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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 02nd 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on February 26th 2026 have been entered. Claims 1 and 4-20 are currently pending. Applicants’ amendments to the drawings and claims have overcome the objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on November 26th 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1 and 4-20 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.
The limitation “wherein the second direction is perpendicular to an extending direction of the flexible printed circuit board” renders the claim indefinite. The flexible printed circuit board comprises two portions which extend in different direction since they are vertically disposed to each other and as such it is unclear to which extending direction the second direction would have to be perpendicular to. Based on the specifications and drawings, it seems like the second direction should be perpendicular to the extending direction of the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board. For the purposes of examination, the examiner as best understood, will interpret claim 1 to mean “wherein the second direction is perpendicular to an extending direction of the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board”.
Claim 4-20 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 1.
The limitation “a second direction” as recited in claims 11, 15, 16, and 19 render the claim indefinite. Claim 1 already recites and defines “a second direction” and further callings of this direction are recited as “the second direction”. However, Claims 11, 15, 16, and 19 recite “a second direction” and it is unclear whether this is supposed to be a new direction or if this is supposed to be the same second direction of claim 1. Based on the specifications and drawings it seems like these are all supposed to be the same second direction. For the purposes of examination, the examiner as best understood, will interpret claim 11, 15, 16, and 19 to mean “the second direction”.
Claim 12 and 16 inherits the indefiniteness of claim 11 and 15 .
Claim 17 recites the limitation “ a fifth support” which renders the claim indefinite. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 depends form claim 1 however claim 1 only recites up to a third support, for there to be a fifth support, the fourth support has to be claimed. This means that claim 17 should depend from claim 4 since claim 4 recites the fourth support. Even if one assumes that the term “Fifth support” has no meaning and can be any support there is still an indefiniteness issue since it would be unclear if this support is the same or different from the first/second/third supports especially since the first/second supports also protrude in a first direction. For the purposes of examination, the examiner as best understood, will interpret claim 17 as depending from claim 4 to provide antecedent basis and clarify that said fifth support is a new and different support.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon’ 571 et al. (AU 2019204571 A1) in view of Leutheuser et al. (IDS Reference US 11189909 B2) and Moon’ 268 et al. (US 20200287268 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 as best understood, Moon’ 571 et al. discloses an electronic device comprising (Electronic device 1100 as seen in figure 11 of Moon’ 571 et al.):
a housing (Electronic device 1100 includes a housing as seen in figure 11 of Moon’ 571 et al.);
a support plate comprising a body, a first support protruding from the body in a first direction substantially perpendicular to one surface of the body, a second support spaced apart from the first support and protruding from the body in the first direction and a third support protruding from the second support in a second direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction (U shaped first and second supports 1842 comprises a first part that extends perpendicular to 1841 and can serve as a first/second support and it further comprise a parallel portion comprises protrusions 1843 wherein this parallel protrusion can serve as a third support that would be in a direction perpendicular to the first direction and help keep the support plate 1841 from moving within the housing which in turn supports the FPCB by preventing it from moving in the housing; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.), the support plate disposed in the housing (Support plate 1840 comprises a body 1841 from which a first and second protrusion 1842 are spaced apart from each other and extend in a first direction perpendicular to the body of the support plate wherein the support plate is disposed in the housing of an electronic device; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.); and
a flexible printed circuit board comprising a first portion, at least a portion of which is disposed between the first support and a second portion extending from the first portion such that the first portion is vertically disposed with respect to the second portion (FPCB 1850 comprises a first part 1851 that is disposed between the first and second support and a second part 1853 that is extends from the first part such that it the first part is vertically disposed with respect the second; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.);
wherein the third support supports the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board (1843 are a third support that would be in a direction perpendicular to the first direction and help keep the support plate 1841 from moving within the housing which in turn supports the FPCB by preventing it from moving in the housing; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.),
wherein the second direction is perpendicular to an extending direction of the flexible printed circuit board (The direction that third supports 1843 extend is a second upwards direction that is perpendicular to the extending direction of the FPCB 1853 which extends inwards as seen in figure 20d of Moon’ 571 et al.),
wherein at least one first conductive member is disposed at the first portion (One conductive element in the form of metal dome key 1852 is disposed on the first part 1851; Paragraph 256-294 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.), and
wherein at least one second conductive member is disposed at the second portion (Second part 1853 is a connection terminal portion which comprises conductive member as seen in figure 20c-d such that it can connect to a PCB 2500; Paragraph 256-284 and figure 25c of Moon’ 571 et al.).
Moon’ 571 et al. fails to explicitly disclose a second portion extending from the first portion disposed on the body of the support plate and wherein the first support is spaced apart from, the second support in the second direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction.
However, Leutheuser et al. does disclose a second portion extending from the first portion disposed on the body of the support plate (FPCB 1700 comprises multiple portions including a second horizontal portion, 1710 to 1704, and a first vertically disposed portion, 1724 to 1726, which may have ground connectors connected to a support plate 110 such that portions to the flex circuits may be bonded to the support plate 110; Paragraph 205-214 and figure 17a-18 of Leutheuser et al).
Moon’ 268 et al. further discloses wherein the first support is spaced apart from, the second support in the second direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction (Antenna module 800 may comprise a flexible printed circuit board with two portions 850a-b wherein a main body portion 850b may be disposed on a support body 910 which comprises a first and second hook shaped supports 913 which have a vertical portion extending in a first direction perpendicular to the surface of 850b and a horizontal hook portion that would serve as a third support that extends in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction and an extending direction of extending portion of FCPB 850a and said supports 913 are also spaced apart in this second direction; Paragraphs 117-146 and 231 as well as figures 9-12 of Moon’ 268 et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al. to have a second portion extending from the first portion disposed on the body of the support plate as taught by Leutheuser et al. since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). The motivations stems from wanting to connect the FPCB connectors to the tunning components and circuit board (Paragraph 215-214 of Leutheuser et al.) as well as conserve space in the device.
It would have been further obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al. and Leutheuser et al. to have wherein the first support is spaced apart from, the second support in the second direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction as taught by Moon’ 268 et al. since the position and shape of the protruding members may be chosen for fixing the flexible printed circuit board (Paragraph 140 and 277 of Moon’ 571 et al.).
PNG
media_image1.png
578
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
525
628
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
482
833
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
615
423
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Moon’ 571 et al. further discloses an electronic component disposed on the support plate, the electronic component including a housing, wherein the second support forms a portion of the housing of the electronic component (Key button 1800 is disposed on the surface 1841 of the support plate wherein the first and second supports 1842 serve to surround the sides of the 1800 and as such serve as part of a housing, with the frame of the device, that encloses the electrical component; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Although Moon’ 571 et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the electronic component is a speaker module.
It would have been before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al. to have the electronic component be a speaker module since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. The motivation stems from wanting to encase other electrical components in the electronic device.
Regarding Claim 18, Moon’ 571 et al. fails to disclose wherein the support plate comprises a first protrusion and a second protrusion protruding in the first direction, and wherein the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first hole through which the first protrusion passes and a second hole through which the second protrusion passes.
However, Leutheuser et al. does disclose wherein the support plate comprises a first protrusion and a second protrusion protruding in the first direction, and wherein the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first hole through which the first protrusion passes and a second hole through which the second protrusion passes (A second part of a FPCB may comprise openings like 1728, and 1730 that couple to grounding connections on the support plate 110 wherein these grounding connections like 1428 and 1430 that may take the form of protrusions as seen in figures 14a-d; Paragraph 186 and 205-214 as well as figure 14a-d and 17-18 of Leutheuser et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al. to have the support plate comprises a first protrusion and a second protrusion protruding in the first direction, and wherein the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first hole through which the first protrusion passes and a second hole through which the second protrusion passes as taught by Leutheuser et al. to connect the flex circuit to other electrical components like a circuit board (Paragraph 207 of Leutheuser et al.) and bond the flex circuit board to the support plate (Paragraph 212 of Leutheuser et al.).
Regarding Claim 19 as best understood, Moon’ 571 et al. further discloses wherein a movement of the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction is restricted through the first support and the second support (First and second supports 1842 prevent the support plate 1840 moving in the housing which in turn prevents the FPCB from moving including in a downwards direction which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction or moving sideways in the second direction; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.).
Regarding Claim 20, Moon’ 571 et al. further discloses wherein a movement of the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board in the second direction is restricted through the third support (Third support is part of 1842 and as such also serves to restrict the movement of the support plate 1840 and in turn the FPCB from moving and protrusions 1843 in the third support would help to prevent the device from moving in a second direction; Paragraph 256-284 and figures 19-23 of Moon’ 571 et al.).
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon’ 571 et al. (AU 2019204571 A1) in view of Leutheuser et al. (IDS Reference US 11189909 B2), Moon’ 268 et al. (US 20200287268 A1), and Cho et al. (US 10768664 B2).
Regarding Claim 4, Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. fail to disclose wherein the support plate comprises a fourth support disposed to face an extension surface comprising the first support and protruding in the first direction with respect to the body of the support plate, and wherein the at least a portion of the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board is located between the first support and the fourth support.
However, Cho et al. does disclose wherein the support plate comprises a fourth support disposed to face an extension surface comprising the first support and protruding in the first direction with respect to the body of the support plate, and wherein the at least a portion of the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board is located between the first support and the fourth support (Bracket 631 serves as a support plate for the FPCB 632 a wherein it comprises a first, second, and third support in the form of central portion 631a and 641e, bent portion with two parts, wherein a fourth support can be 641c-b or can be the central support 631a on the lower side of the plate which extend in the same first direction as 631a and first part of the FPCB 632 is located between the supports and first, second, and fourth support can face an extension surface; Paragraph 70-85 and figure 7-9 of Cho et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. to have wherein the support plate comprises a fourth support disposed to face an extension surface comprising the first support and protruding in the first direction with respect to the body of the support plate, and wherein the at least a portion of the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board is located between the first support and the fourth support as taught by Cho et al. to prevent the FPCB form moving and fasten the structure into the housing (Paragraph 72-75 of Cho et al.).
PNG
media_image5.png
525
236
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. fail to disclose wherein the first conductive member is located in the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board to correspond to the fourth support and is supported by the fourth support.
However, Cho et al. does disclose wherein the first conductive member is located in the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board to correspond to the fourth support and is supported by the fourth support (First conductive switch module 633 is disposed adjacent to one of the two supports, 631a, with the adjacent one being taken as a first as a fourth support which is designed to support the FPCB and in turn switch 633 by keeping it in place; Paragraph 70-85 and figure 7-9 of Cho et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. to have the first conductive member is located in the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board to correspond to the fourth support and is supported by the fourth support as taught by Cho et al. to prevent the FPCB and in turn the first conductive element form moving and fasten the structure into the housing (Paragraph 72-75 of Cho et al.).
Claim(s) 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon’ 571 et al. (AU 2019204571 A1) in view of Leutheuser et al. (IDS Reference US 11189909 B2), Moon’ 268 et al. (US 20200287268 A1), and Son et al. (EP 3125365 B1).
Regarding Claim 9, Moon’ 571 et al. further discloses a printed circuit board disposed in the housing and comprising a communication module; and a frame defining an exterior of a side surface of the electronic device, and wherein the flexible printed circuit board electrically connects with the printed circuit board, the first conductive member, and the second conductive member (Electronic device can include a PCB like 2500 and communication module like 4020 which would be disposed on the PCB of the device as well the housing including side portions that serve as frames wherein the first conductive element in the form of the dome key 1852 and second conductive element in the form of terminal 1853 are connected to the PCB 2500; Paragraph 256-284 and 383-385 as well as figures 19-23 and 40 of Moon’ 571 et al.)
Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. fails to disclose the frame including a conductive material wherein the first conductive member and the second conductive member are in contact with the frame.
However, Son et al. does disclose the frame including a conductive material wherein the first conductive member and the second conductive member are in contact with the frame (FPCB 1021 comprises first conductive members 10212 disposed on a first part of FPCB 10211 and second conductive member 10216 disposed on a second part of the FPCB 10215 wherein these conductive elements can be connected to metal bezel 910, serving as a frame, with conductive material to form bezel parts 911, 912, 913, and 914 that can serve as radiators; Paragraph 164-197 and figure 9-12 of Son et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al.. to have the frame include a conductive material wherein the first conductive member and the second conductive member are in contact with the frame as taught by Son et al. so the frame can have portions serving as antenna radiators that can connect to different electrical components like the FPCB (Paragraph 164-197 of Son et al.).
PNG
media_image6.png
541
598
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, Moon’ 571 et al. fail to disclose wherein the flexible printed circuit board includes a third portion extending from the first portion such that the third portion is vertically disposed with respect to the first portion and electrically connected to the printed circuit board.
However, Leutheuser et al. does disclose the flexible printed circuit board includes a third portion extending from the first portion such that the third portion is vertically disposed with respect to the first portion and electrically connected to the printed circuit board (Third FPCB part 1723 extends from a first vertically disposed part between 1724 and 1726 wherein 1732 serves as a connector that can be electrically connected to a printed circuit board in the form of a board 1600; Paragraph 205-214 and figure 17a-18 of Leutheuser et al).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al. to have the flexible printed circuit board includes a third portion extending from the first portion such that the third portion is vertically disposed with respect to the first portion and electrically connected to the printed circuit board as taught by Leutheuser et al. to couple more electrical components to the PCB through the use of a third FPCB portion (Paragraphs 205-214 of Leutheuser et al.).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon’ 571 et al. (AU 2019204571 A1) in view of Leutheuser et al. (IDS Reference US 11189909 B2), Moon’ 268 et al. (US 20200287268 A1), and Lee et al. (KR 101336710 B1).
Regarding Claim 13, Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. fail to disclose wherein the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first seating groove in which the third support is located.
However, Lee et al. does disclose wherein the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first seating groove in which the third support is located (Support plate 260 comprises multiple portions like 261, 262, and 263 wherein a third support portion 263 can be located in a seating groove in the first part of the FPCB formed by 270a and surface 282a; Paragraph 64-72 and figure 4-6 of Lee et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art modify the antenna as taught by Moon’ 571 et al., Leutheuser et al., and Moon’ 268 et al. to have wherein the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board comprises a first seating groove in which the third support is located as taught by Lee et al. to limit the movement of the FPCB (Paragraph 68 of Lee et al.).
PNG
media_image7.png
317
430
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8, 11-12, 14-16, and 17 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.
Regarding claims 8, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “wherein a housing of the speaker module includes at least two surfaces perpendicular to the body of the support plate, and wherein the second support forms one of the surfaces of the housing of the speaker module” as recited in claim 8. Regarding claims 11-13, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “wherein the second conductive member is in contact with a portion of the frame in the first direction, and wherein the first conductive member is in contact with another portion of the frame in a second direction substantially vertical to the first direction.” as recited in claim 11. Regarding claims 14-16, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “wherein the first conductive member comprises a first seating portion disposed on the first portion of the flexible printed circuit board and a first contact portion protruding from the first seating portion to come into contact with a first electric component disposed in the housing, and wherein the second conductive member comprises a second seating portion disposed on the second portion of the flexible printed circuit board and a second contact portion protruding from the second seating portion to come into contact with a second electronic component disposed in the housing.” as recited in claim 14.
Moon et al., Leutheuser et al., Cho et al., Son et al., and Lee et al. are cited as teaching some of the elements of the claimed invention including an electronic device with a housing, a support plate, a first to fourth support, a flexible printed circuit board with three parts, a first conductive member, a second conductive member, an electronic component, a PCB, a frame with conductive material, a groove, a first and second protrusion. Moon et al., Leutheuser et al., Cho et al., Son et al., and Lee et al. fail to teach a second support forming a surface of the speakers housing
However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant.
Claim 11-12 and 15-17 will also only be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
“With regards to the objections to claims 4 and 17, Applicant notes the specification as originally filed states:
[0039] As used herein, each of such phrases as "A or B," "at least one of A and B," "at least one of A or B," "A, B, or C," "at least one of A, B, and C," and "at least one of A, B, or C," may include any one of, or all possible combinations of the items enumerated together in a corresponding one of the phrases. As used herein, such terms as "1st" and "2nd," or "first" and "second may be used to simply distinguish a corresponding component from another, and does not limit the components in other aspect (e.g., importance or order). It is to be understood that if an element (e.g., a first element) is referred to, with or without the term "operatively" or "communicatively", as "coupled with," "coupled to," "connected with," or "connected to" another element (e.g., a second element), it denotes that the element may be coupled with the other element directly (e.g., wiredly), wirelessly, or via a third element.
Paragraph [0039] of the present specification as originally filed (emphasis addcd).That is to say, for example, a claim requiring a fourth support does not necessarily require a third support and a claim requiring a fifth support does not necessarily require a fourth support. The support numbering is merely to distinguish a corresponding component from another. Nevertheless, in an effort to expedite prosecution of the application towards allowance, Applicant has amended the claims.
Accordingly, withdrawal of the rejections is respectfully requested.”
Applicant's arguments filed February 2nd 2026 in regards to the 112b rejection of claim 17 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner notes that while the specifications may be used to help an examiner understand a claim, the examiner cannot read in limitations form the specifications into the claims themselves. Paragraph 39 language implies that the numbering does not matter in sense of order, not that the numbering does not matter at all, for example one may re-number the supports as desired however the numbering stills distinguishes supports form each other. As far as the BRI of claim language is concerned, “a fifth support” is only considered a fifth support if there is a fourth support already recited. “a fifth support” cannot just be taken to mean “a support” since this would lead to indefiniteness. In this case for example, even if the examiner agreed to interpret this fifth support as a general support, this would raise a new issue of indefiniteness since it would be unclear whether this new support can be the same or would have to be different from the first/second/third supports especially since the first and second supports also extend in the first direction. As such the claim should either depend from claim 4 as the examiner interprets it or the claim language should be changed to recite something like “an additional support different form the first, second, and third support that …” to clearly claim this support as described in the specifications and drawings.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
US 11114748 B2 discloses a FPCB with vertical and horizontal portions disposed on a support board in the housing of an electronic device.
KR 20120073903 A discloses a FPCB with a second part attached to a PCB through pins and a protrusion in the support plate keeps it in place.
JP 4713333 B2 discloses an electronic device with a FPCB with two portions disposed perpendicular to each other supported by a support plate comprising protrusions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Dameon E Levi can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights