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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The three (3) IDSes filed 12/28/2022 have all been considered and made of record. The initialed copies are attached herewith.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 28-30 and 33 show parts of the device components colored in black making the details difficult to distinguish. 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 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 2, 7 and 8 are 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.
Re claim 2, the use of the trademark “Bluetooth” in the claim is not allowed in the USPTO claim drafting procedure.
Re claim 7, negative limitation including the word “excluding…” is not proper in USPTO claim drafting.
Re claim 8, it is indefinite for depending on indefinite claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese document CN106104408B (attached machine translation).
Re claim 1, the document discloses a charging case having, inter alia, a base; a front cover connected to the base and configured to seal an interior of the charging case; a post 1750 on the base and in the interior, wherein the base is dimensioned to receive a wearable device 1700; an antenna disposed within the post; and circuitry connected to the antenna and to a charging port located on the base (Another aspect of the present disclosure provides a case of a wearable computing device, the case comprising: a base defining a receptacle for receiving a wearable computing device; a cover configured to engage the base to substantially enclose the wearable computing device, the cover having an optical element configured to direct incident electro-magnetic radiation to a photovoltaic cell disposed on the wearable computing device to allow charging thereof; Base assembly 1750, described above, may include additional components that may interact with WCD 1700. For example, the base assembly may include one or more antennas).
Re claim 2, the document further discloses wherein the antenna supports both Near Field Communication (NFC) for charging the wearable device and Bluetooth for communicating with the wearable device (the base assembly may include one or more antennas that may communicate according to one or more wireless protocols, such as 3G, 4G, WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC).
Re claim 3, the document discloses NFC is supported (see claim 2 above).
Re claim 4, the document discloses the wearable device is a smart ring 1700.
Re claim 7, the document is silent on having any user-activated mechanisms including a button, a switch and a touch display.
Re claim 10, the document discloses embedded battery in the base and connected to the circuit and charging port (the TCD may include a battery 4540, any printed circuit board 4550 having one or more components (not shown) attached thereto (not shown), such as motion sensors, power management circuitry, charging circuitry, and the like).
Re claim 11, the document discloses a light pipe on the base and connected to LED on the circuit (the TCD may include a light pipe 4524 around its boundary. The light pipe 4524 may be generally annular in shape and may be formed in part by overmolding of the TCD. The light pipe may be constructed of a conventional transparent or translucent moldable material).
Re claims 12 and 13, the document discloses a light sensor configured to monitor light in the room where charging is located; and configured to illuminate the LED based on light where charging is located (in the presence of abundant ambient light (e.g., detected ambient light above a predetermined threshold), the intensity of the LED indicator may increase. In the same way, in the presence of little ambient light (detected ambient light is below a predetermined threshold, the intensity of the LED indicator may decrease)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 5, 6, 9, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese document CN106104408B (attached machine translation).
Re claim 5 and 6, the document does not disclose a wedge disposed between the ring and the post; and the post is placed at an angle toward the cover. Official notice is taken of the fact that having the wedge would allow for different sized rings to be snugly fit on the post; and having the post angle would allow for an easy removal of the ring from the post. It would have been obvious to have used different wedges based on the ring size to accommodate wearers with different finger size; and placing the post at an angle would allow the wearers to easily remove the ring from the charger.
Re claim 9, the document is silent on using a USB port for charging. Official notice is taken that most portable devices use USB ports for power. It would have been obvious to have used a USB port for power because most devices come with separate USB cord and a power brick. With this combination, a user has more flexibility to replace either the cord or the brick should one of them failed.
Re claims 19 and 20, the document does not disclose a seal between the cover and base; and a rubber boot over the post. Official notice is taken of the fact that using a seal and a rubber would prevent damage to both the cover and the post from abuse or overutilization.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chinese document CN106104408B (attached machine translation) in view of Chandramohan et al. (US 9,769,558).
The Chinese document is silent on having the wearable device configured to pair with the charging case by one of detecting motion, tapping on the device or tapping on the case. Chandramohan (“Apple”) has been using sensors to generate signals based on the position of the lid and/or tapping on the case itself to allow pairing between its wearable device (“Airpods”) and the case. It would have been obvious to have employed the tapping on the device/case and/or motion of the lid for pairing as taught by Chandramohan because it is a simple gesture for any user to accomplished.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The art made of record fails to disclose at least an ambient temperature sensor in the charging case (claims 14 and 17). Claims 15, 16 and 18 depend directly or indirectly on claim 14 or 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Other cited art discloses wireless charger for other wearable devices. However, these chargers have an open-design.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Taelor Kim and he can be reached at 571.270.7166. The fax number for the organization where this application 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087