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 .
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.
Claim(s) s 1-9 and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li discloses (US20180358795).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses an electronic device (Figures 1 and 2) usable with a plurality of cables (14, at least paragraphs 18-19, Figures 1 and 2) the electronic device comprising:
a first component (10)(30)(50)(70) comprising a first housing (100) and a second housing (108) connected to each other, an accommodation space (1000) being formed between the first housing and the second housing, and an opening (1004) being formed at a junction (Figure 8) of an edge of the first housing and the second housing; and
a second component (12) connected to the first component; wherein the opening is configured for the cables to pass through so that the cables enter the accommodation space.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
542
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of cable management structures (102)(104)(702)(704), wherein the cable management structures are disposed in the opening (at least Figure 1) and configured to be respectively connected to the cables.
PNG
media_image2.png
496
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the cable management structures are disposed on the edge of the first housing (Figure 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
488
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 3, wherein the cable management structures are sequentially arranged along the edge of the first housing (Figure 10).
PNG
media_image4.png
449
534
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the edge of the first housing has a recess, the recess defines a part of an outline of the opening, and the cable management structures are located in the recess (Figure 10).
PNG
media_image5.png
449
534
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the second housing comprises a sidewall, and the opening is formed at a junction of the edge of the first housing and the sidewall.
PNG
media_image6.png
471
557
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 6, wherein a top surface of the sidewall has a recess, and the recess defines a part of an outline of the opening. (inner part of “rim,” annotated below)
PNG
media_image7.png
449
534
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 6, further comprising a cover (rear surface of housing 108), wherein the cover covers the opening, an outer wall surface of the sidewall has a recess, the cover has a fixing portion, and the fixing portion is fixed to the sidewall in the recess.
PNG
media_image8.png
794
922
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 8, wherein a surface of the fixing portion is substantially flush with the outer wall surface (aforementioned figure 10).
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses an electronic device, comprising: a host body (Figure 1) comprising a first housing (100) and a second housing (108) connected to each other, an accommodation space (1000) being formed between the first housing and the second housing, an opening (1004) being formed at a junction of an edge (Figures 1 and 2) of the first housing and the second housing; a display (Paragraph 0019) connected to the host body; and a plurality of cables (104/704) passing through the opening to enter the accommodation space.
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 11, further comprising a plurality of cable management structures (102)(104)(702)(704), wherein the cable management structures are disposed in the opening (at least Figure 1) and configured to be respectively connected to the cables.
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 12, wherein the cable management structures are disposed on the edge (Figure 8) of the first housing.
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 13, wherein the cable management structures are sequentially arranged (Figure 8) along the edge of the first housing.
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 12, wherein the edge of the first housing has a recess (122), the recess defines a part of an outline of the opening, and the cable management structures are located in the recess.
Regarding claim 16, Li discloses wherein the second housing comprises a sidewall, and the opening is formed at a junction of the edge of the first housing and the sidewall (aforementioned Figure 10 shows that the sidewall and first housing mechanically connect creating a junction.).
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li discloses (US20180358795) in view of Dominy et al. (hereinafter Dominy) (US11144097).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 1.
Li discloses rotatable cable management units; however, Li does not expressly disclose further comprising: a hinge device, wherein the first component and the second component are connected to each other through the hinge device; and a cover covering the hinge device and the opening.
Dominy discloses a hinge device (26), wherein the first component and the second component are connected to each other through the hinge device (Figure 1); and a cover (25) covering the hinge device and the opening.
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the hinge device of Dominy into the electronic device of Li.
One having ordinary skill on the art would have been motivated to do this to offer a plurality of viewing angles.
Regarding claim 20, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 11.
Li discloses rotatable cable management units; however, Li does not expressly disclose further comprising: a hinge device, wherein the first component and the second component are connected to each other through the hinge device; and a cover covering the hinge device and the opening.
Dominy discloses a hinge device (26), wherein the first component and the second component are connected to each other through the hinge device (Figure 1); and a cover (25) covering the hinge device and the opening.
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the hinge device of Dominy into the electronic device of Li.
One having ordinary skill on the art would have been motivated to do this to offer a plurality of viewing angles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 and 18 are 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: Regarding claim 17 , the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship wherein a top surface of the sidewall has a recess, and the recess defines a part of an outline of the opening, as claimed with the remaining limitations of dependent claim 16 and independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the interconnection and interrelationship wherein the cover covers the opening, an outer wall surface of the sidewall has a recess, the cover has a fixing portion, and the fixing portion is fixed to the sidewall in the recess, as claimed with the remaining limitations of dependent claim 16 and independent claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20200233451.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xanthia C Cunningham whose telephone number is (571)270-1963. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday -Friday 9 am - 5 pm.
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 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 ServiceRepresentative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/XANTHIA C RELFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
7 March 2026
Prosecution Insights