Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/429,291

COMPUTING DEVICE COVER

Non-Final OA §102§Other
Filed
Jan 31, 2024
Examiner
WILSON, ADRIAN S
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Apple INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
794 granted / 1099 resolved
+4.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
1120
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
53.5%
+13.5% vs TC avg
§102
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
§112
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1099 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §Other
DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 have been considered for patentability. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 16-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US Publication 2023/0148721). In re Claim 16, Lee discloses a computing device cover, comprising: a back panel 510 (Figure 5) removably attachable to a computing device 200, the back panel comprising: a first surface abuttable against the computing device; and a second surface opposing the first surface (Figure 5); an upper panel 811 (Figures 5, 8 and 11) comprising a hidden surface attached to the second surface; a hinge 700 comprising a hinge shape and a hinge position (Figure 5); a kickstand 812 (Figures 5 and 11) rotatably attached to the upper panel 811 via the hinge 700, the kickstand comprising a kickstand surface abuttable against the second surface (Figure 11); and a sheet of fabric covering the kickstand surface, the hinge, and the hidden surface, wherein the sheet of fabric visually conceals the hinge shape and the hinge position from an unaided human eye (See Figure 5; paragraph 0064 disclosing 810, 820 comprising a fabric). In re Claim 17, Lee discloses a stiffener 710 or 720 (Figure 11) positioned between the hinge 730 and the sheet of fabric 811 or 812, wherein the sheet of fabric at the hinge is shaped to the stiffener (See Figure 5). In re Claim 19, Lee discloses wherein the sheet of fabric (810, 820; paragraph 0064; Figure 5) comprises a continuous sheet of fabric. In re Claim 20, Lee discloses wherein the kickstand is rotatable relative to the back panel within a range extending from about 0 degrees to about 180 degrees (Lee, paragraph 0028). This range fully covers the claimed range of 0 degrees to about 85 degrees and therefore is anticipated by Lee. See MPEP §2131.03. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-15 are allowable over the prior art of record. Claim 18 is 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. The specific limitations of “the fabric layer comprising: a pre-drawn fabric positionable adjacent to the rotation member, the pre-drawn fabric comprising a predetermined tension for controlling kinematics of the rotation member relative to the fixed portion” in Claim 1 are not anticipated or made obvious by the prior art of record in the examiner’s opinion. The specific limitations of “a fabric layer positioned between the first layer and the second layer, the fabric layer comprising a tension control region defined by a combination of one or more stiffened areas and one or more flexible areas” in Claim 8 are not anticipated or made obvious by the prior art of record in the examiner’s opinion. The specific limitations of "wherein the sheet of fabric comprises: a first predetermined tension or compression at a first hinge angle of the hinge; and a second predetermined tension or compression at a second hinge angle of the hinge, the second predetermined tension or compression differing from the first predetermined tension or compression” in Claim 18 are not anticipated or made obvious by the prior art of record in the examiner's opinion. For example, Lee et al. (US Publication 2023/0148721) discloses a computing device cover, comprising: a base layer 510 (Figure 5); a split layer 810, comprising: a fixed portion 811 attached to the base layer 510; and a rotation member 812 pivotably connected to the fixed portion (Figure 11); and a fabric layer (paragraph 0064) attached to the split layer and positioned between the base layer and the split layer. Lee also discloses a computing device cover, comprising: a back panel 510 (Figure 5) removably attachable to a computing device 200, the back panel comprising: a first surface abuttable against the computing device; and a second surface opposing the first surface (Figure 5); an upper panel 811 (Figures 5, 8 and 11) comprising a hidden surface attached to the second surface; a hinge 700 comprising a hinge shape and a hinge position (Figure 5); a kickstand 812 (Figures 5 and 11) rotatably attached to the upper panel 811 via the hinge 700, the kickstand comprising a kickstand surface abuttable against the second surface (Figure 11); and a sheet of fabric covering the kickstand surface, the hinge, and the hidden surface, wherein the sheet of fabric visually conceals the hinge shape and the hinge position from an unaided human eye (See Figure 5; paragraph 0064 disclosing 810, 820 comprising a fabric). However, Lee does not disclose the specific limitations as noted above in Claims 1, 8 or 18. Podhajny et al. (US Patent 10,683,591) discloses a removeable cover for a portable electronic device (col. 2, ll. 36-37) comprising a pre-drawn fabric with a predetermined tension for use as a hinge in the removable cover. However, Podhajny does not disclose a base layer, a split layer comprising a fixed portion attached to the base layer; and a rotation member pivotably connected to the fixed portion, where the fabric layer is attached to the split layer and positioned between the base layer and the split layer. Also, in the examiner’s opinion, Podhajny teaches away from a combination with Lee because Podhajny discloses its fabric hinge as a substitution for traditional hinge structures like that disclosed in Lee. Podhajny, col. 1, ll. 14-21. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adrian S Wilson whose telephone number is (571)270-3907. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9am to 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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. /ADRIAN S WILSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §Other
Mar 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 30, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 03, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596405
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585309
LAPTOP COMPUTER WITH QUICK-RELEASE KEYBOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588160
POWER BOARD MODULE AND SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578760
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572174
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
72%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+10.5%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1099 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