Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/495,850

MOBILE DEVICE CASE FOR SECURED ACCESS AND IMPROVEMENTS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 27, 2023
Examiner
CHEUNG, CHUN HOI
Art Unit
3736
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Cronk Brian
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
641 granted / 1035 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1076
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1035 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/27/2023 is being considered by the examiner. 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dugoni (9,819,788) in view of McMurray (20160053525). As to claim 1, Dugoni discloses a flexible fabric case (soft, flexible case comprises canvas material, canvas material is made of fabric material, column 6, line 10) for selectively limiting a user's ability to control said user's own mobile electronic device, said flexible fabric case comprising front (104) and rear portions (106) joined together (via stitching) and defining therein a containment area (interior compartment sized to receive the mobile electronic device) having an opening (112) for receiving said mobile electronic device (102), and a magnetic locking mechanism (column 6, line 30 teaches the locking mechanism can be magnetic plates. Furthermore, column 6, lines 52-67 further discloses that the locking means 114 having electronic receiver, the EAS detacher container strong magnets that interrupt electronic fields of the locking means 114, by touched to the EAS detacher 502 so that the electromagnetic field are interrupted to disable the locking means and unsecured to exposes the electronic device) for selectively securing said opening in a first locked position to prevent access to said mobile electronic device by said user until a predetermined condition is met (the locking mean 114 main lock until the lock touches the EAS). However, Dugoni does not specifically disclose said flexible fabric case comprising: a reinforcement layer for resisting tearing or cutting of said fabric of said containment area. Nevertheless, McMurray discloses a flexible vault with front and back panel construct of multilayer construction, the multilayer construction comprises a middle layer made with Kevlar layer ([0008]) to provide impact resistance or woven steel layer to provide further impact resistance as well as cut resistance). 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 pouch of Dugoni with middle reinforcement layer made with Kevlar or woven steel as taught by McMurray in order to prevent unauthorized access by cut through the pouch to the electronic device inside the container prior the predetermined condition is met. As to claim 2, Dugoni as modified further discloses said fabric and reinforcement layer comprises a first thickness layer to block access by said user to said mobile electronic device. As to claim 3, Dugoni as modified further discloses said fabric and reinforcement layer do not block or distort radio wave energy from penetrating the case (Dugoni discloses the outer fabric being canvas, canvas does not block the radio wave energy, McMurray also discloses that Kevlar material that would not block radio wave energy). As to claim 4 Dugoni discloses a flexible fabric case (soft, flexible case comprises canvas material, canvas material is made of fabric material, column 6, line 10) for selectively limiting a user's ability to control said user's own mobile electronic device, said flexible fabric case comprising front (104) and rear portions (106) joined together (via stitching) and defining therein a containment area (interior compartment sized to receive the mobile electronic device) having an opening (112) for receiving said mobile electronic device (102), and a magnetic locking mechanism (column 6, line 30 teaches the locking mechanism can be magnetic plates. Furthermore, column 6, lines 52-67 further discloses that the locking means 114 having electronic receiver, the EAS detacher container strong magnets that interrupt electronic fields of the locking means 114, by touched to the EAS detacher 502 so that the electromagnetic field are interrupted to disable the locking means and unsecured to exposes the electronic device) for selectively securing said opening in a first locked position to prevent access to said mobile electronic device by said user until a predetermined condition is met (the locking mean 114 main lock until the lock touches the EAS). However, Dugoni does not specifically disclose said case comprising: a fabric which includes a reinforcement layer which resists tampering by the user by at least tearing or cutting said fabric and which also permits radio waves to be received by said mobile electronic device when said mobile electronic device is disposed in said flexible fabric case. Nevertheless, McMurray discloses a flexible vault with front and back panel construct of multilayer construction, the multilayer construction comprises a middle layer made with Kevlar layer ([0008]) to provide impact resistance or woven steel layer to provide further impact resistance as well as cut resistance), said fabric and reinforcement layer also permits radio wave to be received by said mobile electronic device when said mobile electronic device when said mobile electronic device is disposed in said flexible fabric case (Dugoni discloses the outer fabric being canvas, canvas does not block the radio wave energy, McMurray also discloses that Kevlar material that would not block radio wave energy). 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 pouch of Dugoni with middle reinforcement layer made with Kevlar or woven steel as taught by McMurray in order to prevent unauthorized access by cut through the pouch to the electronic device inside the container prior the predetermined condition is met. As to claim 5, Dugoni as modified further discloses said reinforcement layer comprises fibers containing a tear or cut resistant polymer (Kevlar is a well-known synthetic fiber polymer). As to claims 6-7, Dugoni further discloses said reinforcement layer comprises: a scrim or screen material and said scrim or screen material resists propagation of further damage after said fabric is punctured (the reinforcement layer is an interwoven Kevlar layer [0032] is considered as scrim material, therefore, as the canvas material being puncture, the Kevlar layer material or woven steel as additional layer would both prevent further propagation of the punctured. Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 27, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600526
BAG ROLL CASSETTE AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599745
HINGED LID FOLDING BOX FOR CATHETER SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593648
SEMICONDUCTOR WORKPIECE TRANSPORT POD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12565372
Packaging for a Plurality of Unit Medical Vessels and Processing System Implementing Such Packaging
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12552569
DRILL BIT PACKAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+39.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1035 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month