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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
During the interview on 5/18/26, Applicant determined that the fig 1-2 are just a concept drawing to indicate the electronic deice and the case. The variations of the shape or structure between the fig 1-2 and fig 4 are obvious. Therefore, Applicant request to merge with elected fig 4.
Examiner agree the variations between fig 1-2 and fig 4 are obvious and merger the fig 1-2 and fig 4 as one embodiment.
Applicant’s election without traverse of election of species after the interview is acknowledged. Therefore, Examiner will exam elected embodiments shown in fig 1-2 and fig 4, and associated claims (15-20).
Claim Objections
Claims 17 and dependent claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 17, “the electronic device is configured to capacitively sense a user input at the button through the contact interface and the device button” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner request Applicant to clearly point out, on the drawing, which item support this feature.
The Examiner respectfully requests that the Applicant(s) review all claims for any such similar issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, and/or discussed in the above claim objections (see above) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 15-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Lai (US 20130271902).
With regard claim 15, Lai discloses A system, (abstract, see also fig 1-33) comprising: an electronic device including a device housing and a device button disposed within the device housing (at least fig 1, electronic device, in front 10, with a device housing and a device button disposed within the device housing; at least 20, and other buttons without labels); and a device interface configured to engage the device housing (at least fig 1, device interface behind the device 10), the device interface comprising: a frame (at least fig 1, the frame to hold the device, see also fig 6); a button disposed within the frame (at least fig 6, 46, and other buttons without labels); and a seal positioned on the frame and surrounding a perimeter of the button (at least fig 8, the structure positioned on the frame and surrounding a perimeter of the button; Examiner consider as a seal, no label; see also 6A), the seal being configured to contact the device housing when the electronic device is engaged with the frame (paragraph [85]-[87]), wherein the seal is configured to inhibit contaminant ingress between the device housing and the frame (paragraph [85]-[87]; [97]-[99]).
Regarding claim 16, Lai further disclosed the seal is compressible to a position that enables the button and the device button to remain in continuous contact at a contact interface (paragraph [81]-[84]).
Regarding claim 18, Lai further disclosed the seal is a first seal; and the device interface further comprises a second seal configured to bias the button toward the device button (at least fig 6, the structure protruded inward and configured to bias the button toward the device button; Examiner consider as 2nd seal).
Regarding claim 19, Lai further disclosed a compressibility of the first seal allows the button to apply a preload force from the second seal to the device button, the preload force being within a target range of force values (at least fig 6, see also fig 1, fig 4; paragraph [85]-[88]).
Regarding claim 20, Lai further disclosed the frame of the device interface includes a back wall and a set of side walls extending away from the back wall (at least fig 1, fig 6, back wall on the rear side and a set of side walls extending away from the back wall); and the button is disposed within a side wall of the set of side walls (at least fig 1, fig 6).
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 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 of this title, 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 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lai (US 20130271902) in view of further in view of Examiner’s Official Notice (EON).
Regarding claim 17, The primary art discussed in the preceding claim disclosed all the subject matter except for the electronic device is configured to capacitively sense a user input at the button through the contact interface and the device button.
However, Examiner take official notice (EON) that the above limitations (the electronic device is configured to capacitively sense a user input at the button through the contact interface and the device button) are well known.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to include this feature (the electronic device is configured to capacitively sense a user input at the button through the contact interface and the device button) and modify to previous discussed structure. The motivation to modify the previous discussed structure with EON feature is to further increase the user experience for the modified structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5420. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP: M-Th: 8:30-12:30; 2:30-8:30pm.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571.270.5528. 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.
/JERRY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights