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 .
Election/Restrictions
Election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of I, claims 1-9. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 15-21 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 24 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites in line 1 the word, “generally”. The word should be deleted.
Claim 24 recites in line 3 the word, “generally”. The word should be deleted.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-14 of this application are patentably indistinct from claims 1-14 of Application No. Application No. 19/361,740. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-14 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-14 of copending Application No. 19/361,740 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claim 1 of the present application, claim 1 in Application No. 19/361,740 discloses, an accessory mount for a portable electronic device, the accessory mount comprising: a mount body having longitudinally opposed first and second sides and laterally opposed third and fourth sides; a device fastener affixed to the mount body for releasably securing the accessory mount to the portable electronic device; a first accessory attachment member extending from and about the first side of the mount body; a second accessory attachment member extending from and about the second side of the mount body; a third accessory attachment member extending from and about the third side of the mount body; and a fourth accessory attachment member extending from and about the fourth side of the mount body, wherein, the first and second accessory attachment members are spaced longitudinally apart by a first distance for slidable engagement with a first electronic device accessory, the third and fourth accessory attachment members are spaced laterally apart by a second distance for slidable engagement with a second electronic device accessory, and the first distance is greater than the second distance.
Claim 2 of the present application corresponds to claim 2 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 3 of the present application corresponds to claim 3 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 4 of the present application corresponds to claim 4 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 5 of the present application corresponds to claim 5 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 6 of the present application corresponds to claim 6 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 7 of the present application corresponds to claim 7 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 8 of the present application corresponds to claim 8 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 9 of the present application corresponds to claim 9 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 10 of the present application corresponds to claim 10 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 11 of the present application corresponds to claim 11 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 12 of the present application corresponds to claim 12 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim 13 of the present application corresponds to claim 13 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Claim14 of the present application corresponds to claim 14 in Application No. 19/361,740.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 24 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 claim 12, Lee and Fan fail to disclose, teach or suggest the limitations that read, “wherein each device accessory includes a pair of opposed mounting members spaced apart by one of the first distance and the second distance, and when the mounting members are spaced apart by the first distance, each mounting member is configured to slidably engage a respective one of the first and second accessory attachment members, and when the mounting members are spaced apart by the second distance, each mounting member is configured to slidably engage a respective one of the third and fourth accessory attachment members”, in combination and within the context of all the limitations of the claims from which it depends.
Regarding claim 24, Lee and Fan fail to disclose, teach or suggest the limitations that read, “wherein the user item holder includes a holder body having opposed first and second holder body edges, the pair of opposed clips includes a first clip extending generally perpendicularly from the first holder body edge and a second clip extending generally perpendicular from the second holder body edge”, in combination and within the context of all the limitations of the claims from which it depends.
Claims 13-14 and 25-28 depend from respective claims 12 and 24; therefore, they are allowed due to their dependency from claims 12 and 24.
Note: claim 12 depends from claim 10 that recites an “accessory kit” and claim 10 depends from claim 1 that recites an “accessory mount”. The examiner believes that if combined, claims 1, 10 and 12 should disclose an “accessory kit” that comprises an “accessory mount” and “first and second device accessories”. As presently written, claims 10-14 and 22-28 should not have been given any patentable weight.
the examiner considered the amendment since she had indicated in a conversation with Applicant’s Representative that the proposed amendment was proper; however, after taking a second look, the examiner realized that, as presently written, the claims are not in proper form.
Therefore, the claims will be allowed only after the claims are placed in proper form claiming an “accessory kit” that comprises an “accessory mount” and “first and second device accessories” with their respective limitations.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190253886 A1 (John David Lee, hereinafter Lee) in view of US 8490783 B1 (Eagle Fan. hereinafter Fan).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses an accessory mount (at least Figs. 13, 17, 18, 20 and 26, “54f”) for a portable electronic device (Fig. 8, “100c”), the accessory mount comprising:
a mount body (“54f”) having longitudinally opposed first and second sides (left and right sides of “54f”) and laterally opposed third and fourth sides (top and bottom sides of “54f”);
a device fastener (at least Figs. 13, 17, 18 and 26, peripheral wall of “54f” read on device fastener) affixed to the mount body (“54f”) for releasably securing the accessory mount to the portable electronic device (Fig. 8);
a first accessory attachment member extending from and about the first side of the mount body (Fig. 20, par. [0114], top “inner member's rails 1112”);
[a second accessory attachment member extending from and about the second side of the mount body];
a third accessory attachment member extending from and about the third side of the mount body (Fig. 20, par. [0114], left side “inner member's rails 1112”); and
a fourth accessory attachment member extending from and about the fourth side of the mount body (Fig. 20, par. [0114], right side “inner member's rails 1112”),
wherein, the first and [second accessory attachment members] are spaced longitudinally apart by a first distance for slidable engagement with a first electronic device accessory (Fig. 20, par. [0114], top and bottom “inner member's rails 1112” would be longitudinally apart if two of them are provided), the third and fourth accessory attachment members are spaced laterally apart by a second distance for slidable engagement with a second electronic device accessory (Fig. 20, par. [0114], left and right side “inner member's rails 1112” are spaced laterally).
Lee does not specifically disclose a second accessory attachment member extending from and about the second side of the mount body and where the first and second accessory attachment members are spaced longitudinally apart.
In related art concerning a protection cover, Fan discloses a second accessory attachment member extending from and about the second side of the mount body (Figs. 1 and 4A and “engaging means 20, 21”) and where the first and second accessory attachment members are spaced longitudinally apart (Fig. 1 shows where curved portion indicating continuation of the “lip” into the top portion/side of “protective cover 1”; therefore, top and bottom portions would be spaced longitudinally).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Fan’s design showing a lip that includes a top and bottom portions of a protective case with the portable device accessory mount disclosed by Lee because one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such design configuration would allow lateral sliding when the mount accessory is slid into the accessory kit .
Regarding claim 2, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee further discloses wherein the device fastener includes a sidewall extending generally perpendicularly from a periphery of the mount body (Fig. 20, walls having “lips 1111”) and a device retaining ledge extending inboard from an upper edge of the sidewall (Fig. 20, “lips 1111”).
Regarding claim 3, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 2. Lee further discloses wherein at least a portion of the mount body, the sidewall, and the retaining ledge define a recess for receiving a peripheral portion of the electronic device (Fig. 20, please see the cavity that receives electronic device 100c as shown in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 4, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 2. Lee and Fan further disclose wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth accessory attachment members extends outboard of the sidewall (Lee, Fig. 20, left and right “rails 1112” and Fan showing in Figs. 1 and 4A top and bottom “engaging means 20, 21” extending outboard).
Regarding claim 5, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 2. Lee further discloses wherein the device fastener comprises a plurality of fastener segments (please see walls and curved portions of the wall reading on “device fastners[s]”), each fastener segment being spaced apart from an adjacent one of the plurality of fastener segments along the periphery of the mount body (Fig. 20, being around the base/plate portion), each fastener segment including a portion of the sidewall and a portion of the device retaining ledge (Fig. 20, portion of the call and “lips 1111”).
Regarding claim 6, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee and Fan disclose wherein each of the first, second, third and fourth accessory attachment members extends respectively along a full length of the first, second, third, and fourth sides of the mount body (Lee, Fig. 20, left and right “rails 1112” and Fan showing in Figs. 1 and 4A top and bottom “engaging means 20, 21” in combination extend along the full length of the mount body).
Regarding claim 7, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee and Fan disclose wherein an uninterrupted peripheral attachment lip extending about a perimeter of the mount body, the peripheral attachment lip including the first, second, third and fourth attachment members (Lee, Fig. 20, left and right “rails 1112” and Fan showing in Figs. 1 and 4A top and bottom “engaging means 20, 21” in combination extend along the full length of the mount body).
Regarding claim 8, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee and Fan disclose wherein the mount body includes a front surface and a rear surface opposite the front surface (Fig. 20, front and back), and the front surface of the mount body at least partially overlies a rear surface of the portable electronic device when the accessory mount is secured to the portable electronic device (Fig. 8), and wherein the first, second, third and fourth accessory attachment members are flush with the rear surface of the mount body (Lee, Fig. 20, left and right “rails 1112” and Fan showing in Figs. 1 and 4A top and bottom “engaging means 20, 21” are flush with the rear surface).
Regarding claim 9, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee further discloses wherein the mount body includes a mount magnet for magnetically engaging a device magnet of the portable electronic device to strengthen securement between the accessory mount and the portable electronic device (par. [0215], the portable electronic device magnets have no patentable weight, since the claims concern an accessory mount and the “portable electronic device magnets” are not elements of the “accessory mount”).
Regarding claim 10, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Lee further discloses an accessory kit for a portable electronic device (at least Fig. 17 reads on accessory kit, since an accessory kit, according to applicant’s invention, comprises an “accessory mount” and at least an ‘accessory device”; therefore, items combined items “50f “and “54f” read on accessory kit”), the accessory kit comprising: b) at least one device accessory (Figs. 17-19,25, 28-33, “50f”, “70f”, 70g) slidably engageable with the accessory mount via one of i) the first and second accessory attachment members; and ii) the third and fourth accessory attachment members (at least Figs. 15-18, par. [0132], left and right sides of phone holder 54f slide along the tracks 90f-1 and 90f-2 of privacy shield 70f).
Regarding claim 11, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 10. Lee and Fan further disclose wherein the at least one device accessory includes a first device accessory and a second device accessory (Figs. 17-19,25, 28-33, “50f”, “70f”, 70g, Figs. 43-45; first and second device accessories being interchangeable), the first device accessory slidably engageable with the accessory mount via the first and second accessory attachment members (at least Figs. 15-18, par. [0132], top and bottom sides of phone holder 54f slide along the tracks 90f-1 and 90f-2 of privacy shield 70f could be slide from the top or the bottom. There is not special mechanism for sliding; therefore, the combination of Lee and Fan red on the limitation), and the second device accessory slidably engageable with the accessory mount via the third and fourth accessory attachment members (at least Figs. 15-18, par. [0132], left and right sides of phone holder 54f slide along the tracks 90f-1 and 90f-2 of privacy shield 70f).
Regarding claim 22, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 10. Lee further discloses wherein each device accessory includes a first segment and a second segment pivotably connected to an edge of the first segment (Figs 19, 25, 43 and 44, first and second being interchangeable), and each device accessory is movable between a storage position, in which the first and second segments extend generally parallel to one another (Figs 19, 25, 43 and 44, first and second being interchangeable), and at least a device standing position, in which the first segment is inclined relative to the second segment by a stand angle (18, 28-38).
Regarding claim 23, Lee and Fan disclose all the limitations of claim 22. Lee further discloses wherein further comprising a user item holder configured to hold one or more user items (Figs. 43-45), wherein the user item holder is releasably securable to the second segment (Fig. 25), the user item holder including a pair of opposed clips for engaging opposed edges of the second segment to secure the user item holder to the second segment (par. [0018], [0130], “clip”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0072992 A1 relates to sliding device for mobile device.
US 9,318,089 B2 relates to sound amplifying case for electronic devices.
US 2012/0012483 A1 relates to protective apparatus for tablet electronic device.
US 2014/013225 A1 relates to cover for portable electronic device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Angelica Perez whose telephone number is 571-272-7885. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
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, Yuwen (Kevin) Pan can be reached at (571) 272-7855. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and for After Final communications.
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 the PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through the 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). Information regarding Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system can be found at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the TC 2600's customer service number is 703-306-0377.
/Angelica M. Perez/
Primary Examiner AU 2649
Prosecution Insights