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. 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 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim s 1 , 3 -9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokote et al. ( JP2008-108558, see machine translated version ) in view of Mori ( US Patent Application No. 2015/0304750). Regarding claim 1 , Yokote et al. teach a waterproof partition adapted to a button (paragraphs [0006]), the waterproof partition comprising a waterproof film (paragraph [0006) and a waterproof foam formed on a surface of the waterproof film and covering a periphery of the waterproof film (paragraphs [0017], [0018]), the waterproof film has elasticity (paragraphs [0017], [0018]) and the waterproof film is annular (paragraphs [0017], [0018], Fig. 3 ) . Yokote et al. fail to teach wherein the waterproof foam is formed with an opening for providing a moving passage for pressing he button. However, Mori teach es a waterproof case (page 1, paragraph [0001]) comprising a foam having a hole (page 6, paragraph [0078]). The limitation “for providing a moving passage for pressing the button" is deemed to be a statement with regard to intended use and is not further limiting in so far as the structure of the product is concerned. In article claims, a claimed intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. MPEP 2111.02. The foam of Mori is capable of providing a moving passage for pressing the button in that it contains the same constituents and displays the same characteristics as claimed by Applicant. Being that the foam of Mori and Applicant are the same structurally, they would as a result be capable of the same use. It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the foam with an opening of Mori on the waterproof partition of Yokote et al. in order to provide a sound transmitting membrane (Mori, page 1, paragraph [0011]). Regarding claim 3, Yokote et al. teach wherein an adhesive is located between the waterproof film and the waterproof foam (paragraph [0017]) and the waterproof film and the waterproof foam are adhered together by the adhesive (paragraph [0017]). Regarding claim 4, Yokote et al. teach wherein a thickness of the waterproof foam is 1 mm to 5 mm which reads on Applicant’s claimed range of not less than 0.5 mm (paragraph [0017]). Regarding claim 5, Yokote et al. do not disclose wherein an effective bonding width of the waterproof foam is not less than 1.2 mm. However , where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in width involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the effective bonding width of the waterproof foam of Yokote et al. in order to adhere the waterproof foam to the waterproof film (paragraph [0017]). Regarding claim 6, Yokote et al. teach wherein the waterproof foam is an annular rectangular structure (paragraphs [0017], [0018], Fig. 3). Regarding claim 7, Yokote et al. teach wherein the waterproof foam has a size same as a size of the waterproof film (paragraphs [0017], [0018], Fig. 3). Regarding claim 8, Yokote et al. teach wherein an outer edge con tour of the waterproof foam is the same as and aligned with an outer edge contour of the waterproof film (paragraphs [0017], [0018], Fig. 3). Regarding claim 9, Yokote et al. tech wherein a surface of the waterproof foam facing away from the waterproof film is provide with an adhesive (paragraphs [0017], [0018]). Yokote et al. fail to teach wherein the adhesive surrounds the opening. However, Mori teaches a waterproof case (page 1, paragraph [0001]) comprising a foam having a hole (page 6, paragraph [0078]), wherein an adhesive surrounds the hole (page 5, paragraph [0062]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the foam with an opening of Mori on the waterproof partition of Yokote et al. in order to provide a sound transmitting membrane (Mori, page 1, paragraph [0011]). Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokote et al. ( JP2008-108558, see machine translated version ) in view of Mori (US Patent Application No. 2015/0304750), in further view of Wang et al. (CN 204117905, see machine translated version). Yokote et al. and Mori are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claim 2, Yokote et al. fail to teach wherei n the waterproof film is made of polyethylene terephthalate. However, Wang et al. teach a waterproof key (paragraph [0008]) comprising a waterproof sheet (paragraph [0008]), wherein the waterproof sheet is made of PET (paragraphs [0008], [0011]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the PET of Wang et al. as the waterproof film of Yokote et al. in order to achieve a better waterproof effect and button operation feel (Wang et al., paragraph [0007]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT CHINESSA GOLDEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5543 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday; 8:00 - 4:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Alicia Chevalier can be reached on FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1490 . 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. /Chinessa T. Golden/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 9/3 /2025