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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 55 see Figure 3. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 § 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 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0252770) in view of Melville (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2024/0123677) and/or Techter et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0149183) and/or Jenson et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2018/0257840).
Lee discloses a film-sticking box capable of for an electronic device, comprising a box body (cradle 6950) forming a receiving slot (device slot 6956) capable of for receiving a material or article worked upon such as an electronic device (device 7100) and a film-sticking assembly (overlay applicator 3000), and a shape of the receiving slot being adapted to a shape of the material or article worked upon such as an electronic device; wherein the box body is connected to an enclosing shell (clamshell frame 6910), the enclosing shell comprises a bottom plate (support base 6920) fixedly connected to a bottom of the box body (via a cradle support 7021) and a cover plate (lid 6930) reversibly connected to the bottom plate (via a hinge); the bottom plate is connected to a connecting plate (of a hinge mechanism see Figure 69), and the cover plate (from which the hinge mechanism extends) is reversibly connected to the bottom plate through the connecting plate (Figures 69-75 and Paragraphs 0384-0394).
As to the limitation in claim 1 of “a positioning box (6) is mounted around the enclosing shell (5)”, Lee does not expressly teach a positioning box is mounted around the enclosing shell. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art a film-sticking apparatus, instructions, cleaning cloth, dust removal sticker, etc. are mounted in a package for retail including as evidenced by Lee (Figures 85-87 and Paragraphs 0468-0473) wherein the package is specifically a box as evidenced by Melville (102, 104 see Figure 1 and Paragraph 0027) and/or Techter (100 see Figure 10 and Paragraph 0036) and/or Jenson (110 see Figure 12 and Paragraphs 0033 and 0041). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the film-sticking box taught by Lee further comprise a positioning box is mounted around the enclosing shell and any further instructions, cleaning cloth, dust removal sticker, etc. to package the box for retail as is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art as evidenced by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson and consistent with that suggested by Lee.
Regarding claim 4, the film-sticking assembly taught by Lee comprises a tempered film (overlay 2930 is tempered glass see paragraph 0515), a positioning film (protective film 2920 including alignment tab 2910), a release film (adhesive release liner 2740), and a handle (pull tab 2750), the release film is removably attached to one side of the tempered film, the handle is fixedly connected to the release film, a length of the handle is greater than a length of the release film, the positioning film is removably attached to the other side of the tempered film, and at least one positioning hole (alignment mechanism 2915) is defined in the positioning film (Figure 30 and Paragraphs 0280-0282).
Regarding claim 5, the film-sticking assembly taught by Lee is arranged at the bottom of the box body (see Figure 73), and the material or article worked upon such as an electronic device during use is placed on the film-sticking assembly, with a screen of the electronic device contacting the film-sticking assembly; and the cover plate covers a back of the electronic device which is a side of the electronic device away from the screen (see Figure 74).
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches a through hole is defined in the cover plate (see the depicted through hole through the lid 6930 such as shown in Figure 72). As to the limitation of “for receiving a camera protrusion area on a back of the electronic device”, the claims are directed to an apparatus wherein the limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon by the apparatus and/or functional limitations. Inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims (see MPEP 2115). A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. If an examiner concludes that a functional limitation is an inherent characteristic of the prior art, then to establish a prima case of anticipation or obviousness, the examiner should explain that the prior art structure inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus. The burden then shifts to applicant to establish that the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on (see MPEP 2114). Lee teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim as set forth above and is capable of “for receiving a camera protrusion area on a back of the electronic device” wherein as the material or article worked upon by the apparatus/film-sticking box is an electronic device having a camera protrusion area on a back of the electronic device corresponding to the through hole.
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches a pressing block (pad 7031) is fixedly arranged on the cover plate.
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches an adhesive (adhesive agent on the tempered film and/or positioning film) is arranged on a top of a raised part (central support 6955) on one side of the box body (Figures 69 and 73).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson as applied to claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 above, and optionally further in view of Chen ‘655 (CN 219134655 and see also the machine translation) and/or Melville and/or Xie (WO 2025/015883 and see also the machine translation or CN 220298955 and see also the machine translation).
Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson above teach limitations in claim 2 including the enclosing shell taught by Lee comprises three surfaces which are the bottom plate, the cover plate, and the connecting plate (as shown in Figure 69); the cover plate covers the box body (when the lid is closed), and a positioning block (alignment base 6953). Lee does not expressly teach the positioning block is arranged in the receiving slot. Lee teaches the box body (cradle) includes the positioning block (alignment base see paragraph 0402) without expressly teaching how the box body includes the positioning block wherein it is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art as evidenced by other embodiments of Lee (see Figure 31) and/or Chen ‘655 (see Figures 2 and 3) and/or Melville (see Figure 1) and/or Xie (see Figure 1) the box body (3100 of Lee and 201 of Chen ‘655 and 108 of Melville and 101 of Xie) includes the positioning block (3112 of Lee and 204 of Chen ‘655 and 126 of Melville and 102 of Xie) by the positioning block is arranged in the receiving slot. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the positioning block as taught by Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson is arranged in the receiving slot as is the conventional and predictable arrangement as evidenced by other embodiments of Lee and optionally further Chen ‘655 and/or Melville and/or Xie.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson as applied to claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 above, and further in view of Chen ‘207 et al. (WO 2025/156207 and see also the machine translation) and/or Xie.
Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson teach all of the limitations in claim 6 except for a specific teaching of a cotton strip installation groove is formed in the bottom of the box body, a support cotton strip is mounted in the cotton strip installation groove, and a thickness of the support cotton strip is greater than a depth of the cotton strip installation groove. Lee teaches a central support (6955) mounted in the bottom of the box body and extending from the box body and formed of a foam or elastomeric material (Figure 69 and Paragraph 0290). It is known in the same art the central support (124 of Chen ‘207 and 104 of Xie) is formed of cotton (including as alternative to rubber or sponge) and mounted in an installation groove formed in the bottom of a box body (as depicted in Figures 3 and 6 of Chen ‘207 see 131b and Figure 3 of Xie) as evidenced by Chen ‘207 (see page 6 of the machine translation) and/or Xie (see page 5 of the machine translation of Xie ‘883 and page 6 of the machine translation of Xie ‘955). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the central support taught by Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson is a support cotton strip mounted in a cotton strip installation groove formed in the bottom of the box body and a thickness of the support cotton strip is greater than a depth of the cotton strip installation groove (to extend from the box body) as a simple substitution of one known central support for another to yield predictable results as evidenced by Chen ‘207 and/or Xie.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome Chen ‘207 because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson as applied to claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 above, and further in view of Jenson.
Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson above teach all of the limitations in claim 8 except for a specific teaching a first drawing hole (end slot 7225 and/or unlabeled end slot on an opposite end of the box body) defined in the box body (see Figures 72 and 73 of Lee) face toward a same direction as a second drawing hole defined in the positioning box. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art the box comprise a drawing hole/opening aligned perpendicular with a length of the film sticking apparatus for inserting the apparatus in the box as evidenced by Jenson (Figure 12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the positioning box taught by Lee as modified by Melville and/or Techter and/or Jenson has an opening of the type taught by Jenson (i.e. and including a second drawing hole is defined in the positioning box, and the first drawing hole and the second drawing hole face towards the same direction) as is the conventional and predictable box opening for inserting the box body as evidenced by Jenson.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a film-sticking box for an electronic device as claimed in claim 1 and further wherein the enclosing shell comprises three surfaces which are the bottom plate, the cover plate, and the connecting plate; the cover plate covers the box body, and a positioning block is arranged in the receiving slot and wherein the positioning box is a rectangular box with one opening formed by surrounding at least one box wall, and a buckle portion is arranged in the positioning box and is a gap formed in an edge of the opening of the positioning box.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN L GOFF II whose telephone number is (571)272-1216. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST Monday - Friday.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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.
/JOHN L GOFF II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746