Appeal No. 2006-0027 3
Application No. 10/287,889
coupling a retainer to one of the plurality of different
mounting locations, the retainer adapted to apply a varying level
of retention force to the at least one expansion card based on
a size of the at least one expansion card.
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner to support the
final rejection are:
Mobley 4,880,113 Nov. 14, 1989
Wong 5,268,821 Dec. 07, 1993
Jensen et al. (Jensen) 6,373,713 Apr. 16, 2002
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-11, 13-18, 20, 21, 23, 44-46, 48-51 and
53-61 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Wong.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-15, 17, 18 and 20-22 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Jensen.
Claims 5, 12 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of Mobley.
Claims 47 and 52 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Wong in view of Mobley.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007