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
Applicant’s election without traverse of a housing comprising a metal substrate formed by bonding a first metal portion and a second metal portion, each comprising at least one of aluminum, titanium, magnesium, or zinc, a plastic injection part, an oxide film layer, and a plating layer in the reply filed on July 6, 2026 is acknowledged.
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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6-10, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 2023/0121011) and further in view of Choi (US 2020/0252492).
Baek is directed to an electronic housing comprising a metal frame or metal substrate 118, a first area 200 including a nickel-contained anodized layer (claimed plating layer), and a second area 210 including a nickel-free anodized layer (claimed oxide film layer). In such an instance, though, the housing of Baek does not include a plastic injection part.
Choi is similarly directed to an electronic housing. More particularly, Choi teaches the inclusion of a polymer part 330 (corresponds with claimed plastic injection part) on an inner surface of metal part 220 in order to absorb impacts (Paragraph 133). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include a polymer part or plastic injection part in the housing of Baek for the benefits detailed above.
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the space or area that is occupied by the plastic injection part can be viewed as hollow part (prior to be filled with plastic material).
With respect to claims 3 and 13, the claims are directed to an electronic device housing as opposed to a method of manufacturing an electronic device housing. Thus, the plating layer thickness (nickel containing layer) in Baek can be viewed as including any number of layers, including a plurality of layers as required by the claimed invention (thickness can be arbitrarily divided, for example, into a first thickness and a second thickness and each thickness corresponds with a single plating layer). Again, the final article of Baek includes an overall plating layer thickness and such is consistent with the final article or housing of the claimed invention.
As to claims 6, 7, and 12 Choi teaches the use of PEEK, PPS, PBT, PI, and PC (Paragraph 67). With specific respect to claim 7, it is extremely well-known and conventional in a wide variety of industries to include additives, such as fibers, in polymeric compositions to provide reinforcement (positive affect on mechanical properties). It is emphasized that polymeric compositions are extensively described as including any number of common additives and reinforcing fibers such as those required by the claims are well recognized as being among the known class of common additives.
Regarding claim 8, Baek describes the use of aluminum (Paragraph 4).
As to claim 9, Choi recognizes the ability to form the metal substrate as a combination of first and second metal portions (310 and 320). One of ordinary skill I the art would have found it obvious to form the metal frame or substrate of Baek using any conventional construction, including that required by the claimed invention absent a conclusive showing of unexpected results.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek and Choi as applied in claims 1 and 9 above and further in view of Jeong (EP 3599296).
As detailed above, Baek is directed to an electronic device housing including an outer anodized layer formed on a metal substrate (outer anodized layer can be viewed as the claimed plating layer and inner anodized layer can be viewed as the claimed oxide film layer). In such an instance, though, Baek is silent with respect to the inclusion of deposition layers.
Jeong is similarly directed to an electronic device housing including an anodized layer on an outside of a metal substrate (Paragraphs 44 and 55- aluminum oxide layer formed on aluminum substrate). More particularly, Jeong teaches the known inclusion of deposition layers on the outside of anodized layers in order to provide a desired texture and color (Paragraph 4). As to the materials, Jeong teaches the use of at least one of chromium, titanium, gold, and silicon for deposition layer 530 and the use of at least one of several materials, including silicon, for deposition layer 540 (Paragraph 44). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to include a plurality of deposition layers in the housing of Baek for the benefits detailed above.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Jeong recognizes the ability to vary an anodizing layer thickness by changing the temperature, time electrolyte composition, or electrolyte concentration (Paragraph 560) and such is seen to encompass embodiments or arrangements in which an anodizing layer thickness (anodized layer on the outside is seen to correspond with the claimed plating layer) is greater than a deposition layer thickness in accordance to the claimed invention. Also, Applicant has not provided a conclusive showing of unexpected results for the broad range of the claimed invention (appears to be consistent with common thickness values for respective layers).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN R FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-1215. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
Justin Fischer
/JUSTIN R FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749 September 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights