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 .
This communication is in response to the claims dated 4/24/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 4/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Issues raised by the Applicant:
The transfer circuit 210 cannot move relative to the bottom-plate 110.
The current invention has the function of fine-tuning the orientation to improve the tolerance problems of existing external components and the defects such as inability to accurately plug into the connector, other problems such as poor contact or structural damage can also be avoided.
The Examiner’s position:
a. Claim 1 recites “wherein, when the external module is moved toward the electronic device along the first direction, the first circuit board is adapted to be moved relative to the locking component to plug in the connector.”.
Figures 1-3 of Zheng et al. indeed shows: wherein, when the external module (3) is moved toward the electronic device along the first direction, the first circuit board (210) is adapted to be moved relative to the locking component to plug in (see figures 1-3) the connector.
b. The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant. Such fine-tuning effect is not part of the claimed limitation.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. U.S. Patent 8,837,135 in view of Volz et al. U.S. Patent 5,402,316.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
580
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Zheng et al. teaches an external module (3; figure 2), suitable for an electronic device (2; figure 2), the external module (3) comprising:
a main body (110 + 120-122; figure 3), having a housing (housing formed by 110, 120-122);
a first circuit board (210; figure 3), disposed on the housing along a first direction (see above annotated figure 3), and one side (bottom side) of the first circuit board (210) has at least one electrical contact (211; figure 3);
a locking component (see above annotated figure 3), positioned in a second direction (see above annotated figure 3) and is securely disposed (see figure 3) on the housing;
and a connector (810; figures 1-2), disposed on a surface (top surface of 800; figure 2) of the electronic device (2; figure 2) and aligned (see figures 1-3) with the at least one electrical contact (211), wherein, when the external module (3) is moved toward the electronic device along the first direction, the first circuit board (210) is adapted to be moved relative to the locking component to plug in (see figures 1-3) the connector.
However, Zheng et al. does not specifically teach that the first circuit board (210) has a first through hole, and that the locking component, passes through the first through hole; and wherein a hole diameter of the first through hole is larger than an outer diameter of the locking component.
Volz et al. teaches a board (24; figure 20) has a first through hole (52; figure 20), and that the locking component (25; figure 20), passes through the first through hole; and wherein a hole diameter (52; figure 20) of the first through hole is larger than an outer diameter (outer diameter of the threaded portion of 25) of the locking component.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the external module of Zheng et al. such that the first circuit board (210) would have a first through hole, and that the locking component, would pass through the first through hole; and wherein a hole diameter of the first through hole would be larger than an outer diameter of the locking component, as suggested by Volz et al., for the ease of part’s replacement and insertion of said external module into said electronic device.
PNG
media_image2.png
394
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, as mentioned above, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 1.
Volz et al. further teaches the locking component includes a stepped stud portion (see above annotated figure 20) and a screw portion (see above annotated figure 20), the stepped stud is fixed (as resulted from the modification) on the main body and passed through (as resulted from the modification) the first through hole of the first circuit board.
Even though, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. does not specifically teach the screw is screwed to the stepped stud, however, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the screw portion to be screwed to the stepped stud, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art, for enhancing the versatility of fastening capability. Nerwin v. Erlichmena, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 3, the modification of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. would result in the external module as recited in claim 2, wherein the stepped stud is abutted a lower edge (see figure 3 of Zheng et al.) of the first through hole to limit the first circuit board after the first circuit board is plugged in the connector.
Regarding claim 5, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module of claim 1 for the same reason stated in the above rejection of claim 2.
Regarding 6, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 5 for the same reasons stated in the above rejection of claim 3.
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. U.S. Patent 8,837,135 in view of Volz et al. U.S. Patent 5,402,316 in view of Fischer et al. U.S. Patent 12,130,041.
Regarding claim 4, the modification of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. would result in the external module as recited in claim 2, wherein the stepped stud has a stopper (26; figure 20 of Volz et al.), the outer diameter of the stopper is larger (see figure 20 of Volz et al.) than the hole diameter of the first through hole, and the stopper (26) would be spaced from one side of the first circuit board.
However, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. does not specifically teach the screw has a gasket, the outer diameter of the gasket is larger than the hole diameter of the first through hole and the gasket is spaced from the other side of the first circuit board.
Fischer et al. discloses the common usage of a gasket (52; figure 6) with a screw/bolt/fastener (44; figure 6), the outer diameter (see figure 6) of the gasket is larger than the hole diameter (diameter of 42; figure 6) of the first through hole (42; figure 6), to provide more durable and reliable fastening force.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further provide a gasket to be used with the screw of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al., as suggested by Fischer et al., such that the outer diameter of the gasket would be larger than the hole diameter of the first through hole and the gasket would be spaced from the other side of the first circuit board, for creating a more durable and reliable fastening force.
Regarding claim 7, as mentioned above, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 5, wherein the stud has a stopper (26; figure 20 of Volz et al.), the outer diameter of the stopper is larger (see figure 20 of Volz et al.) than the hole diameter of the first through hole, and the stopper (26) would be spaced from one side of the first circuit board.
However, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. does not specifically teach the stepped screw has a gasket, the outer diameter of the gasket is larger than the hole diameter of the first through hole and the gasket is spaced from the other side of the first circuit board.
Fischer et al. discloses the common usage of a gasket (52; figure 6) with a screw/bolt/fastener (44; figure 6), the outer diameter (see figure 6) of the gasket is larger than the hole diameter (diameter of 42; figure 6) of the first through hole (42; figure 6), to provide more durable and reliable fastening force.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further provide a gasket to be used with the screw of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al., as suggested by Fischer et al., such that the outer diameter of the gasket would be larger than the hole diameter of the first through hole and the gasket would be spaced from the other side of the first circuit board, for creating a more durable and reliable fastening force.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. U.S. Patent 8,837,135 in view of Volz et al. U.S. Patent 5,402,316 and in further view of CHU U.S. Pub. 2007/0291460.
Regarding claim 8, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 1, wherein the first circuit board has a plug portion (main body of 211; figure 3 of Zheng et al.); the plug portion is extended from the bottom of the first circuit board toward the connector.
However, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. does not specifically teach two first chamfers, and the two first chamfers are formed oppositely on one end of the plug portion.
PNG
media_image3.png
400
486
media_image3.png
Greyscale
CHU teaches a similar structure, which suggests a circuit board comprising a plug portion (see above annotated figure 1) and two first chamfers (see above annotated figure 1), and the two first chamfers are formed oppositely on one end of the plug portion.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify and equip the circuit board of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. with two first chamfers, and the two first chamfers are formed oppositely on one end of the plug portion, as suggested by CHU, for the ease of insertion.
Regarding claim 9, as mentioned above, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and CHU teaches the external module as recited in claim 8, wherein the connector (810; figures 2-3 of Zheng et al.) includes a slot (slot of 810; see figures 2-3 of Zheng et al.); and the inner diameter of the slot is matched (implicitly taught; in order for proper connection) the outer diameter of the plug portion.
Even though, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and CHU does not specifically mention two second chamfers, and the two second chamfers are oppositely formed on the inner wall of the slot and located on a top of the connector, however, from figure of CHU and the above rejection of claim 8, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide two second chamfers oppositely formed on the inner wall of the slot and located on top of the connector of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and CHU, as implicitly suggested by CHU, for smooth insertion of said plug portion into said slot.
Regarding claim 10, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and CHU would result in the external module as recited in claim 9, wherein the first chamfer is moved along one of the second chamfers to drive the plug portion into the slot (see above rejection of claim 9).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng et al. U.S. Patent 8,837,135 in view of Volz et al. U.S. Patent 5,402,316 in view of Lajara et al. U.S. Patent 7,663,889.
Regarding claim 11, as mentioned above, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 1.
However, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. does not further teach an outer frame accommodating the main body and has a plurality of limiting posts, the plurality of limiting posts are vertically formed on a top surface of the outer frame and adjacent to the main body.
PNG
media_image4.png
384
634
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Lajara et al. teaches as similar structure, which includes an outer frame (102; figure 1) accommodating a structure (106; figure 1) and has a plurality of limiting posts (see above annotated figure 1), the plurality of limiting posts are vertically formed on a top surface (top surface of 102) of the outer frame (102) for limiting movement of said structure (106).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further equip the external module of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. with a similar outer frame having a plurality of limiting posts, the plurality of limiting posts are vertically formed on a top surface of the outer frame, as suggested by Lajara et al., for stabilizing the main body of said external module and for limiting the movement of the upper circuit board (900; figures 2-3 of Zheng et al.).
Regarding claim 12, the modification of Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and Lajara et al. would result in the external module as recited in claim 11, further comprising a second circuit board (900; figure 2 of Zheng et al.) coupled to the main body and sleeved (as suggested by figure 1 of Lajara et la.) on the plurality of limiting posts.
Regarding claim 13, as mentioned above, Zheng et al. in view of Volz et al. and Lajara et al. teaches the external module as recited in claim 12.
From figures 2-3 of Zheng et al. and from the rejection of claim 1, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further provide a similar type of fastener (as explained in claim 1’s rejection) or another type of fastener that passes through the second circuit board (900 of Zheng et al.) and locked to the outer frame to further stabilize the overall structure of said external module.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3069. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6PM..
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 N Hayman can be reached at 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 Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUNG Q DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights