in a
similar manner.
To release and remove PCBA 100 from the electronic system, latch
release button 135 (not shown in FIG. 4) is depressed to release handle
130 from handle pawl 144. As handle 130 is rotated away from face plate
110, upper jaw 120 rotates, moving relative to chassis rail 400, allowing
PCBA 100 to be removed from the electronic system. Lower jaw 115
operates in a similar manner [column 4, line 57, through column 5, line 5].
In applying Jensen against independent claims 1, 11 and 17, the examiner (see
pages 4 and 5 in the final rejection) reads the limitations in these claims pertaining to
the retainer or means adapted to apply an increasing level of retention force to an
expansion card as a size of the card increases on Jensen’s handle 130 and latch pawl
144. Arguably, Jensen’s handle 130 does apply a retention force to a card or PCBA
100 once the card is inserted into the chassis. Jensen does not provide any reasonable
basis, however, to find that the handle 130, taken alone or in combination with the latch
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007