Appeal No. 2006-1998
Application No. 10/215,648
maximum of two processing modules when no dividing member is present and a
maximum of four processing modules when a dividing member is present.
Contrary to the examiner’s view, we find nothing in Jackson that suggests these
claim limitations. The absence of fan trays 140 in Jackson in no way doubles the height
of the processing modules that may be received nor does it decrease to half the number of
processing modules (engine blade assemblies) that may be received. The examiner states
otherwise at page 4 of the answer, but there is no cogent rationale as to why this is
supposedly the case in Jackson. We also find unpersuasive the examiner’s response, at
page 7 of the answer, about the term, “operable” requiring only the ability to operate in
such a fashion, because the examiner has not shown how Jackson has the capability of
receiving modules of h height when a fan tray is received, but only the capability of
receiving modules of 2h height when no fan tray is received. While Figure 2 of Jackson
does show four assemblies of engine blades with two fan tray units 140 received, we find
nothing in Jackson indicating that a maximum of two such engine blade assemblies may
be received when there are no fan trays received.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of claims 3, 6, and 17 under
§102 (e).
With regard to claims 11, 12, 26-28, and 30, these claims are directed to the
specific flow of cooling air to flow from the front face of the enclosure to a support
module bypassing processing modules received in the information processing module
receiving locations and to a plenum chamber to allow the flow of cooling air.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007