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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9, “a magnetic wireless function” should be amended to “the magnetic wireless function”.
In claim 11, “two handle grips shaped device” should be amended to “two handle grip shaped devices”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-5 and 7-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the phone" in line 2; Claim 4 recites the limitation "the recharging cable" in lines 1-2, “the device” in line 2, “the gamer’s hands” in line 2; Claim 5 recites the limitation "the phone’s recharge port" in 3; Claim 7 recites the limitation "the recharging cable" in line 2 and “the phone’s charge port” in line 3; and Claim 8 recites the limitation "the protruding cable" in line 2; however, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims.
Claims 9-11 inherit the deficiencies of Claim 5 from which they depend; therefore are rejected herein.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 10,868,436) in view of Ku (US 2003/0109314).
Claim 1: Chen discloses a mobile phone gaming grip cover, comprising: a grip cover (Fig. 1, elements (102, 104, 108)); a top-mounted charging port (Fig. 1, element (136), Figs. 7a-8), and a magnetic wireless recharge function ring (Col. 4:1-14, 47-63, Col. 7:20-38, Col. 8:4-20).
Chen teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting the grip cover being made of plastic or being a plastic grip cover. Chen at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the concepts of the invention (Col. 9:50-62). Furthermore, an analogous art of Ku teaches a similarly structured gaming grip cover, wherein the grip cover is made of plastic (¶ 39). It would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the grip cover of Chen such that is made of a material, such as plastic, as taught by Ku because such a modification would make the grip more durable and more easily and economically produced (Ku - ¶ 39). Additionally, it has been held that selecting a known material on the basis of its suitably for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416).
Claim 2: Chen in view of Ku discloses wherein the plastic grip cover is designed specifically for mobile gaming (Chen – Col. 4:1-14).
Claim 3: Chen discloses wherein the top-mounted charging port is connected to cable for charging the phone while in use (Fig. 7a-8, Col. 7:20-38).
Claim 4: Chen discloses wherein the cover relocates the recharging cable and charge port to the top part of the device, eliminating interference with the gamer's hands during horizontal phone holding (Fig. 7a-8, Col. 7:20-38).
Claim 5: Chen discloses wherein the magnetic wireless recharge function ring is designed to enable power transfer without the need for a physical wire connection to the phone's recharge port (Col. 4:46-64).
Claim 6: Chen discloses wherein the said cover further comprises an ergonomic design (Col. 4:1-14) that enables the grip cover to ensure a comfortable and ergonomic gaming experience, reducing the risk of carpal tunnel syndrome and fatigue (Chen teaches that the grips are of an ergonomic design and one of ordinary skill in the art understands that ergonomic refers to comfort and/or efficiency of use. A grip designed to be ergonomic would as a result reduce the risk of fatigue and/or carpal tunnel). Furthermore, as it pertains to the bolded limitations, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus
satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim 7: Chen discloses wherein the said cover ensures damage prevention by relocating the charging cable by preventing potential damage to the phone's charge port (top mounted charging port) caused by movement during gameplay (Fig. 7a-8, Col. 7:20-38). Since Chen’s charge port is mounted at the top (see above) potential damage is prevented, for example by a user(s) hands, when using the gaming grip cover during play of a game. Furthermore, as it pertains to the bolded limitations, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim 8: Chen discloses wherein the said cover is designed (Fig. 7a-8, Col. 7:20-38) to reduce pain by eliminating the discomfort and pain caused by the protruding cable between the gamer's fingers, enhancing the overall gaming experience. Since Chen’s cover has a top mounted charging port the cable does not interfere with game play e.g. the cable does not protrude between the gamer’s fingers and as a result pain is reduced by eliminating the discomfort and pain. Furthermore, as it pertains to the bolded limitations, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Claim 9: Chen discloses wherein the said cover further comprises a magnetic wireless recharge function ring that is designed to provide a convenient and wire-free power transfer option for users (Col. 4:46-64, Col. 8:4-20).
Claim 10: Chen discloses wherein the said cover (Figs. 1-2, see above) is designed to enhance the overall usability and longevity of mobile gaming devices by protecting portions of the mobile gaming devices and by providing a power source for charging the mobile gaming device (Figs. 1-2, see above).
Claim 11: Chen discloses wherein the said cover has two handle grips (102, 104) shaped device that wirelessly attaches to phones (Figs. 1-8 and descriptions thereof).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please see attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAMAR HARPER whose telephone number is (571)272-6177. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571) 270-1344. 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.
/TRAMAR HARPER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715