CTNF 18/791,098 CTNF 76857 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 3, 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 3 sets for the limitation “wherein the arm is coupled to a lower portion of the head engager that is on a side of the head engager that is opposite the arm and below the case.” The structure corresponding “the arm” is unclear. It appears that “the arm” should be “a handle”. The only structure in Figure 1 that is “coupled to a lower portion of the head engager (ref.# 240) that is on a side of the head engager that is opposite the arm (ref.# 210) and below the case (ref.# 300)” is the handle (ref.# 242). Claim 6 sets forth the limitation “further comprising a handle rigidly coupled to the case”. Claim 9 sets forth the limitation “a handle rigidly coupled to the case…”. It is unclear how the handle is coupled to the case. In Figure 1, it appears that the handle (ref.# 242) is coupled to the head engager (ref.# 240) and not the case (ref.# 300). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolas, et a. (US 5,253,832) in view of Huang, et al. (CN 207516650) . PNG media_image1.png 654 507 media_image1.png Greyscale Bolas, et al. (US 5,253,832) – Figure 1 Regarding claim 1, Bolas discloses “a base (Fig. 1, ref.# 42); an arm (Fig. 1, ref.# 24) pivotable about a pivot (Fig. 1, ref.# 32) and with respect to the base; a counterweight (Fig. 1, ref.# 28) on a side of the pivot opposite the arm; and a case (Fig. 1, ref.# 12: case of viewing device) for receiving the head-mountable device (Fig. 1, ref.# 12: viewing device), the case being on an end of the arm (Fig. 1, ref.# 24) that is opposite the pivot (Fig. 1, ref.# 32)”. Bolas does not specifically teach where “the case defining an opening to provide the head-mountable device with a view to an external environment.” However, a head-mountable device with openings to provide access for a camera or vent ports was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Huang (See Fig. 5, case: ref.#s 10, 12, 14; openings: ref.# 16, 18). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the case of Bolas, or alternatively, include an outer case that includes an opening to provide the head mountable device with a view to the external environment in order to not obscure the camera of the head mountable device and/or to allow heat to escape for efficient cooling. Regarding claim 2, Bolas discloses “a head engager (Fig. 1, ref.# 15, 18) coupling the arm (Fig. 1, ref.# 24) to the case (Fig. 1, ref.# 12), wherein the head engager (Fig. 1, ref.# 15) is configured to secure to a head and align the head-mountable device with a face.” Regarding claim 3, Bolas discloses “wherein [the arm] a handle (Fig. 1, ref.# 14) is coupled to a lower portion of the head engager (Fig. 1, ref.# 12) that is on a side of the head engager that is opposite the arm (Fig. 1, ref.# 24) and below the case (Fig. 1, ref.# 12).” Regarding claim 4, Bolas discloses “a post (Fig. 1, ref.# 34) between the base (Fig. 1, ref.# 42) and the arm (Fig. 1, ref.# 24), wherein the post is pivotable about a post pivot (Fig. 1, ref.# 44) and with respect to the base (Fig. 1, ref.# 42).” Regarding claim 5, Bolas discloses “wheels at the base.” (Fig. 1, ref.# 52) Regarding claim 6, Bolas discloses “a handle (Fig. 1, ref.# 14) rigidly coupled to the case (Fig. 1, ref.# 12), wherein the opening is on an outer portion of the case (Fig. 1: face of case), the outer portion being configured to be positioned on a side of the head-mountable device (Fig. 1, ref.# 15, 18) that faces away from the handle (Fig. 1, ref.# 14).” 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, et al. (CN 207516650) in view of Bolas, et a. (US 5,253,832) . PNG media_image2.png 305 436 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 274 368 media_image3.png Greyscale Huang – Figure 2 Huang – Figure 5 Regarding claim 7, Huang discloses “a case (Fig. 2, ref.# 10, 12, 14) for receiving the head-mountable device (Fig. 1, ref. # 2), the case comprising: a body defining an opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 16, 18) to provide the head-mountable device with a view to an external environment; and a case engager (Fig. 5, ref.# 90, 91); and a head engager (Fig. 2, ref.# 5) configured to secure to a head and releasably engage the case at the case engager” and “wherein the case is adjustable with respect to the head engager to align the head-mountable device with respect to a face (Fig. 2: adjustable strap). Huang does not teach (Claim 7) “wherein the head engager is configured to attach to a pivotable arm” and (Claim 9) “a handle rigidly coupled to the case and the head engager wherein an outer portion of the case defining the opening is configured to be positioned on a side of the head-mountable device that faces away from the handle.” . However, attached a pivotable arm to a head engager attached to a head-mountable device, along with a handle, was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Bolas (See Figure 1: arm- ref.# 24, handle- ref.# 14). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize the pivotable arm and associated counter weight, along with a handle, with the head gear of Huang in order to offset the weight of the head-mountable device for the comfort of the user and to assist positioning the headset. Regarding claim 10, Huang discloses “wherein the case defines additional openings to provide access to an input device and an output device of the head-mountable device.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 16, 18) 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, et al. (CN 207516650) in view of Bolas, et a. (US 5,253,832) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Aili (CN 109061882) . Regarding claim 8, modified Huang discloses all the structure set forth in the claims except “a holder coupled to the head engager and configured to removably receive an accessory device operably connected to the head-mountable device.” However, the use of a holder to removable receive an accessory (i.e., battery) that is connected to a head mountable device was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Aili (See Figure 1, ref.#s 11, 13). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huang to include a holder coupled to the head engager and configured to removably receive an accessory device operably connected to the head-mountable device in order to allow the user to add an external battery to the headset and avoid the use of extension cords for power supply . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 11-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang, et al. (CN 207516650) . Regarding claim 11, Huang discloses “a body defining an upper portion (Fig. 5, ref.# 12), a lower portion (Fig. 5, ref.# 14) opposite the upper portion, and an outer portion (Fig. 5, ref.# 10); a sensor opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 18) extending through the outer portion, an inlet opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 16) extending through the lower portion; and an outlet opening (Fig. 5, ref. # 16) extending through the upper portion, wherein, when the case receives the head-mountable device (Fig. 1, ref.# 2): the sensor opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 18) is positioned to overlap a sensor (Fig. 1, ref.# 4) of the head-mountable device; the inlet opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 16) is positioned to overlap an inlet vent of the head-mountable device; and the outlet opening (Fig. 5, ref.# 16) is positioned to overlap an outlet vent of the head-mountable device (page 5 of translation, 3 rd paragraph: air flow openings).” Regarding claim 12, Huang discloses “wherein: the inlet opening is a first inlet opening; the inlet vent is a first inlet vent; and the case further comprises a second inlet opening extending through the lower portion, wherein, when the case receives the head-mountable device, the inlet opening is positioned to overlap a second inlet vent of the head-mountable device.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 16; page 5 of translation, 3 rd paragraph: air flow openings) Regarding claim 13, Huang discloses “wherein the sensor opening increases in cross-sectional dimension as it extends from an inner surface of the case.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 18) Regarding claim 14, Huang discloses “wherein the sensor opening is one of multiple sensor openings, wherein each of the sensor openings is configured to overlap multiple sensors of the head-mountable device.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 18) Regarding claim 15, Huang discloses “a case engager (Fig. 5, ref.# 90, 91) configured to releasably and adjustably secure the case at one of multiple positions and orientations with respect to a head engager.” Regarding claim 16, Huang discloses “an input opening on the upper portion of the body, wherein, when the case receives the head-mountable device, the inlet opening is positioned to receive an input device of the head-mountable device extending through the inlet opening.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 16; page 5 of translation, 3 rd paragraph: air flow openings) Regarding claim 17, Huang discloses “an output opening on the upper portion of the body, wherein, when the case receives the head-mountable device, the output opening is positioned to overlap an output device of the head-mountable device.” (Fig. 5, ref.# 16; page 5 of translation, 3 rd paragraph: air flow openings) Regarding claim 18, Huang discloses “wherein, when the case (Fig. 1, ref.# 10, 12, 14) receives the head-mountable device (Fig. 1, ref.# 2) , an inner surface of the body is configured to conform to an outer surface of the head-mountable device (See Fig. 1).” Regarding claim 20, Huang discloses “wherein the case comprises: a first segment (Fig. 5, ref.# 12) comprising a first engager (Fig. 5, ref.# 90); and a second segment (Fig. 5, ref.# 14) comprising a second engager (Fig. 5, ref.# 91), wherein the first engager and the second engager are configured to releasably secure the first segment to the second segment (page 4 of translation, last paragraph).” 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang, et al. (CN 207516650) in view of JayBratt, “A Quest 2 Hard Shell?”, www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZCw2v4Ww3E, Mar 17, 2022 . Regarding claim 19, Huang discloses all the structure set forth in the claims except “wherein the body is flexible, such that inner portions of the body are adjustable to be larger than a maximum cross-sectional dimension of the head-mountable device.” However, the use of a case to cover a VR headset that that is made of silicone was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by JayBratt (See video at time 2:41 / 4:02). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huang such that the body is flexible, such that inner portions of the body are adjustable to be larger than a maximum cross-sectional dimension of the head-mountable device in order to securely connect to different sizes and models of head mountable devices . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Nishi z9ud 8,289,230), Maguire, Jr. (US 6,181,371), Roell, et al. (US 6,057,810), Yee, et al. (US 6,016,385), Mori (JP 6-195440) and Bradley (US 3,205,303) teaches a head mountable device with a counterweight. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2118. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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. /RODNEY E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 June 15, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/791,098 Page 2 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/791,098 Page 3 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/791,098 Page 4 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/791,098 Page 6 Art Unit: 2852 Application/Control Number: 18/791,098 Page 7 Art Unit: 2852
Prosecution Insights