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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0014], Line 5 recites “the supply of expandable positioned”. It appears that the word “material” is missing.
Paragraph [0015], Line 2 recites “protect an electronic devices”. It appears that the word “an” should be removed in this case.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites “the bladder” which should be amended to ‘a bladder’ for the first recitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1-5, 7-8, 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo (US 3,861,710) in view of Rupp et al (US 11,084,447).
As concerns claim 1, Okubo (US 3,861,710) discloses an electronic device protection system configured to protect an electronic device (the airbag disclosed is configured to protect a hand-held electronic device, medical implant within a passenger, or other similar device located within the vehicle etc) in a vehicle, the system comprising:
a housing (passenger area of the vehicle), the electronic device positioned within the housing;
a capsule (21, 51);
a trigger mechanism (24, 54) coupled to the capsule; and
a supply of expandable material (gas) configured to move from a compressed state to an expanded state upon actuation of the trigger mechanism, the supply of expandable material positioned within the capsule in the compressed state and positioned in the housing (in the form of an expanded air bag).
Okubo fails to specify wherein the airbag would be positively surrounding the electronic device in the expanded state.
Rupp et al (US 11,084,447) however teaches an alternative airbag configuration (Figure 15) whereby the entire occupant and thus any hand-held electronic device or medically implanted electronic device would also be surrounded.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Okubo as taught by Rupp to include an airbag configuration that more thoroughly surrounded the electronic device and/or an occupant for the expected benefit of lowering kinetic impact damage to both the individual and the electronic device, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
As concerns claim 2, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a processor (Okubo – 17) configured to actuate the trigger mechanism to cause the supply of expandable material to expand from the compressed state to the expanded state.
As concerns claim 3, the combination discloses the system of claim 2, further comprising:
a duct (Okubo – 22/52, 23/53) connecting the capsule (Okubo - 21/51) to the bladder (Okubo – 3), wherein the processor is configured to release the supply of expandable material to travel through the duct to the bladder within the housing upon actuation of the trigger mechanism.
As concerns claim 4, the combination discloses the system of claim 2, further comprising:
a sensor (Okubo – 1, 4) configured to communicate with the processor, wherein the processor is configured to actuate the trigger mechanism upon a signal from the sensor. (Okubo – Column 3, Line 19-32)
As concerns claim 5, the combination discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the sensor is configured to generate the signal upon a prediction or a detection of a collision. (Okubo – Column 3, Line 19-32)
As concerns claim 6, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, wherein a bladder (Okubo – 3 / Rupp - 1500) is positioned within the housing and the capsule is positioned within the bladder and the housing.
As concerns claim 7, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the supply of expandable material is C02; and
the capsule is a compressed CO2 cylinder. (Okubo – Compressed gas 21 and 51 / analogous to claimed CO2.)
As concerns claim 8, the combination discloses the system of claim 7, wherein upon release of the expandable material, the bladder is inflated within the housing. (Okubo - Figure 5 / Rupp – Figure 15)
As concerns claim 10, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the trigger mechanism is an actuator. (Okubo – which actuates the valves 24 and 54)
As concerns claim 13, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a bumper (Okubo – Figure 2 illustrates a vehicle with a bumper) having an outside surface and an opposite inside surface, a cavity (Okubo - space within the body of the vehicle) opposite the outside surface, wherein the housing (Okubo - passenger area of vehicle) is positioned within the cavity.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo and Rupp and further in view of Hamilton et al (US 5,078,422).
As concerns claim 12, the combination discloses the system of claim 1, however fails to specify wherein the trigger mechanism is a squib is configured to rupture the capsule to release the expandable material.
Hamilton et al (US 5,078,422) however teaches wherein a trigger mechanism for a gas inflator apparatus is a squib, configured to rupture a capsule to release an expandable gas. (Column 7, Line 47-55)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination of Okubo and Rupp as taught by Hamilton to include the squib mechanism for the expected benefit of improved airbag inflation, to obtain the invention as specified in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 9 and 11 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As concerns claims 6 and 9, neither Okubo, Rupp, Hamilton nor any additionally cited art of record teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combination, inter alia, wherein:a capsule is positioned within a bladder; wherein the supply of expandable material is a spray foam.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON L LEMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3065. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached on (571) 272-5405. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AARON L LEMBO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3679