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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “ad” appears to be a typo. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chase (US 20250216894 A1).
For claim 1. Chase discloses A shade and sound enclosure for a cell phone (intended use) comprising, a base enclosure portion (base 10 of the case) and a top enclosure portion (lid 12 of the case) hinged together (Abstract, [0009], [0016], [0046]-[0048], figure 1, lid 12 of the case and base 10 of the case), said base enclosure portion (base 10 of the case) having upstanding sidewalls and interconnecting end walls, said top enclosure portion (lid 12 of the case) having upstanding sidewalls at interconnecting end walls there between, a sound panel (top visor panel 14, e.g. blocking surrounding sound noises) hinged from one of said top portion's sidewalls movable from a first position to a second position, a pair of oppositely disposed sound panel supports (lower side panels 18b) hinged from said top portion.
For claim 2. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said base enclosure and said top enclosure are of equal registration dimension and aligned with one another when in hinged closed position (figures 1-5).
For claim 3. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said sound panel and said sound panel supports are configured so that they can fold within said top enclosure portion (figures 1-5, [0048]).
For claim 5. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein the dimensions of said sound panel is less than the known dimension of said top enclosure portion (figures 1-5).
For claim 7. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said base and top enclosure portions are of a rectangular dimensional configuration (figures 1-5).
For claim 8. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said sound panel supports folding sequentially in both collapsing and deployment positions (figures 1-5).
For claim 9. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said top enclosure portion is movable from a first closed position in registration on said base enclosure portion to a second open position in angular orientation to said base enclosure portion (figures 1-5).
For claim 10. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said sound panel first position is folded within said top enclosure portion and said second position is hinged from said top enclosure to one of said base portion sidewalls ad said respective sound panel supports (figures 1-5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
8. 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.
9. Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chase (US 20250216894 A1) in view of Myles (US 5887777 A).
For claim 4. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase discloses wherein said sound panel and said sound panel supports upon deployment will define a shade (Abstract, figure 1).
But fails to mention sound transparent enclosure.
This teaching is disclosed by Myles (figures 2, 3, 6, column 4 lines 18-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Myles into the art of Chase as to allow more speaker sound through the panel to improve user experience.
For claim 6. The shade and sound enclosure set forth in claim 1 Chase fails to disclose wherein said sound panel has a sound transparent surface.
This teaching is disclosed by Myles (figures 2, 3, 6, column 4 lines 18-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Myles into the art of Chase as to allow more speaker sound through the panel to improve user experience.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300, submitted online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only, Registered users of the USPTO's EFS-Web system may submit a response electronically through EFS-Web at https://efs.uspto.gov/TruePassSample/AuthenticateUserLocalEPF.html), or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rui Meng Hu whose telephone number is 571-270-1105, email is ruimeng.hu@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
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, Jinsong Hu can be reached on (571)272-3965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Rui Meng Hu/
R.H./rh
January 29, 2026
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643