Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/388,700

ELECTRONIC DEVICE ENCLOSURE HAVING A TEXTURED GLASS COMPONENT

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Nov 10, 2023
Examiner
WENDELL, ANDREW
Art Unit
2648
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Apple INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
752 granted / 893 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
911
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§103
59.8%
+19.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 893 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 21-22, 27-29, and 35 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7-8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because even though they are not word for word with each other they both teach the same inventive concept. Regarding claim 21, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches a display; an enclosure surrounding the display and including a housing; a front cover assembly positioned over the display, coupled to the housing, and defining a front surface of the mobile phone; and a rear cover assembly coupled to the housing and defining a protrusion and an array of openings that extend through the protrusion, the rear cover assembly comprising a first cover member formed from a first glass material that at least partially defines a textured base region of the rear cover assembly; an interior coating disposed on an interior surface of the first cover member, comprising at least one color layer, and visible through the textured base region of the rear cover assembly; and a second cover member coupled to the first cover member, formed from a second glass material, and at least partially defining a raised surface region of the protrusion; and a plurality of camera modules, each of the camera modules extending into a respective opening of the array of openings (Claim 1). Regarding claim 22, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches he textured base region of the rear cover assembly has a first gloss value; and the raised surface region has a second gloss value that is greater than the first gloss value (Claim 1). Regarding claim 27, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches a plurality of windows coupled to the second cover member, each window of the plurality of windows positioned over a respective camera module of the plurality of camera modules (Claim 7). Regarding claim 28, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches A mobile phone comprising an enclosure including a front cover assembly; and a rear cover assembly comprising a first glass cover member defining a surface texture that at least partially defines a first surface region of the rear cover assembly; and a second glass cover member at least partially defining a second surface region of the rear cover assembly that protrudes with respect to the first surface region; and defining a plurality of openings that extend through the second glass cover member; a camera assembly positioned below the second glass cover member and comprising a plurality of camera modules, each camera module of the plurality of camera modules extending into a respective opening of the plurality of openings; and a display positioned below the front cover assembly (Claim 1). Regarding claim 29, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches wherein the second surface region of the rear cover assembly defines a plateau and has a gloss value that is greater than a gloss value of the first surface region (Claim 1). Regarding claim 35, U.S. Patent No. 11,533,817 teaches a mobile phone comprising a display; a set of camera modules; and an enclosure at least partially surrounding the display and the set of camera modules, the enclosure including a first cover assembly positioned over the display and defining a front surface of the mobile phone; and a second cover assembly defining a rear surface of the mobile phone and comprising a first glass cover member at least partially defines a textured first surface region of the second cover assembly, the textured first surface region producing a first amount of transmissive haze; a second glass cover member coupled to the first glass cover member; at least partially defining a protrusion of the second cover assembly, the protrusion defining a second surface region of the second cover assembly that produces second amount of transmissive haze that is less than the first amount of transmissive haze; and defining a set of openings, each camera module of the set of camera modules extending into a respective opening of the set of openings; and a housing coupled to the first cover assembly and the second cover assembly (Claim 8). 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. 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 21 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US Pat Pub# 2016/0113135) in view of Jeon et al. (US Pat Pub# 2019/0098121) and further in view of Evans, V et al. (US Pat# 10,333,576). Regarding claims 21 and 28, Kim teaches mobile phone comprising a display 111 (Fig. 1, display device); an enclosure surrounding the display and including a housing 119 (Fig. 1 and Section 0040, glass housing enclosure); a front cover 119 (Fig. 1) assembly positioned over the display (Section 0040, glass housing covering the display), coupled to the housing, and defining a front surface of the mobile phone 100 (Fig. 1); and a rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1) coupled to the housing and defining a protrusion 121 (Fig. 1) and an opening that extend through the protrusion, the rear cover assembly comprising a first cover member 102 (Fig. 1) formed from a first glass material that at least partially defines a textured base region of the rear cover assembly (Section 0043, rear cover containing glass and/or textures etc.); an interior coating disposed on an interior surface of the first cover member, comprising at least one color layer, and visible through the textured base region of the rear cover assembly (Section 0043, having color coating layer etc.). Kim fails to teach a second cover member and a raised surface region. Jeon teaches mobile phone comprising a display 151 (Fig. 1B); an enclosure surrounding the display and including a housing (Fig. 1B); and a rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1C) coupled to the housing and defining a protrusion and an array of openings 121b/c (Fig. 1C) that extend through the protrusion, the rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1C) comprising a first cover member formed from a first glass material (Section 0013 and Claim 5, glass material); and a second cover member (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.) coupled to the first cover member 102 (Fig. 1C), formed from a second glass material (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.); and a plurality of camera modules, each of the camera modules extending into a respective opening of the array of openings 121b/c (Fig. 1C, plurality of cameras etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a second cover member as taught by Jeon into Kim’s device in order to improve protection of the device. Kim and Jeon fails to teach a raised surface region. Evans teaches mobile phone comprising a second cover member coupled to the first cover member and at least partially defining a raised surface region of the protrusion 302a (Fig. 3, as shown a raised surface of the second cover member being the camera etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a raised surface region as taught by Evans into a second cover member as taught by Jeon into Kim’s device in order to improve protection and performance. Regarding claim 26, Kim further teaches the interior coating is a first interior coating; and the rear cover assembly further comprises a second interior coating disposed on an interior surface of the second cover member, comprising a second color layer, and visible through an exterior surface of the second cover member (Section 0043, having color coating layer etc.). Regarding claim 27, Jeon further teaches a plurality of windows coupled to the second cover member, each window of the plurality of windows positioned over a respective camera module of the plurality of camera modules (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.). Claims 35 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US Pat Pub# 2016/0113135) in view of Jeon et al. (US Pat Pub# 2019/0098121) and further in view of Evans, V et al. (US Pat# 10,333,576) and further in view of Allemand et al. (US Pat Pub# 2010/0243295). Regarding claim 35, Kim teaches mobile phone comprising a display 111 (Fig. 1, display device); an enclosure surrounding the display and including a housing 119 (Fig. 1 and Section 0040, glass housing enclosure); a front cover 119 (Fig. 1) assembly positioned over the display (Section 0040, glass housing covering the display), coupled to the housing, and defining a front surface of the mobile phone 100 (Fig. 1); and a rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1) coupled to the housing and defining a protrusion 121 (Fig. 1) and an opening that extend through the protrusion, the rear cover assembly comprising a first cover member 102 (Fig. 1) formed from a first glass material that at least partially defines a textured base region of the rear cover assembly (Section 0043, rear cover containing glass and/or textures etc.); an interior coating disposed on an interior surface of the first cover member, comprising at least one color layer, and visible through the textured base region of the rear cover assembly (Section 0043, having color coating layer etc.). Kim fails to teach a second cover member, a transmissive haze, and a raised surface region. Jeon teaches mobile phone comprising a display 151 (Fig. 1B); an enclosure surrounding the display and including a housing (Fig. 1B); and a rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1C) coupled to the housing and defining a protrusion and an array of openings 121b/c (Fig. 1C) that extend through the protrusion, the rear cover assembly 102 (Fig. 1C) comprising a first cover member formed from a first glass material (Section 0013 and Claim 5, glass material); and a second cover member (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.) coupled to the first cover member 102 (Fig. 1C), formed from a second glass material (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.); and a plurality of camera modules, each of the camera modules extending into a respective opening of the array of openings 121b/c (Fig. 1C, plurality of cameras etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a second cover member as taught by Jeon into Kim’s device in order to improve protection of the device. Kim and Jeon fails to teach a raised surface region and a transmissive haze. Evans teaches mobile phone comprising a second cover member coupled to the first cover member and at least partially defining a raised surface region of the protrusion 302a (Fig. 3, as shown a raised surface of the second cover member being the camera etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a raised surface region as taught by Evans into a second cover member as taught by Jeon into Kim’s device in order to improve protection and performance. Kim, Evans, and Jeon fails to teach a transmissive haze. Allemand teaches a first amount of transmissive haze and a second amount of transmissive haze that is less than the first amount of transmissive haze (Sections 0010-0011and 0269 and claims 1, 6, and 14, first and second transmission haze having different values etc.). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a transmissive haze as taught by Allemand into a raised surface region as taught by Evans into a second cover member as taught by Jeon into Kim’s device in order to improve performance and visuals. Regarding claim 39, Jeon further teaches wherein each opening of the set of openings extends through the second glass cover member; and the second cover assembly further comprises a set of windows coupled to the second glass cover member, each window of the set of windows positioned over a respective camera module of the set of camera modules (Section 0029 and 0169 and Claim 21, glass covering over the cameras etc.). Regarding claim 40, Kim further teaches wherein the housing comprises a set of metal segments that are separated by dielectric segments (Sections 0043, 0061, and 0098, metal segments etc.). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 23-25, 30-34, 36-38 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW WENDELL whose telephone number is (571)272-0557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM. 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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 WENDELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 12/27/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 10, 2023
Application Filed
May 08, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP
Apr 04, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597958
RF FRONT-END ARCHITECTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592726
RADIO FREQUENCY MODULE AND COMMUNICATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587256
SYNCHRONIZATION BEAM SWEEPING WITH CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE SURFACES IN PRESENCE OF MULTIPLE OPERATORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587040
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING POWER BETWEEN PLURALITY OF DEVICES THROUGH OUT-OF-BAND COMMUNICATION IN WIRELESS POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579890
RIDE MATCHING TO A DESTINATION CATEGORY OR PURPOSE IN A SHARED TRANSPORT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 893 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month