Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/888,774

ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING CABLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 18, 2024
Examiner
CHOWDHURY, ROCKSHANA D
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
517 granted / 644 resolved
+12.3% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
673
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§112
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 644 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1, 3-6, 11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Rappoport et al. (US Patent No. 9658648 B2 and Rappoport hereinafter) Regarding Claim 1, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8 and annotated figs below) an electronic device comprising: a printed circuit board (28); and a flat cable (32) having an end electrically connected to the printed circuit board, wherein the flat cable comprises: a cable connector (fig.2) at the end of the flat cable and coupled to the printed circuit board; a curved part (U-shaped portion, fig.2) having a curved shape; and an elastic bracket (46, fig.5) comprising an elastic material, the elastic bracket coupled to at least one end of opposite ends of the curved part and configured to apply an elastic contraction force (54) in a direction in which the opposite ends of the curved part become closer to each other (fig.5). PNG media_image1.png 353 737 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 3, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the curved part has a U-shape (fig.2). Regarding Claim 4, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the elastic bracket comprises: a flexible part configured to extend or contract along a direction of tension applied to the flat cable; and at least one fixing part fixed to the at least one end of opposite ends of the curved part of the flat cable. PNG media_image2.png 663 630 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 5, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the electronic device of claim 4, wherein the at least one fixing part comprises an adhesive member (52) at a surface of the at least one fixing part and attached to a surface of the flat cable. Regarding Claim 6, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the electronic device of claim 4, wherein the flexible part is further configured so that a cross sectional area of the flexible part decreases in comparison with a cross sectional area of the at least one fixing part with respect to a direction of tension (56) applied to the flat cable (fig.5). Regarding Claim 11, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) a flat cable of an electronic device comprising a printed circuit board (28) to which the flat cable (32) is electrically connected, the flat cable comprising: a cable connector (fig.2) at one end of the flat cable and coupled to the printed circuit board; a curved part (fig.2) having a curved shape; and an elastic bracket (46) comprising an elastic material, the elastic bracket coupled to at least one end of opposite ends of the curved part and configured to apply an elastic contraction force (54) in a direction in which the opposite ends of the curved part become closer to each other (fig.5). Regarding Claim 13, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the flat cable of claim 11, wherein the curved part has a U-shape. Regarding Claim 14, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the flat cable of claim 11, wherein the elastic bracket comprises: a flexible part configured to extend or contract along a direction of tension applied to the flat cable; and at least one fixing part fixed to the at least one end of opposite ends of the curved part. PNG media_image2.png 663 630 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 15, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the flat cable of claim 14, wherein the at least one fixing part comprises an adhesive member (52) at a surface of the at least one fixing part and attached to a surface of the flat cable. Regarding Claim 16, Rappoport discloses (figs. 1-8) the flat cable of claim 14, wherein the flexible part is further configured so that a cross sectional area of the flexible part decreases in comparison with a cross sectional area of the at least one fixing part with respect to a direction of tension (56) applied to the flat cable (fig.5). 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 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rappoport et al in view of Takashima et al (US Pub No. 2025/0013267 A1 and Takashima hereinafter) Regarding Claim 2, Rappoport discloses the electronic device of claim 1, but fails to disclose at least two elements having different sizes, wherein the curved part of the flat cable overlaps a step formed by a size difference of the at least two elements. However, Takashima teaches (annotated fig below) at least two elements (18 and 29) having different sizes, wherein the curved part of the flat cable (28) overlaps a step PNG media_image3.png 516 644 media_image3.png Greyscale formed by a size difference of the at least two elements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the curved part of the flat cable overlaps a step formed by a size difference of Takashima to device of Rappoport in order to provide an extra length portion in a flat cable can be maintained in an appropriate route to absorb changes in route length associated with changes in the rotation angle between chassis (Takashima and [0007]). Regarding Claim 11, Rappoport discloses the flat cable of claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the curved part overlaps a step formed by a size difference of at least two elements of the electronic device. However, Takashima teaches (annotated fig below) wherein the curved part overlaps a step formed by a size difference of at least two elements (18 and 29) of the electronic device. PNG media_image3.png 516 644 media_image3.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the curved part of the flat cable overlaps a step formed by a size difference of Takashima to device of Rappoport in order to provide an extra length portion in a flat cable can be maintained in an appropriate route to absorb changes in route length associated with changes in the rotation angle between chassis (Takashima and [0007]). Claims 7-8 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rappoport et al in view of Zamora et al (US Patent No. 6194664 B1 and Zamora hereinafter) Regarding Claim 7, Rappoport discloses the electronic device of claim 6, but fails to disclose wherein a surface of the flexible part comprises perforated holes formed therein. However, Zamora teaches (fig.6) wherein a surface of the flexible part comprises perforated holes (169) formed therein. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a surface of the flexible part including perforated holes of Zamora to device of Rappoport in order to provide a flexed at its predefined hinge regions or flex points which are located at the formations (Zamora and col 5, lines 20-25). Regarding Claim 8, Rappoport/Zamora discloses the electronic device of claim 7. Zamora further teaches(fig.6) wherein the elastic contraction force is based on to a number of the perforated holes (169) and an arrangement interval between the perforated holes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an arrangement interval between the perforated holes of Zamora to device of Rappoport in order to provide a flexed at its predefined hinge regions or flex points which are located at the formations (Zamora and col 5, lines 20-25). Regarding Claim 17, Rappoport discloses the flat cable of claim 16, but fails to disclose wherein a surface of the flexible part comprises perforated holes formed therein. However, Zamora teaches (fig.6) wherein a surface of the flexible part comprises perforated holes formed therein. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a surface of the flexible part including perforated holes of Zamora to device of Rappoport in order to provide a flexed at its predefined hinge regions or flex points which are located at the formations (Zamora and col 5, lines 20-25) Regarding Claim 18, Rappoport/Zamora discloses the flat cable of claim 17. However, Zamora teaches (fig.6) wherein the elastic contraction force is determined according to a number of the perforated holes (169) and an arrangement width of the perforated holes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a surface of the flexible part including perforated holes of Zamora to device of Rappoport in order to provide a flexed at its predefined hinge regions or flex points which are located at the formations (Zamora and col 5, lines 20-25) Claims 9-10 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rappoport et al in view of Onuma et al (US Patent No. 7115006 B2 and Onuma hereinafter) Regarding Claim 9, Rappoport discloses the electronic device of claim 4, but fails to disclose wherein the at least one fixing part comprises a lateral extension part extending in a width direction of the flat cable, and wherein the lateral extension part is folded to at least partially surround the flat cable. However, Onuma teaches (figs. 1-6) wherein the at least one fixing part (1) comprises a lateral extension part (11, 12) extending in a width direction of the flat cable (2), and wherein the lateral extension part is folded to at least partially surround the flat cable (figs.6A-C). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a lateral extension part f fixing part extending in a width direction of the flat cable of Onuma to device of Rappoport in order to provide accurate longitudinal position of the coaxial cable (Onuma and col 4, lines 40-45) Regarding Claim 10, Rappoport/Onuma discloses the electronic device of claim 9. Onuma further (figs. 1-6) teaches wherein the flat cable further comprises a fixing groove (22) formed by reducing a width in an area corresponding to the lateral extension part, and wherein the lateral extension part is in the fixing groove (fig.5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the lateral extension part that is in the fixing groove of Onuma to device of Rappoport in order to accurately be positioned only by aligning the cable so as to be accommodated between the lateral extension part (Onuma and col 4, lines 35-40) Regarding Claim 19, Rappoport discloses the flat cable of claim 14, but fails to disclose wherein the at least one fixing part further comprises a lateral extension part extending in a width direction of the flat cable, and wherein the lateral extension part is configured to at least partially surround the flat cable. However, Onuma teaches (figs. 1-6) wherein the at least one fixing part further comprises a lateral extension part (11-12) extending in a width direction of the flat cable, and wherein the lateral extension part is configured to at least partially surround the flat cable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a lateral extension part of fixing part extending in a width direction of the flat cable of Onuma to device of Rappoport in order to provide accurate longitudinal position of the coaxial cable (Onuma and col 4, lines 40-45) Regarding Claim 20, Rappoport/Onuma discloses the flat cable of claim 19. Onuma further (figs. 1-6) teaches wherein the flat cable comprises a fixing groove (22) formed by reducing a width in an area corresponding to the lateral extension part, and wherein the lateral extension part is in the fixing groove. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the lateral extension part that is in the fixing groove of Onuma to device of Rappoport in order to accurately be positioned only by aligning the cable so as to be accommodated between the lateral extension part (Onuma and col 4, lines 35-40) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 AM - 4:30 PM ET. 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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. /ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602077
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602090
SUPPORT PLATE FOR FOLDING PORTABLE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602076
ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING HINGE MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596404
FLEXIBLE DISPLAY MODULE AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596410
PORTABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 644 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month