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 .
Status
The filing on 07/14/2026 amended claim 1. Claims 1, 2, and 6-12 are pending and rejected on new grounds of rejections necessitated by the amendment/s of claim 1.
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/29/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - AIA 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 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 of this title, 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 1, 2 and 6-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takezawa (US 20040032569 A1) in view of Tokita (US 20090039503 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takezawa teaches an electronic apparatus (Fig. 1-26) comprising: a first case (810B); a second case (600B) provided in such a manner that an internal part (360) is disposed between the first case (810B) and the second case (600B), the second case (600B) comprising a protruding area (601) provided in such a manner as to protrude towards the internal part (360; [0113]); a heat conductive member (adhesive sheet or adhesive) interposed between the internal part (360) and the protruding area (601; [0113]); and a cover (820B) configured to cover an opposite side of the second case (600B) opposite to a side thereof facing the internal part (360), wherein the internal part (360) comprises a heat generating member (360), and wherein a heat conductivity of the second case (600B) is higher than a heat conductivity of the cover (820B; [0153], [0178]).
Takezawa does not teach the protruding area (601) comprises multiple protruding portions, each of the multiple protruding portions being arranged in a rib-like manner and extending in a direction towards the internal part.
Tokita teaches the having the protruding area (601) comprises multiple protruding portions (5C), each of the multiple protruding portions (5C) being arranged in a rib-like manner and extending in a direction towards the internal part (Fig. 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skills in the art, at the time of the invention, to combine Takezawa with Tokita; because it improves heat transfer and stability.
Regarding claim 2, Takezawa further teaches wherein the second case (600B) and the cover (820B) are rectangular, wherein the second case (600B) has an engagement area (at 826, 827, 829 and more), and wherein the cover (820B) has an engagement target area (at 826, 827, 829 and more) in such a manner as to be brought into engagement with the engagement area (at 826, 827, 829 and more; [0100], [0107], [0194]).
Takezawa does not explicitly teach the engagement area and the engagement target area provided in at least one of four corners.
Having the engagement area and the engagement target area provided in at least one of four corners requires only rearrangement of parts that does not change the principle of operation in any way.
Rearrangement of parts without changing the operation of the reference device is prima facie obvious. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 6, Takezawa further teaches a material of the second case (600B) is a magnesium alloy ([0153], [0174], [0190]).
Regarding claim 7, Takezawa further teaches the second case (600B) comprises a lens barrel support area (602) which is configured to support a lower side of an end portion of a lens barrel (380; Fig. 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 25).
Regarding claim 8, Takezawa further teaches a material of the cover (820B) is a mixed resin ([0178]).
Regarding claim 9, Takezawa further teaches the internal part (360) is disposed at a position on the second case (600B) separated from a lens barrel (380; Fig. 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 25).
Regarding claim 10, Takezawa further teaches wherein the cover (820B) is provided in such a manner as to be brought into abutment with substantially an entire surface of the opposite side of the second case (600B; Fig. 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 25).
Regarding claim 11, Takezawa further teaches a lens barrel (380), wherein the electronic apparatus is a projector in which projected light is emitted from a projection port of the lens barrel (380), and wherein the second case (600B) comprises a support area provided in such a manner as to support the projection port of the lens barrel (380; Fig. 6, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 25).
Regarding claim 12, Takezawa further teaches a concave portion is provided between each of multiple protruding portions (610).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-LUAN Q LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5362. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached on (571) 272 230303. 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 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.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or:
(571) 273-7490, (for informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”)
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
/BAO-LUAN Q LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights