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 .
Claims 1-4 have been cancelled, and Claims 5-8 have been added as per the amendment filed on 12/13/2023.
Currently Claims 5-8 are pending and prosecuted.
Specification
The amendment filed 12/13/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
Drawings:
Figure 7
Figure 9
Specification:
The amendments made in paragraphs [0004-0033] of the marked-up specification as filed on 12/13/2023.
The examiner suggests amending the drawings and the specification to as they were presented originally on 10/22/2022 in order to overcome the rejection. The examiner notes that the amendment to the specification in paragraph [0001] removing reference to cross-application 18/048032 is acceptable and does not raise an issue of new matter.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 5 recites, “means for securely holding at least one low profile key fob” however, the specification as originally filed on 10/19/2023 fails to disclose or describe a “means for securely holding at least one low profile key fob”. Therefore, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement
Claims 6-8, which are dependent from Claim 5, are also rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 6 recites the term “low profile specific interconnecting contacts” where the specification and drawings as originally filed on 10/19/2023 fail to disclose or describe a “low profile specific interconnecting contacts”. Therefore the claims fails to comply with the written description requirement.
The examiner suggests changing “low profile specific interconnecting contacts” to “battery contacts” which is consistent with what is disclosed and depicted in the specification and drawings as originally filed on 10/19/2023.
Claim 7 recites the limitation, “the cell phone case front and the cell phone case back comprising an inside surface, the cell phone case inside surfaces facing the enclosed cell phone”. However, the specification and the drawings fail to disclose a “cell phone case” have an “inside surface” for both the front and back of the “cell phone case”, as well as having the both of these “inside surfaces” facing the “enclosed cell phone”. Therefore the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
Claim 7 recites the limitation, “wherein furthermore the panel attachment means are selected from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic” in lines 15-16, and lines 20-21. However, the specification and the drawings as originally filed on 10/19/2023, fail to disclose, describe or mention “the panel being magnetic”.
Therefore, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
The examiner suggests changing the limitation in lines 20-21 to recite, “wherein the panel attachment is an adhesive film” which is properly supported by the original specification on page 8 and in Figure 7 of the original drawings. The examiner further suggests removing the limitation in lines 15-16 in order to overcome this rejection.
Regarding Claim 7, which is dependent from Claim 5, Claim 5 recites “A process wherein a user creates a single cell phone-key fob device by combining a low profile key fob with a cell phone and/or a cell phone case enclosing the cell phone”. However, the specification and the drawings, as originally filed on 10/19/2023, fail to disclose or describe an embodiment in which a low profile key fob is combined with a cell phone that further utilizes the aspects as described in sections (a) and section (b) of Claim 7. Therefore, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
Claim 8 recites the limitation, “wherein the outwardly extending flanges comprise attachment means selected individually or jointly from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic, whereby enabling the low profile key fob to be attached to the cell phone case, or directly to the back of the cell phone”. However, the specification and the drawings, as originally filed on 10/19/2023, fail to disclose or describe the “outwardly extending flanges” comprises individually of “the panel being magnetic”, the “outwardly extending flanges” comprising jointly of “an adhesive film” and “the panel being magnetic”, and in either instance, where the low profile key fob is to be attached directly to the back of the cell phone. Therefore, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
The examiner suggests the following amendment to overcome the rejection “wherein the outwardly extending flanges comprise
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 5-8 are 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 5 recites the phrase “can be” in the limitation “wherein furthermore the low profile key fob can be detached from the cell phone and/or the cellphone enclosed in the cell phone”. The phrase "can be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 6-8, which are dependent from Claim 5, are also rejected for the same rationale.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: wherein the means for securely holding at least one low profile key fob comprise at least one of the following: a) a single recessed portion disposed on the cell phone case back outside surface capable of snappably holding one low profile phone fob key; b) two recessed portions side-by-side disposed on the cell phone case back outside surface, each portion capable of snappably holding one low profile phone-fob key; c) a plurality of resilient tabs upwardly facing from a panel capable of snappably holding one low profile key fob, wherein the panel being attached to the back of the cell phone case, wherein furthermore the panel attachment means are selected individually or jointly from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic; and d) a plurality of resilient tabs upwardly facing from a panel capable of snappably holding one low profile key fob wherein the panel being disposed on the cell phone back outside surface, wherein furthermore the panel attachment means are selected from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colan et al., US Patent Publication 2014/0104771, henceforth known as Colan, in further view of YouTube video 3dprinted keyfob case 2016 Mustang, by chris gonzales, published on September 2, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBfgwhQNTOQ, henceforth known a Gonzles.
Regarding Claim 5, Colan discloses a process wherein a user creates a single cell phone-key fob device by combining a key fob with a cell phone and/or a cell phone case enclosing the cell phone (Abstract; Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026]; [0030]; [0038[]; a electronic device case that also provides a docking station for a fob, that can be used with a vehicle, such that the individual only need to carry a single entity), wherein the cell phone and/or the cell phone enclosed in the cell phone case comprise
means for securely holding at least a key fob (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026]; a fob recess 21 that allows for a fob 21 to be held by a frictional force that is created by the material surface of the inner jacket 2),
wherein furthermore both, the key fob and the cell phone, retain their original functionality (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026]; the key fob, when inserted into the electronic device case, along with an electronic device, “retain their original functionality”),
wherein furthermore the key fob can be detached from the cell phone and/or the cell phone enclosed in the cell phone case at will by the user without loss of functionality of the key fob and/or of the cell phone (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0027]; the key fob can be detached from the cell phone case “at will by the user without loss of functionality of the key fob and/or of the cell phone”).
However, Colan does not disclose wherein the key fob is a low profile key fob,
the low profile key fob comprising an enclosure comprised of a top half and a bottom half.
Gonzales discloses a “low profile key fob” that is a 3D printed replacement for his 2016 Mustang key fob. This “low profile key fob comprises of a “top half” and “a bottom half”, as seen below”.
PNG
media_image1.png
327
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
778
1400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 disclosure of Colan to further include the teachings of Gonzales such that the key fob is replaced with the 3d printed key fob as described in Gonzales in order to provide wherein the key fob is a low profile key fob, the low profile key fob comprising an enclosure comprised of a top half and a bottom half. The motivation to combine these analogous arts is because Gonzales describes 3d printed a smaller and more low profile key fob for a 2016 Mustang vehicle.
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Colan and Gonzales teaches further comprising converting an original manufacturer's key fob into the low profile key fob, the original manufacturer's key fob comprising an enclosure enclosing at least a printed circuit board and a battery (Gonzales: as seen in the figures above, the 2016 Mustang key fob was converted into the “low profile key fob” using the “original manufacturer’s key fob” that comprises of an enclosure with at least a printed circuit board and a battery),
wherein the converting process utilizes the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed printed circuit board and the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed battery (Gonzales: as seen in the figures above, the 2016 Mustang key fob was converted into the “low profile key fob” using the “original manufacturer’s key fob” that comprises of an enclosure with at least a printed circuit board and a battery),
wherein the process of converting comprises: a) disassembling the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure, removing the original manufacturer's enclosure enclosed printed circuit board and removing the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed battery (Gonzales: the 2016 Mustang key fob enclosure is inherently disassembled with the printed circuit board and battery removed);;
b) inserting a low profile specific interconnecting contacts into the bottom half of the low profile key fob enclosure (Gonzales: the 3D printed fob has the battery contact inserter into the “bottom half” of the “low profile key fob enclosure” as seen below );
PNG
media_image3.png
791
1417
media_image3.png
Greyscale
c) inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half, wherein the battery and the printed circuit board are electrically connected by the low profile specific interconnecting contacts (Gonzales: the battery is inserted into the bottom half, where the printed circuit board and battery are electrically connected by the battery connect); and
d) attaching the top half to the bottom half whereby forming the low profile key fob (Gonzales: the top half and the bottom half are combined, thereby forming the “low profile key fob”, as seen in the Figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
791
1394
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The combination of Colan and Gonzales doesn’t explicitly teach c) inserting the original manufacturer's printed circuit board into the bottom half and inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half alongside the printed circuit board.
However, since the applicant has failed to disclose that providing the printed circuit board into the bottom half in which the printed circuit board such that it is along the battery provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide inserting the original manufacturer's printed circuit board into the bottom half and inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half alongside the printed circuit board.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 7, The combination of Colan and Gonzales teaches wherein the cell phone case comprises a front and a back, the cell phone case front and the cell phone case back comprising an inside surface, the cell phone case inside surfaces facing the enclosed cell phone (Colan: Figures 1-5; [0021-0027]; the electronic device case comprises of a front and a back, comprising of an inside surface that faces a mobile phones (the cell phone case inside surfaces facing the enclosed cell phone)),
whereby the cell phone comprises a front and a back, the cell phone back being proximate with the inside surface of the cell phone case back, the cell phone front and the cell phone back further comprising an outside surface facing outward from the cell phone (Colan: Figures 1-5; [0021-0027]; a mobile phone inherently comprises of a front and a back, the back side is inherently inserted into the electronic device case that is proximate with the inside surface of the back side of the electronic device case, where the front and back of the mobile phone have an outside surface facing outward from the cell phone),
wherein the means for securely holding at least one low profile key fob comprise at least one of the following:
a) a single recessed portion disposed on the cell phone case back outside surface capable of snappably holding one low profile phone fob key (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026]; a fob recess 21 that allows for a fob 21 to be held by a frictional force (“snappable holding”) that is created by the material surface of the inner jacket 2. In an alternative embodiment, the inner jacket 2 comprises a locking mechanism 26 (snappably holding one low profile phone fob key) that is positioned adjacent to the fob recess 21 and comprises a release button and stopper, the stopper being operatively could to the release button. Once the fob 4 is placed within the fob recess 21, the stopper engages the fob casing 41, preventing the fob 4 from being inadvertently removed from the fob recess 21. When the release button is pressed, the stopper disengages the fob casing 41, thus allowing the fob 4 to be removed from the fob recess 21. The release button is spring loaded and is accessible through a hole in the shell back panel 34. );
b) two recessed portions side-by-side disposed on the cell phone case back outside surface, each portion capable of snappably holding one low profile phone-fob key;
c) a plurality of resilient tabs upwardly facing from a panel capable of snappably holding one low profile key fob, wherein the panel being attached to the back of the cell phone case, wherein furthermore the panel attachment means are selected individually or jointly from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic; and
d) a plurality of resilient tabs upwardly facing from a panel capable of snappably holding one low profile key fob wherein the panel being disposed on the cell phone back outside surface, wherein furthermore the panel attachment means are selected from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colan et al., US Patent Publication 2014/0104771, henceforth known as Colan, in further view of YouTube video 3dprinted keyfob case 2016 Mustang, by chris gonzales, published on September 2, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBfgwhQNTOQ, henceforth known a Gonzales, and in further view of Youtube video Mazda keyfob teardown and rebuild, by Hack ‘n’ Tink, published on May 20 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhpBgfxI-x0.
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Colan and Gonzales teaches further comprising converting an original manufacturer's key fob into the low profile key fob, the original manufacturer's key fob comprising an enclosure enclosing at least a printed circuit board and a battery (Gonzales: as seen in the figures above, the 2016 Mustang key fob was converted into the “low profile key fob” using the “original manufacturer’s key fob” that comprises of an enclosure with at least a printed circuit board and a battery),
wherein the converting process utilizes the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed printed circuit board and the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed battery (Gonzales: as seen in the figures above, the 2016 Mustang key fob was converted into the “low profile key fob” using the “original manufacturer’s key fob” that comprises of an enclosure with at least a printed circuit board and a battery),
wherein the process of converting comprises: a) disassembling the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure, removing the original manufacturer's enclosure enclosed printed circuit board and removing the original manufacturer's key fob enclosure enclosed battery (Gonzales: the 2016 Mustang key fob enclosure is inherently disassembled with the printed circuit board and battery removed);;
b) inserting a low profile specific interconnecting contacts into the bottom half of the low profile key fob enclosure (Gonzales: the 3D printed fob has the battery contact inserter into the “bottom half” of the “low profile key fob enclosure” as seen below );
PNG
media_image3.png
791
1417
media_image3.png
Greyscale
c) inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half, wherein the battery and the printed circuit board are electrically connected by the low profile specific interconnecting contacts (Gonzales: the battery is inserted into the bottom half, where the printed circuit board and battery are electrically connected by the battery connect); and
d) attaching the top half to the bottom half whereby forming the low profile key fob (Gonzales: the top half and the bottom half are combined, thereby forming the “low profile key fob”, as seen in the Figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
791
1394
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The combination of Colan and Gonzales doesn’t explicitly teach c) inserting the original manufacturer's printed circuit board into the bottom half and inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half alongside the printed circuit board.
However, Hack ‘n’ Tink, discloses a 3D printed key fob for a 2019 Mazda Key fab, where the printed circuit board, the battery, and battery interconnects, are inserted into the bottom half of a “low profile key fob”.
PNG
media_image5.png
1000
1404
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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 combinational disclosure of Colan and Gonzales to further include the teachings of Hack ‘n’ Tink, in order to provide c) inserting the original manufacturer's printed circuit board into the bottom half and inserting the original manufacturer's key fob battery into the bottom half alongside the printed circuit board. The motivation to combine these analogous arts is because Hack ‘n’ Tink provides an alternative arrangement of the key fob components into a 3D printed key fob enclosure.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over chris gonzales, published on September 2, 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBfgwhQNTOQ, henceforth known a Gonzales, in further view of Colan, US Patent Publication 2014/0104771, in further view of YouTube video 3dprinted keyfob case 2016 Mustang, by and in further view of Kaplan, US Patent 8833379.
Regarding Claim 5, Gonzales discloses a low profile key fob (a 3D printed replacement for his 2016 Mustang key fob).
The low profile key fob comprising an enclosure comprised of a top half and a bottom half (As seen in the Figures below, the 3D printed replacement for the 2016 Mustang key fob comprises of a top half and a bottom half)
PNG
media_image1.png
327
545
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
778
1400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Gonzales doesn’t explicitly disclose a process wherein a user creates a single cell phone-key fob device by combining a key fob with a cell phone and/or a cell phone case enclosing the cell phone, wherein the cell phone and/or the cell phone enclosed in the cell phone case comprise
means for securely holding at least a key fob,
wherein furthermore both, the key fob and the cell phone, retain their original functionality,
wherein furthermore the key fob can be detached from the cell phone and/or the cell phone enclosed in the cell phone case at will by the user without loss of functionality of the key fob and/or of the cell phone.
Colan discloses an electronic device case that protects an electronic device, such as a smart from, while also provide a docking station for a fob, such that an individual only needs to carry a single entity (Abstract). Colan discloses an electronic device case with a fob recess 21, where when the key is inserted into the recess it is held by a frictional force that is created by the material surface of the inner jacket 2 (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026];). Colan’s single entity allows for the key fob and the electronic device to “retain the original functionality”, and allows the key fob to be detached from the electronic phone enclosure by the user without loss of functionality of either the key fob or the electronic device (Figure 3 and 5; [0023-0026];)
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 disclosure of Gonzales to further include the teachings of Colan such that the 3D printed key fob can be integrated with a electronic device in order to provide wherein a user creates a single cell phone-key fob device by combining a key fob with a cell phone and/or a cell phone case enclosing the cell phone, wherein furthermore both, the key fob and the cell phone, retain their original functionality, wherein furthermore the key fob can be detached from the cell phone and/or the cell phone enclosed in the cell phone case at will by the user without loss of functionality of the key fob and/or of the cell phone.
However, the combination of Gonzales and Colan doesn’t explicitly teach means for securely holding at least a key fob.
Kaplan, US Patent 8833379, discloses a pocket-sized container securable to the back of a mobile phone or smart-phone-like device (Abstract;). The pocket-size container comprises of a top half and a bottom half (Figure 7B; see below Figure ).
PNG
media_image6.png
565
621
media_image6.png
Greyscale
The pocket size container enclosure can be adhered to the rear surface of PDA by an adhesive layer 19, which is provided at the bottom of the pocket size enclosure. The securement of the container may be permanent or, alternatively, be releasable and re-secured to the same or a different PDA by used of suitable adhesive/securing mechanisms (col. 5, ll. 27-38;). The container 50 includes a housing 51 with a lower base portion 55 (outwardly extending flanges disposed at the bottom half), where the adhesive 49 is located underneath the lower base portion (Figure 7B and 8; col. 6, ll. 39-48).
Kaplan’s teachings of a pocket size container comprising of a lower base portion that can be releasable and resecured to a PDA by an adhesive, would have been recognized by one skilled in the art as applicable to the combination disclosure of Gonzales and Colan electronic device case that serves as a single entity for a electronic device and a 3D printed key fob, and the results would have been predictable and resulted in providing having the bottom half of the 3D printed case comprise of a lower base portion (outwardly extending flanges disposed at the bottom half of the low profile key fob) where an adhesive is underneath the lower base portion and is used to secure itself to either a electronic device case or the back of an electronic device, since Colan describes providing a single entity of a electronic device and a key fob for a user (Abstract).
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 8, The combination of Gonzales, Colan, and Kaplan teaches wherein the low profile key fob comprises outwardly extending flanges disposed at the bottom half of the low profile key fob (Gonzales: Kaplan: Figure 7B and 8; col. 6, ll. 39-48; the bottom half of the 3D printed case comprise of a lower base portion (outwardly extending flanges disposed at the bottom half of the low profile key fob)),
wherein the outwardly extending flanges comprise attachment means selected individually or jointly from a group consisting of: and adhesive film and the panel being magnetic, whereby enabling the low profile key fob to be attached to the cell phone case, or directly to the back of the cell phone (Gonzales: Kaplan: Figure 7B and 8; col. 6, ll. 39-48; where an adhesive is underneath the lower base portion and is used to secure itself to either a electronic device case or the back of an electronic device).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following claims are drafted by the examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, Claim 5-9 is presented to applicant for consideration:
Claims 5-8. (Cancelled)
Claim 9. (New) A single cell phone-key fob device comprising:
at least one low profile key fob;
a cell phone case enclosing a cell phone;
wherein the cell phone case comprises of at least one aperture corresponding low profile key fob;
wherein the low profile key fob comprises of:
an enclosure comprising of a top half and a bottom half,
a printed circuit board from an original manufacturer’s key fob,
a battery from the original manufacturer’s key fob, and
a first and second custom battery contacts,
wherein the first custom battery contact is insert into a recess at the bottom half of the enclosure, that is below a floor of the bottom half, and is in electrical contact with the printed circuit board
wherein the second custom battery contact has a first portion that is inserted in another recess at the bottom half of the enclosure, that is below a floor of the bottom half, and a second portion that is arranged to be parallel to a sidewall of the bottom half and in electrical contact with the printed circuit board, where the sidewall is perpendicular to the floor,
wherein the printed circuit board is inserted into the bottom half of the enclosure, in a PCB holding area, such that it sits on the floor of the bottom housing, overlaps part of the first custom battery contact and overlaps the first portion of the second custom battery contact,
wherein the battery is in electrical contact with the first custom battery contact and the second portion of the second custom battery contact, and is inserted into a recess of the bottom half of the enclosure, that is above the recess for the second custom battery contact, such that it sits on the floor of the bottom half of the enclosure,
wherein the top half of the enclosure comprises of a plurality of flexible panels that each correspond to a switch that is on the printed circuit board,
wherein the top half attaches to the bottom half by a snap fit,
wherein the bottom half of the enclosure includes a flange that extends from all four sides and includes a self-adhesive material that allows the top half of the enclosure to be inserted into the at least one aperture of the cell phone case and adhere to an inside surface of the cell phone.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Prius Car Key Fob Hack for Wallet: Speed Project, by Patrick Donnelly, Published on 1/21/2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbmfi2gaDbU
PNG
media_image7.png
860
1401
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
991
1379
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
985
1399
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
986
1407
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK F MARINELLI whose telephone number is (571)270-3383. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00AM - 5:00PM PST.
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, George Eng can be reached at (571)-272-7495. 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.
/PATRICK F MARINELLI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699