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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argued the applied reference fails to disclose "a rear cover configured to cover at least a portion of a rear surface of the mobile device, the rear cover including a plurality of first arms, the rear cover having a rectangular shape with four peripheral edges, the plurality of first arms being positioned along each of the four peripheral edges", the rails 420 of Poon and the posts 131 of Rayner are in entirely different fashions. Moreover, simply replacing the rails 420 of Poon with the posts 131 of Raynor would result in a structure that does not satisfy the features of the claimed invention.
The Examiner respectfully submits that Raynor discloses the argued limitation “a rear cover configured to cover at least a portion of a rear surface of the mobile device, the rear cover including a plurality of first arms, the rear cover having a rectangular shape with four peripheral edges, the plurality of first arms being positioned along each of the four peripheral edges” ([0509], figures 14E-14H, the plural posts (first arms) 131 located along all four edges of the rear cover, aligning and sliding in vertical direction to lock/connect the rear cover to the front cover as the first arms 131 sliding with respect to the second arms 121), thus satisfied the claimed features. The connections of Poon and Raynor are alternatively useable/applicable to engage the rear cover to the front cover, and using either connection type is simply a choice to one skilled in the art.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 8 amend to “to engage the front cover” for better alignment with the rest of claim limitation. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-14 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poon (US 20220263532 A1) in view of Rayner (US 20140152890 A1).
For claim 1. Poon discloses (Abstract, figures 1-9, [0033], [0034]) A mobile device case comprising: a rear cover configured to cover at least a portion of a rear surface of the mobile device (figures 7-8, back portion 300), the rear cover including a plurality of first arms ([0048], arms 420); a front cover configured to cover at least a portion of a front surface of the mobile device (front portion 200), the front cover including a plurality of second arms ([0044], arms 721) configured to engage with the plurality of first arms to attach the front cover to the rear cover, wherein the rear cover and front cover are configured to accommodate the mobile device therebetween and to prevent removal of the mobile device when the plurality of second arms engage with the plurality of first arms, and wherein the plurality of second arms engage with the plurality of first arms via a sliding engagement ([0044], [0048]).
Poon fails to disclose the rear cover having a rectangular shape with four peripheral edges, the plurality of first arms being positioned along each of the four peripheral edges.
This teaching is disclosed by Rayner ([0509], figures 14E-14H, sliding to lock between the locking arms 131 and 121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Rayner into the art of Poon as to protect the mobile device in an alternative secure locking embodiment.
For claim 2. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 1, Poon discloses wherein the sliding engagement includes sliding in a direction parallel to the front and rear surfaces of the mobile device when the mobile device is accommodated between the rear cover and the front cover (FIGS. 7-9, [0044], [0048]).
For claim 3. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 2, Poon discloses wherein the plurality of first arms each include a first ledge that engages with a corresponding second ledge of the plurality of second arms (FIGS. 7-9, [0044], [0048]).
For claim 5. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 1, Poon discloses further comprising a lock coupled to at least one of the rear cover and the front cover, the lock configured to prevent sliding disengagement of the front cover from the rear cover ([0036], [0045], lock/clasp 715; also see Rayner: [0509], figures 14E-14H, therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Rayner into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner as to protect the mobile device in an alternative secure locking embodiment).
For claim 8. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 1, Poon discloses further comprising an actuator configured to be coupled to at least one of the front cover and the rear cover in a region between the front cover and the rear cover and outside a peripheral edge of the mobile device when the mobile device is accommodated between the rear cover and the front cover, the actuator movable to actuate a button on the peripheral edge of the mobile device ([0037] movable switch interface 435, [0042]).
For claim 9. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 8, Poon discloses wherein the actuator includes an external portion accessible from outside of the front cover and/or the rear cover to enable a user to actuate the button by manipulating the external portion ([0037] movable switch interface 435, [0042]).
For claim 10. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 8, Poon discloses wherein the actuator is configured to be coupled to the at least one of the front cover and the rear cover in a first configuration when the mobile device has the button in a first position, and is configured to be coupled to the at least one of the front cover and the rear cover in a second configuration when the mobile device has the button in a second position different from the first position ([0037], [0042], [0003], [0058]).
For claim 11. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 8, Poon discloses further comprising at least one additional actuator, the at least one additional actuator being movable to actuate an alternative button on the peripheral edge of the mobile device ([0037], [0042], [0003], [0058]).
For claim 12. Poon discloses (Abstract, figures 1-9, [0033], [0034]) A method for accommodating a mobile device within a mobile device case comprising: positioning the mobile device between a rear cover and a front cover, the rear cover (figures 7-8, back portion 300) configured to cover at least a portion of a rear surface of the mobile device, the front cover (front portion 200) configured cover at least a portion of a front surface of the mobile device; and sliding the front cover relative to the rear cover to engage the front with the rear cover in such a manner that the rear cover and the front cover accommodate the mobile device therebetween and prevent removal of the mobile device ([0044], [0048]).
Poon fails to disclose the rear cover having a rectangular shape with four peripheral edges, with a plurality of first arms being positioned along each of the four peripheral edges, sliding to engage the front with the plurality of first arms.
This teaching is disclosed by Rayner ([0509], figures 14E-14H, sliding in vertical direction to lock between the locking arms 131 of the rear cover and the locking arms 121 of the front cover).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Rayner into the art of Poon as to protect the mobile device in an alternative secure locking embodiment.
For claim 13. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the method of claim 12, Poon discloses wherein the sliding includes sliding the front cover relative to the rear cover in a direction parallel to the front and rear surfaces of the mobile device (FIGS. 7-9, [0044], [0048]).
For claim 14. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the method of claim 12, Poon discloses further comprising locking the front cover relative to the rear cover to prevent sliding disengagement of the front cover from the rear cover ([0036], [0045], lock/clasp 715; also see Rayner: [0509], figures 14E-14H, therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Rayner into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner as to protect the mobile device in an alternative secure locking embodiment).
For claim 17. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the method of claim 12, Poon discloses further comprising coupling an actuator to at least one of the front cover and the rear cover in a region between the front cover and the rear cover and outside a peripheral edge of the mobile device, the actuator configured to be movable to actuate a button on the peripheral edge of the mobile device ([0037] movable switch interface 435, [0042]).
For claim 18. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 1, Poon discloses ([0051]-[0053], figures 11A-11D) A mobile device stand comprising: a base configured to be positioned on a surface (1202); a pillar (1200) extending upwardly from the base away from the surface, the pillar comprising a pillar connector (1201); and the mobile device case of claim 1, wherein the rear cover includes a case connector (1110) configured to mate with the pillar connector such that the mobile case is supported by the pillar when the base is positioned on the surface.
For claim 19. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device stand of claim 18, Poon discloses wherein the pillar connector is rotatable in order to enable tilting of the mobile device case when the mobile device case is supported by the pillar ([0051]-[0053], figures 11A-11D).
8. Claim(s) 6-7 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poon as modified by Rayner above, further in view of Wang (US 20240237793 A1).
For claim 6. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising: a plurality of removable pads configured to support an edge of the mobile device; and a plurality of retainers on at least one of the front and rear cover, each of the plurality of retainers configured to receive one of the plurality of pads, wherein the plurality of retainers include a first subset of retainers positioned to support peripheral edges of the mobile device when the mobile device has first dimensions, and a second subset of retainers positioned to support the peripheral edges of the mobile device when the mobile device has second dimensions different from the first dimensions.
This teaching is disclosed by Wang (figures 1-2, 5, [0024], pads 21 on four sides, retainers 2124; [0038]: the protective case of the present disclosure may be applied to various portable electronic devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Wang into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner as to securely protect the mobile device using pads.
For claim 7. Poon in combination with Rayner and Wang substantially teaches the mobile device case of claim 6, Wang discloses wherein the plurality of pads are configured to support the edge of and a portion of the rear surface of the mobile device ([0031], figure 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Wang into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner and Wang as to securely protect the mobile device using pads.
For claim 15. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the method of claim 12, but fails to disclose further comprising: placing a plurality of removable pads in corresponding retainers on at least one of the front and rear cover depending on dimensions of the mobile device, such that the plurality of pads are positioned in a first subset of retainers to support peripheral edges of the mobile device when the mobile device has first dimensions, and a second subset of retainers to support the peripheral edges of the mobile device when the mobile device has second dimensions different from the first dimensions.
This teaching is disclosed by Wang (figures 1-2, 5, [0024], pads 21 on four sides, retainers 2124; [0038]: the protective case of the present disclosure may be applied to various portable electronic devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Wang into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner as to securely protect the mobile device using pads.
For claim 16. Poon in combination with Rayner and Wang substantially teaches the method of claim 15, Wang discloses wherein the placing is performed before the positioning, and the positioning includes positioning the mobile device on the plurality of pads such that the plurality of pads support the peripheral edges of and a portion of the rear surface of the mobile device ([0031], figure 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Wang into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner and Wang as to securely protect the mobile device using pads.
9. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poon as modified by Rayner above, further in view of ZHAO (US 20230146663 A1).
For claim 20. Poon in combination with Rayner substantially teaches the mobile device stand of claim 18, but fails to disclose further comprising electrical wiring positioned at least partially within the mobile device case, the electrical wiring including a first electrical connector configured to mate with a corresponding electrical contact on the mobile device, the electrical wiring extending from the first electrical connector through the case connector and the pillar connector and into the pillar.
This teaching is disclosed by ZHAO (figures 1-7, electrical wiring positioned at least partially within the mobile device case (figure 5, [0048]), the electrical wiring including a first electrical connector configured to mate with a corresponding electrical contact on the mobile device ([0055], [0086], charging interfaces), the electrical wiring extending from the first electrical connector through the case connector and the pillar connector and into the pillar (figures 6-7 and 12, [0050]: the lead wire is arranged in the base 4, the telescopic rod 2 and the back splint 3, so as to finally charge the electronic equipment through the Type-C interface on the shell body 1)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by ZHAO into the art of Poon as modified by Rayner as to improve its functionality with charging capability.
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 response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300, submitted online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only, Registered users of the USPTO's EFS-Web system may submit a response electronically through EFS-Web at https://efs.uspto.gov/TruePassSample/AuthenticateUserLocalEPF.html), or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rui Meng Hu whose telephone number is 571-270-1105, email is ruimeng.hu@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., 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, Jinsong Hu can be reached on (571)272-3965. 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.
/Rui Meng Hu/
R.H./rh
April 10, 2026
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights