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 Species I (claims 1-20) in the reply filed on 12/10/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 21-30 are hereby withdrawn from consideration.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9, 11-13, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR20230157043) in view of Wyss (5,738,214).
As to claim 1, Lee discloses a protective case (Figure 1 with operating plate 20 and fixing plate 10) for a computing device (smart phone, Samsung Galaxy), comprising a first cover (20), a second cover (10), and a hinge piece (21) connecting the first and second covers (Figure 5 shows the assembled of the protective case); the first cover is configured to enclose and to capture at least a first portion of the computing device's main body and its perimeter (Figure 7 of the drawing shows the combination of the phone with protective case), the second cover (10) is configured to enclose and to capture at least a second portion of the computing device's main body and its perimeter (Figure 7 of the drawing shows the combination of the phone with protective case); a recess (insertion portion 11) is disposed between the second cover and the computing device with its length and width set to enclose that of a leaf portion (slide piece 211) of the hinge piece (21), and the leaf portion that is flexible and slides within the recess with a range that supports the first and second covers to rotate from a fully closed position to a fully opened position (Figure 4 and Figure 8).
However, Lee further discloses that the hinge piece is adhered to the operating plate (20), but does not disclose a first row of knuckles situated along an edged abutting the second cover; the second cover is configured to enclose and to capture at least a second portion of the hinge piece comprises a second row of knuckles in complement to that of the first row of knuckles on the first cover. Nevertheless, Wyss discloses a container with a hinge structure, a first row of knuckles (5) situated along an edged along the first cover (20); the first cover is configured to enclose and to capture at least second cover (1) comprises a second row of knuckles (5) in complement to that of the first row of knuckles on the first cover to form the hinge.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the one end of the hinge (21) that attached to the operating part of Lee with knuckles form on the side of the operating part and other corresponding knuckles on the hinge piece as taught by Wyss in order to able to replace either the damage operating part or the fixing part with the pin/knuckle hinges with a new operating part or the fixing part without completely dispose of the case.
As to claim 2, Lee as modified further disclose the leaf portion (211) of the hinge piece (21) further comprises a plurality of slits (212) which serve as tracks to allow relative motion between the slits and a plurality of raised positioners fixed onto the recess of the second cover.
As to claim 3, Lee as modified further discloses the first and second row of knuckles are joined via a pin (15) through barrels of the first and second rows of knuckles.
As to claim 7, Lee as modified further discloses the recess is raised above the second cover via a preset displacement (as shown in Figure 9, the recess portion with backwall raised beyond the outside surface of the second cover 10) .
As to claim 9, Lee as modified further discloses the recess is configured to be completely enclosed within walls of the second cover (10, as shown in Figure 8, the recess is configured to be completely enclosed within walls of the second cover (10).
As to claim 11, Lee discloses a protective case (Figure 1 with operating plate 20 and fixing plate 10) for a computing device (smart phone, Samsung Galaxy), comprising a first cover (10), a second cover (20), and a hinge piece (21) connecting the first and second covers (Figure 5 shows the assembled of the protective case); the first cover (10) is configured to enclose and to capture at least a first portion of the computing device's main body and its perimeter (Figure 7 of the drawing shows the combination of the phone with protective case), a recess (insertion portion 11) is disposed between the first cover and the computing device with its length and width set to enclose that of a leaf portion (slide piece 211) of the hinge piece (21), the second cover (20) is configured to enclose and to capture at least a second portion of the computing device's main body and its perimeter (Figure 7 of the drawing shows the combination of the phone with protective case); and the leaf portion that is flexible and slides within the recess with a range that supports the first and second covers to rotate from a fully closed position to a fully opened position (Figure 4 and Figure 8).
However, Lee further discloses that the hinge piece is adhered to the operating plate (20), but does not disclose a first row of knuckles situated along an edged abutting the second cover; the second cover is configured to enclose and to capture at least a second portion of the hinge piece comprises a second row of knuckles in complement to that of the first row of knuckles on the first cover. Nevertheless, Wyss discloses a container with a hinge structure, a first row of knuckles (5) situated along an edged along the first cover (20); the first cover is configured to enclose and to capture at least second cover (1) comprises a second row of knuckles (5) in complement to that of the first row of knuckles on the first cover to form the hinge.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the one end of the hinge (21) that attached to the operating part of Lee with knuckles form on the side of the operating part and other corresponding knuckles on the hinge piece as taught by Wyss in order to able to replace either the damage operating part or the fixing part with the pin/knuckle hinges with a new operating part or the fixing part without completely dispose of the case.
As to claim 12, Lee as modified further disclose the leaf portion (211) of the hinge piece (21) further comprises a plurality of slits (212) which serve as tracks to allow relative motion between the slits and a plurality of raised positioners fixed onto the recess of the second cover.
As to claim 13, Lee as modified further discloses the first and second row of knuckles are joined via a pin (15) through barrels of the first and second rows of knuckles.
As to claim 17, Lee as modified further discloses the recess is raised above the first cover via a preset displacement (as shown in Figure 9, the recess portion with backwall raised beyond the outside surface of the first cover 10) .
As to claim 19, Lee as modified further discloses the recess is configured to be completely enclosed within walls of the second cover (10, as shown in Figure 8, the recess is configured to be completely enclosed within walls of the second cover (10).
Claims 8, 10, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR20230157043) in view of Wyss (5,738,214), further in view of Loh et al (10,790,869).
As to claims 8,10, 18 and 20, Lee as modified does not disclose the recess sit flush with the outside surface of the first cover and the hinge piece comprises preset textures. Nevertheless, Loh discloses a split screen phone carrying case (10) includes a first casing (40) and a second casing (80), a hinge piece (120), the hinge piece with one end connect to the second casing, and the other end sliding within slots or guide channels (50) formed in the first casing (40), the slots or guide channels are within the back of the first casing and have the recess sits flush with outside surface of the first casing (Figure 9 shows that the recess for holding hinge piece 120 are completely encasing in the first casing) and the hinge piece (120) comprises preset textures (rib like structure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the recess and the hinge portion of Lee that recess sit flush with the casing and have rib like structure as taught by Loh so that the outer surface can be flush to the touch in order to provide additional cover to attached to the outer surface of the casing and the ribs like structure texture provide a greater gripping and additional protection when the split carrying case is the closed configuration.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR20230157043) in view of Wyss (5,738,214), further in view of Seidler (2002/0153376).
As to claims 4 and 14, Lee as modified does not disclose the first and second row of knuckles are joined via magnetic forces. Seidler discloses a container (Figure 1, 10) with hinge element (magnetic hinge, 16 and 18). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one known hinge mechanism (knuckles with hinge pin) for the other known hinge mechanism (magnetic force hinged) to achieve the predictable result of hinge two structure together. KSR Int' l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR20230157043) in view of Wyss (5,738,214), further in view of Borkan (4,219,116)
As to claims 5 and 15, Lee as modified does not disclose the first and second row of knuckles snap into one another via a figure-ground configuration.
Borkan discloses a container (Figure 1, 10), the container comprises a top (12) and bottom (14), which are hinged together by hinge (16 and 18), the hinge comprises hinge element (30 and 36), said hinge element (30) is position as a first row of knuckles and a second knuckles on the rear side walls of the top and bottom (12, 14), the first and second knuckles snap into one another via a figure-ground configuration (each hinge, 16, 18 is formed by a somewhat tubular protrusion 30 located on opposed, rear sidewalls 32, 34 of the top and bottom of the container snap fitted between a pair of spaced spherical protrusions 36 located on the respective rear sidewall opposed to that on which tubular protrusion is disposed. The ends of the plastic tubular protrusions are planar and are engaged by the plastic spherical protrusions to form the hinges). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one known hinge mechanism (knuckles with hinge pin) for the other known hinge mechanism (figure-ground type) as taught by Borkan to achieve the predictable result of hinge two structure together. KSR Int' l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR20230157043) in view of Wyss (5,738,214), further in view of Ahmed (11,737,612).
As to claims 6 and 16, Lee as modified does not disclose the first and second row of knuckles are replaced by a plurality of pairs of latches and receiving slots, wherein the latch comprises a hook profile. Ahmed discloses a container (1) with hinge element (Figures 1-3, hinge detail with knuckles structure 4 in the lid 1, and knuckles structure in the second housing 12) and the first and second row of knuckles are a plurality of pairs of latches (latch shown in Figure 3 on the lid structure 1) and receiving slots (slots are found in Figure 2) wherein the latch comprises a hook profile (as shown in Figures 2-3). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one known hinge mechanism (knuckles with hinge pin) for the other known hinge mechanism (latch hook and receiving slot) as taught by to achieve the predictable result of hinge two structure together. KSR Int' l Co. V. Teleflex Inc. 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ 2d 1385 (Supreme Court 2007) (KSR).
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant, in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or prior art(s) disclosed by the Examiner (in the attached PTO-892 form).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN HOI CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-5702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Orlando E Aviles can be reached at (571)270-5531. 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.
/CHUN HOI CHEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736