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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Zhang et al. (CN208509194U), cited by applicant in view of Anklesaria (US 7,808,392 B1) previously cited and Mayfield (US 11/212,929 B2).
Re claim 1: Zhang et al. teaches an electronic device, comprising: a device assembly (200) including a housing *exterior portion or (200); a first magneto coupler (210) coupled to the housing; a clip member (10) having a second magneto coupler (34); wherein the second magneto coupler of the clip member is capable of being magnetically coupled to the first magneto coupler that is coupled to the housing (paragraph [0025]), the clip member and the housing together forming a clipping device, the clip member configured to form a closed end of the clipping device with the housing (see figure 1 in which the clip member (10) has a V-shape one end of which is a closed end and in which can be attached to the housing), the second magneto coupler being disposed proximate to the closed end of the clipping device (see figure 1); wherein the clipping device allows the housing to be attached to, and detached from, an edge of a non-metallic or non-magnetic item (such as a collar, paragraph [0008], the closed end of the clipping device configured to prevent the edge of the non-metallic or non-magnetic item from passing completely through the clipping device. Zhang et al. does not specifically teach as set forth that the magnetic coupling of the second magneto coupler to the first magneto coupler allows the housing to be attached to a non-edge portion of anon-metallic or non- magnetic item when the item is placed between the first magneto coupler and the clip member, the non-edge portion of the non-metallic or non-magnetic item being located inwardly from an edge of the non-metallic or non-magnetic item by a distance that is greater than a longest dimension of the clip member. Anklesaria teaches in a similar environment a clipping arrangement formed by first and second magnetic couplers (42 and 46) wherein the clipping device allows a housing (43) to be attached to a non-edge portion of a non-metallic or non- magnetic item when the item is placed between the first magneto coupler and the clip member (see figure 2, noting that the attachment to the clothing can take place anywhere, .e.g. at an edge of the clothing or somewhere within the clothing spaced from an edge) the non-edge portion of the non-metallic or non-magnetic item being located inwardly from an is edge of the non- metallic or non-magnetic item by a distance that is greater than a longest dimension of the clip member (when the magnetic coupling arrangement is made to the clothing spaced from the edge by a distance that is greater than a longest dimension of the clip member. Note there is no strap connecting element (47) to element (44) that would limit where on a piece of clothing the device can be clipped. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Anklesaria into the arrangement of Zhang et al. to predictably provide an arrangement that not only is capable of clipping a device to an edge of clothing but also to non-edge portions of clothing making a device more versatile in its placement of attachment to clothing. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention. Additionally claim 1 now sets forth by amendment that the magnetic coupler is disposed on an end portion of the clip member instead of a middle location as taught in Zhang et al. Mayfield teaches in a similar environment that clipping devices can include magneto coupler disposed on end portions of a clip member (see arrangement in figures 1-3) providing an alternative placement of a coupler performing a similar clipping operation. It would have been obvious before the filing of the invention by one of ordinary skill in the art to relocate the couples as taught by Zhang et al.in the arrangement of Zhang et al. and Anklesaria as applied to predictably provide an alternative location of the couplers in or on the clip member to perform a similar operation of clipping. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Re claim 4: Note in Zhang et al. figures 1 and 2 elements (34) and (210) are magnets as indicated by the designation S/N and N/S
6. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN208509194U), cited by applicant in view of Anklesaria (US 7,808,392 B1) and Mayfield as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Ellis et al. (US 9,265,294 B2), previously cited.
Re claims 2: The teaching of Zhang et al. in view of Anklesaria and Mayfield is discussed above and incorporated herein. Additionally note Anklesaria discloses that arrangement taught therein can be used to attach any type of electronic component (column 3, lines 27-30) but not specifically stating a speaker. Ellis et al. teaches in a similar environment that one possible electronic component that can be attached to a garment can be a speaker, speaker assembly (which inherently includes a transducer and any magnet of the speaker separate from the magneto couplers to produce audio), column 5, lines 28-32 providing an additional use of providing audio to a user of the garment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Ellis et al. into the arrangement of Zhang et al. in view of Anklesaria and Mayfield as applied to predictably provide audio to the user of the garment. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
7. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN208509194U), cited by applicant in view of Anklesaria (US 7,808,392 B1) and Mayfield as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Pillarisetty et al., previously cited.
Re claims 3: The teaching of Zhang et al. in view of Anklesaria and Mayfield is discussed above and incorporated herein. Additionally note Anklesaria discloses that arrangement taught herein can be used to attach any type of electronic component (column 3, lines 27-30) , but does not specifically state a camera system. Pillarisetty et al. teaches in a similar environment that one possible electronic component that can be attached to a garment can be a camera system (which inherently includes an image assembly), column 5, lines 9-10 providing an additional use of providing images for a user of the garment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Pillarisetty et al. into the arrangement of Zhang et al. in view of Anklesaria and Mayfield as applied to predictably provide images for a user of the garment. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
8. Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (CN208509194U), cited by applicant in view of Anklesaria (US 7,808,392 B1) and Mayfield as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Harchol., previously cited.
Re claims 5-6: The teaching of Zhang et al. in view of Anklesaria and Mayfield as applied is discussed above and incorporated herein. Zhang et al. and Anklesaria do not teach that either the second magnetic coupler (claim 5) or the first magnetic coupler (claims 6) is a ferromagnetic metal. Harchol teaches in a similar environment that magnetic couplers can include ferromagnetic materials (such as iron) paragraph [0028] as an alternative to a magnet. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to substitute either magneto coupler (magnet) taught in Zhang et al., Anklesania and Mayfield as applied with a ferromagnetic coupler as taught by Harchol to predictably provide an alternative arrangement of magnetic attraction between elements. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-30 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 6/30/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6 under 35 U. S. C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly discovery prior art (Mayfield) satisfying the newly recited features in claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ANDREW SNIEZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-7563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM-3:30 PM 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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
/ANDREW SNIEZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/A.S./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693 7/29/26
