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 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.
Claims 1-2 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Breault, Jr. (11,108,421).
PNG
media_image1.png
532
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claims 1-2, Breault discloses a case (10) for protecting a portable electronic device, the case including a single-piece main body (12) and a frame (14), the main body including a well for receiving a portable electronic device (Figure 4), the well defined by a plurality of perimeter walls (perimeter wall 18 with front 26, back 28, lateral sides 30 and 32) and a back wall (16) spanning therebetween, the well including at least one perimeter channel (as shown in Figure 4, the side wall 30 with the upper lip extend inward forming a channel between the lip and the back wall), the frame being received in the perimeter channel (Figure 4, the frame 14 is place inside the perimeter channel), an exterior surface of the frame being level with an exterior surface of the main body (as shown in Figure 4 above), the perimeter channel includes a lip, the lip interfering with the frame to retain the frame in the well.
As to claim 7, Breault further discloses the perimeter channel includes ribs, the ribs extending away from the perimeter channel (as shown in Figure 2, the backwall have plurality of channels (34), the wall between the channels are considered as ribs which is inside the perimeter channel below the lip of front side 26, backside 28, and lateral side 30 and 32).
As to claim 8, Breault further discloses the backwall is dished (as shown in Figures 5-6, the back wall 16 have recessed portion 34 that is dished, according to Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of the word dished is concave, which the recessed portion 34 is concave into the backwall).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 3, 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breault, Jr. (11,108,421) in view of Alsberg et al (2016/0254836).
PNG
media_image2.png
388
472
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As to claims 3, 5-6, Breault does not specifically disclose the lip includes a terminal portion, the terminal portion engaging a notch on the frame when the frame is in the well, the lip includes a bevel on a top surface of the lip, the bevel adjacent to the frame when the frame is seated in the well and the lip includes a bevel on a bottom surface of the lip. Nevertheless, Alsberg discloses a case (Figure 11) for protecting a portable electronic device (105), the case including a main body (220, 230, 240) and a frame (210), the main body including a well for receiving a portable electronic device (as shown in Figure 11, the well is formed to hold the electronic device (105)) , the well defined by a plurality of perimeter walls and a back wall (back wall is considered as 220 and back wall of 230) spanning therebetween, the well including at least one perimeter channel (channel is form between the back wall and the lip 250) , the frame being received in the perimeter channel (210), Alsberg further discloses the lip includes a terminal portion, the terminal portion engaging a notch on the frame to retain the frame in the well (Figure 11), the lip includes a bevel on a top surface of the lip and the bottom surface of the lip , the bevel adjacent to the frame when the frame is seated in the well (as annotate above). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the electronic device case of Breault with terminal end of the lip lock into the a notch of the frame as taught by Alsberg in order to provide a greater locking mechanism to secure the frame inside the main body.
Claims 9-11 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breault, Jr. (11,108,421) in view of Fathollahi (2020/0295795).
As to claims 9-10, Breault discloses a case (10) for protecting a portable electronic device, the case including a main body (12) having a perimeter channel (as shown in Figure 4, the side wall 30 with the upper lip extend inward forming a channel between the lip and the back wall) surrounding a well (Figure 4) for receiving a portable electronic device and a removable frame (14), wherein the at least a portion of the frame being received in the perimeter channel (Figure 4, the frame 14 is place inside the perimeter channel) when the frame is seated in the well (Figure 4).
However, Breault does not disclose the frame has a durometer that is at least 20A higher than the durometer of the main body. Nevertheless, Fathollahi discloses a case (Figure 2C) to accommodate a plurality of sizes of portable electronic devices (functional language, the case can hold the exact size of the electronic device and/or hold a slightly smaller electronic device), the case including a main body (500) having a perimeter channel surrounding a well (a cell is form between the main body and the middle layer (400) for receiving a portable electronic device, a frame (300) having a durometer that is at least 20A higher than the durometer of the perimeter channel of the main body (according to the specification [0068] teaches that the first layer is 300, [0074] teaches the third layer is 500. [0045] discloses a first layer may have shore A durometer harness that is 40% or more greater than the third layer with the third layer may have a shore A durometer of 75. Therefore with the first layer may have a shore A durometer of 53.5. and thus meeting the claim language of a frame (300) having a durometer that is at least 20A higher than the durometer of the perimeter channel of the main body (500). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the electronic device case of Breault with various shore A durometer hardness material as taught by Fathollahi in order to withstand various forces they are subject to without undergoing permanent deformation or damage.
As to claim 11, Breault as modified further disclose the perimeter channel includes a lip, the lip interfering with the frame to retain the frame in the well (Figure 4 as annotated above).
As to claim 16, Breault as modified further discloses the perimeter channel includes ribs, the ribs extending away from the perimeter channel (as shown in Figure 2, the backwall have plurality of channels (34), the wall between the channels are considered as ribs which is inside the perimeter channel below the lip of front side 26, backside 28, and lateral side 30 and 32).
As to claim 17, Breault as modified further discloses the backwall is dished (as shown in Figures 5-6, the back wall 16 have recessed portion 34 that is dished, according to Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of the word dished is concave, which the recessed portion 34 is concave into the backwall).
As to claim 18, Breault as modified further discloses the case retains a portable device of a first size without the frame being seated in the well, and retains a portable electronic device of a size different from the first size when the frame is seated in the well (Figure 4 of Breault teaches the case holding a first size of electronic device, and without the frame 14, the housing is capable of holding a greater size electronic device).
Claims 12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Breault, Jr. (11,108,421) in view of Fathollahi (2020/0295795), further in view of Alsberg et al (2016/0254836).
As to claims 12, 14-15, Breault does not specifically disclose the lip includes a terminal portion, the terminal portion engaging a notch on the frame when the frame is in the well, the lip includes a bevel on a top surface of the lip, the bevel adjacent to the frame when the frame is seated in the well and the lip includes a bevel on a bottom surface of the lip. Nevertheless, Alsberg discloses a case (Figure 11) for protecting a portable electronic device (105), the case including a main body (220, 230, 240) and a frame (210), the main body including a well for receiving a portable electronic device (as shown in Figure 11, the well is formed to hold the electronic device (105)) , the well defined by a plurality of perimeter walls and a back wall (back wall is considered as 220 and back wall of 230) spanning therebetween, the well including at least one perimeter channel (channel is form between the back wall and the lip 250) , the frame being received in the perimeter channel (210), Alsberg further discloses the lip includes a terminal portion, the terminal portion engaging a notch on the frame to retain the frame in the well (Figure 11), the lip includes a bevel on a top surface of the lip and the bottom surface of the lip , the bevel adjacent to the frame when the frame is seated in the well (as annotate above). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the electronic device case of Breault with terminal end of the lip lock into the a notch of the frame as taught by Alsberg in order to provide a greater locking mechanism to secure the frame inside the main body.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 13 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.
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
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 inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN HOI CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-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, Orlando E Aviles can be reached at (571)270-5531. 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.
/CHUN HOI CHEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736