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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the
“an accommodating cavity open at both ends” of Claim 1
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 10/13/23. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Zhang (CN 217010439 U)
Independent Claim 1, Zhang discloses an electronic device (Figs. [1-5]), characterized by comprising:
a housing having an accommodating cavity open at both ends (63, Figs. [3, 4] shows the cavity being open at both ends, and capped by a non-integral member, ¶’s [26, 35]) and provided with a partition (30, 62), which separates the accommodating cavity to form a first accommodating groove and a second accommodating groove;
a wireless charging module, which is arranged in the first accommodating groove (10);
a lighting module, which is arranged in the second accommodating groove (70, 642);
a heat dissipation hole is opened along the outer circumference of the housing (633, ¶[29]), and connected with the first accommodating groove and/or the second accommodating groove ([70, 642], where comparisons of Fig. 5 with Figs. [3, 4] shows the connection).
Dependent Claim 2, Zhang discloses a characterized in that the electronic device further includes a mask assembly, which includes a first mask (21 shown esp. in Figs. [3-5] to be located directly on coil 10) and a second mask (632 & 642/64, esp. 642, ¶[32] described as a light-diffusing structure, i.e. mask, in that it covers all or part of the piece, 632 further meets that definition of mask);
the first mask is installed at the opening of the first accommodating groove; the second mask is installed at the opening of the second accommodating groove (see Figs. [3-5]).
Dependent Claim 3, Zhang discloses characterized in that the second mask is made of transparent material and is integrally molded (642/64 is described as a partially-transparent/light-diffusing structure, i.e. transparent material, and both are each shown to be a single piece, i.e. interpreted to be integrally molded).
Dependent Claim 4, Zhang discloses characterized in that there are a plurality of heat dissipation holes, which are spaced apart along the outer circumferential direction of the housing (see Figs. [1-5, esp. 1-4] showing the holes of 633).
Dependent Claim 9, Zhang discloses electronic component, characterized by comprising an outdoor mobile power supply and the electronic device according to claim 1 (the system is not described as stationary and thus would be capable of being mobile, and is not described as indoor only, so it is capable of being used;
furthermore, it is described as a power supply for mobile phones [known to be used outside], ¶’s [08, 26, 31], thus, as a mobile phone/smart phone is known as a mobile power supply, the device being charged along with the electronic device charger as well).
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.
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.
Claims 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 217010439 U) in view of Schreiner et al (USPGPN 20150340892; hereinafter Schre)
Dependent Claim 5, Zhang is silent to characterized in that the electronic device further includes a base, and the housing is movably disposed on the base.
Schre teaches electronic device ([20, 22, 21] in Figs. [1-11]) further includes a base (16), the housing is movably disposed on the base (¶’s [32, 40, 45, 53, 57, esp. 32], where Figs. [4-6, 11] show the base moved by the hinge in a vertical orientation, Figs. [1-3, 10] show the base moved by the hinge horizontal orientation). Zhang, Schreiner, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the provision of power from a mobile power source [22, 20, 21 in Schre] to a device to be charged [12 in Schre]. Schre has an internal battery power source in the base [18, 42] which does not move with the hinge (¶[40], Figs. [10, 11] have an external power cord as well ¶’s [56-62]). The fact that Schre has a wired power provision and [Zhang & the present application] have wireless power provision does not mean the base used for the power supply is not analogous. The problem being solved is supporting a power source for charging, not, the particular kind of power provision of charging. Schre teaches by having this movement operation, it serves to improve the ease of moving the device around the room (abstract, ¶[50]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang with Schre to provide improved convenience.
Dependent Claim 6, the combination of Zhang and Schre teaches characterized in that the electronic device further comprises a connecting piece, which is hinged to the base and the housing respectively (Schre: hinge 44, ¶’s [09, 11, 32, 40, 45, 53, 57, esp. 32, 40, 45]).
Dependent Claim 7, the combination of Zhang and Schre teaches characterized in that a first connection part is provided at an end of the base away from the housing (while silent in Zhang, Schre Figs. [10, 11] have an external-power-cord[202]/first-connection-part as well ¶’s [56-62], which provides improved ability to recharge the internal battery of Schre [and so it is not limited to only one charge, i.e. improving longevity]).
Dependent Claim 8, the combination of Zhang and Schre teaches characterized in that the first connection part is provided with a first conductive part, which is electrically connected to the wireless charging module and the lighting module respectively (122 is the analogous portion in Schre which would best meet Zhang’s structure, and as 122 is electrically deriving power from the battery 116/18 and the power cord 204/202, the modification of Zhang to incorporate the base of Schre would mean the lighting module and wireless charging module in Zhang would be connected to the source of external power [otherwise, Zhang, which again is silent to the explicit source of its external power]).
Dependent Claim 10, Zhang is silent to the electronic device is provided on the outdoor mobile power supply, and a second connection part is provided on one end of the outdoor mobile power supply close to the electronic device, and the second connection part is provided with a second conductive part, which is electrically connected to the electronic device.
Schre teaches the electronic device ([20, 22, 21] in Figs. [1-11]) is provided on the outdoor mobile power supply (16), and a second connection part (18) is provided on one end of the outdoor mobile power supply close to the electronic device, and the second connection part is provided with a second conductive part (68, ¶’s [43]), which is electrically connected to the electronic device (¶’s [32, 40, 45, 53, 57, esp. 32], where Figs. [4-6, 11] show the base moved by the hinge in a vertical orientation, Figs. [1-3, 10] show the base moved by the hinge horizontal orientation). Zhang, Schreiner, and the present application are analogous in that they involve the provision of power from a mobile power source [22, 20, 21 in Schre] to a device to be charged [12 in Schre]. Schre has an internal battery power source in the base [18, 42] which does not move with the hinge (¶[40], Figs. [10, 11] have an external power cord as well ¶’s [56-62]). The fact that Schre has a wired power provision and [Zhang & the present application] have wireless power provision does not mean the base used for the power supply is not analogous. The problem being solved is supporting a power source for charging, not, the particular kind of power provision of charging. Schre teaches by having this movement operation, it serves to improve the ease of moving the device around the room (abstract, ¶[50]). Schre also teaches the outdoor mobile power supply having wheels provides improved mobility (¶’s [06, 36, 50, 56])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang with Schre to provide improved convenience.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references were determined to have analogous structure to the features of claim 1 (including reference[s] cited above):
CN-208312067-U OR WO-2019051629-A1 OR CN-110707829-A OR CN-210744830-U OR CN-216976738-U OR CN-217010439-U
US-20230191141-A1 OR US-20240146109-A1 OR US-20240292960-A1
The following references by same inventive entity and/or assignee/applicant were close to being considered for double patenting rejections:
US-20250125555-A1 OR US-20250125473-A1 OR US-20260121451-A1 OR US-20260171845-A1 OR US-20250125474-A1
The following references relate to the movable base/outdoor mobile power supply claimed: CN-208316415-U
US-20100290215-A1 OR US-20120026724-A1 OR US-20120181979-A1 OR US-20150340892-A1 OR US-20160084431-A1 OR US-20220069399-A1 OR US-20220278405-A1 OR US-20230100066-A1 OR US-20250226497-A1
US-8061864-B2 OR US-8262244-B2 OR US-9755446-B2 OR US-10072790-B2 OR US-11552365-B2 OR US-11870086-B2 OR US-12288889-B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights