Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/666,316

PROTECTIVE STRUCTURES FOR COMPUTER DONGLES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 16, 2024
Examiner
EDWARDS, ANTHONY Q
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Jacs Solutions
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
791 granted / 937 resolved
+16.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
949
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
43.0%
+3.0% vs TC avg
§102
45.5%
+5.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 937 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Claims 1-9 and 18-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on January 20, 2026. 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 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)(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, and. (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 10, 13, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Appl. Publ. No. 2017/0196327 to MA et (i.e., Ref. 1 hereafter). Referring to claim 10, Ref. 1 discloses a protective and tamper resistant structure (Figs. 1-4) for a computer dongle (202, Figs. 2A) comprising: a protective enclosure (102) providing a chamber (124) for enclosing a computer dongle (202) therein including a dongle interface (126) for insertion of a dongle plug (not shown) therein; a computer interface plug (within 126) extending from the protective enclosure and adapted to be plugged into an interface port (e.g., on wall 108) on a computer; and an electrical connection inherently provided between the dongle interface (126) and the computer interface plug, the electrical connection configured to provide data and power connection between the computer dongle and the computer interface plug, when the computer dongle is plugged into the dongle interface (see Fig. 2A and the corresponding specification), wherein the protective enclosure (102) is at least one of: (a) a separate structure (see [0014]) mounted to the computer (100) in a tamper-resistant manner (Fig. 2A, Fig. 3A and [0019]), (b) fixed to or integrated with a protective computer cover, and (c) fixed to or integrated with a computer stand. Referring to claim 13, Ref. 1 discloses the device of claim 10, further comprising a connector enclosure (326) adapted to be mounted over the computer interface plug and computer port in a tamper-resistant manner. See Figs. 1 and 4. Referring to claim 15, Ref. 1 discloses the device of claim 10, further comprising a cover plate (106) for enclosing the computer dongle (202) within the protective enclosure (102) that is secured in place in a tamper-resistant manner. See ([0023-0024]). Referring to claim 17, Ref. 1 discloses the device of claim 10, further comprising circuitry within the protective enclosure for converting the dongle interface from a first interface type to a second interface type (i.e., for use with a variety of connectors provided on computer wall 108). 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. Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ref. 1. Ref. 1 discloses the device as substantially claimed, except for the tamper- resistant mounting or securing is accomplished using secure screws. It is well-known in the field of anti-disassembly structures to use screws for tamper- resistant mounting or securing. As such, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to further modify the device by utilizing secure screws, since this would provide a simple, cost-effective means for the same. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11, 12 and 14 are allowable. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 11 is 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. The specific limitations of “a circuitry within the protective enclosure for splitting the dongle interface into (a) a data interface electrically connected to the computer interface plug and (b) a charging interface electrically connected to a separate connector or port,” in combination with the remaining elements, is not taught or adequately suggested. Claim 12 is 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. The specific limitations of “a cable extending from the protective enclosure terminating at the computer interface plug; wherein the computer interface plug structure provides an interface for insertion into the computer port that is directed about 180° with respect to the direction of the cable extent,” in combination with the remaining elements, is not taught or adequately suggested. Claim 14 is 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. The specific limitations of “the charging interface is provided on the protective enclosure adjacent to the cable,” in combination with the remaining elements, is not taught or adequately suggested. 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 ANTHONY Q EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm. 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 at 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 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. /Anthony Q Edwards/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841 February 4, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 16, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602087
WATERPROOF PROTECTIVE CASE OF MOBILE TERMINAL FOR DIVING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593599
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANAFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585311
Computing Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585303
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS AND CHASSIS MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585076
UNIVERSAL MOUNTING MECHANISM FOR MOUNTING A TELECOMMUNICATIONS CHASSIS TO A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FIXTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 937 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