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 . This office action is in response to applicant's communication of January 14, 2026. The rejections are stated below. Claims 12-22 and 25 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments concerning claims 12-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been considered and are persuasive so therefore the rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection with respect to prior art rejection of claim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claim(s) 12-18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Razaghi et al. [US Patent No. 10,410,021 B1].
Regarding claim 12, Razaghi discloses an adapter for integrating an accessory module with a mobile computing device, the adapter comprising:
an adapter housing (Figure 1c items 110/115);
an accessory bay on a first side of the adapter housing (Figure 1c items 110/115);
a first set of electrical contacts in the accessory bay, engaging with a payment accessory (Figure 1c);
a device interface on a second side of the adapter housing opposite the accessory bay, the device interface coupling the adapter to the mobile computing device (Figure 2a item 230).
a second set of electrical contacts disposed on the second side of the adapter and associated with the device interface, engaging with corresponding electrical contacts of the mobile computing device (see fig 4. Elements 455 and 450); and
a set of connectors disposed within the adapter housing and interconnecting the first and second sets of contacts (see breakout circuitry within figures 2a-c); and
a battery disposed in the adapter housing and powering the payment accessory (see fig. 4, and see column 6 lines 47-52, and see claim 11; Note: Applicant argues on page 6 of remarks filed 1/14/2026 this is not taught by the reference, however it appears to clearly be taught. For clarity and compact prosecution, it is noted that the examiner is interpreting “powering the payment accessory” is interpreted as --providing power to component(s) of the payment accessory-- and not --providing sole power to all of the components of payment accessory--).
Regarding claim 13, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 12, wherein the connectors interconnect the first and second sets of contacts and the battery (Figure 2A, items 120, 230 and 240; Figure 4a).
Regarding claim 14, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 12, wherein the accessory bay includes a support surface defined on the first side of the adapter housing, and containment walls extending outward from the support surface (Figure 1c).
Regarding claim 15, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 14, wherein the first set of contacts is disposed on the support surface (Figure 2a item 120).
Regarding claim 16, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 14, wherein the first set of contacts is disposed on one of the containment walls (Figure 2a).
Regarding claim 17, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 14, wherein at least one of the containment walls includes a cutout enabling access to a card slot of the payment accessory (Figure 1c).
Regarding claim 18, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 18, wherein at least one of the containment walls includes an aperture configured to receive a fastener therethrough to retain the payment accessory in the accessory bay (Figure 1c items 110 and 115).
Regarding claim 21, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 12, wherein the device interface is configured to couple the adapter to a battery well of the mobile computing device (Figure 4a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
view of Razaghi et al. [US Patent No. 10,410,021 B1] in view of Stewart [US Pub No. 2005/0061884 A1].
Regarding claim 19, Razaghi does not disclose however Stewart teaches wherein at least one of the containment walls includes an aperture configured to receive a fastener therethrough to retain the payment accessory in the accessory bay (0024 0026). Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to modify the disclosure of Razaghi to include Stewart. The rationale to combine the teachings is a more effective novel card reader design that enables the insertion of smart cards into an open receptacle.
Regarding claim 20, Razaghi does not disclose however Stewart teaches wherein at least a portion of the accessory bay is configured to prevent access to an input mechanism of the payment accessory (0024-0026). Before the effective filing date,
it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to modify the disclosure of
Razaghi to include Stewart. The rationale to combine the teachings is a more effective
novel card reader design that enables the insertion of smart cards into an open
receptacle.
Claims 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
view of Razaghi et al. [US Patent No. 10,410,021 B1] in view of Huang
[US Pub 20140065948].
25. Regarding claim 25, Razaghi disclose the adapter of claim 12, wherein the battery powers the payment accessory (see claim 11)
Razaghi does not teach the battery powers the mobile computing device
However, Huang does teach a payment batter powers the mobile device (see at least the abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the effective time of filing to incorporate a battery of sufficient size to provide power to the mobile device, as well as the external charging, because the result would have allowed for additional power for merchants using their mobile devices. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the combination as obvious.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm EST.
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, Ryan Donlon can be reached on 571-270-3602. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692 June 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights