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 Interpretation
Regarding Applicant’s preamble including “a soundproofing cover,” it is noted that the claims do not recite any limitations having to do with soundproofing, or details of what constitutes a cover having the function of “soundproofing”. The Examiner will use the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) and will interpret the preamble language as any cover element that could contribute to a reduction in sound emanating into or out of a cover element, so long as the material of the cover does not explicitly teach against its ability to absorb/insulate sound. Any material known to have utility in sound absorbing or sound reflection would suffice, as no level of soundproofing is disclosed or present in the claims. For example, an extremely thin material that yields only an infinitesimal level of sound-reduction/soundproofing of a sound wave present as compared to a sound wave that does not encounter a cover element will satisfy the claim language. Essentially any material will be capable of being “soundproofing” as long as it does not amply sound in some way. Note that an absorptive or reflective material will contribute to soundproofing into or out of a closed container.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-4 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “first cover portion that is fashioned in a shape of a housing, and of which a part of a first outer edge portion makes up a first arcuate outer edge portion, the first arcuate outer edge portion including a first notch portion”; a second cover portion that is fashioned in a shape of a housing, and of which a part of a second outer edge portion makes up a second arcuate outer edge portion, the second arcuate outer edge portion including a second notch portion”, and “in which the hinge portion is configured such that… a middle region in a circumferential direction of at least the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion is deformed into a protruding shape that protrudes to an inward side of the first cover portion and the second cover portion” are indefinite.
First, the limitations “first/second cover portion that is fashioned in a shape of a housing” is indefinite, as it is unclear what “a shape of a housing” means. Is Applicant attempting to claim a specific shape? Or, is Applicant merely attempting to claim that the cover portions can form a housing? Applicant should clarify the language, as there is no commonly understood “housing” shape, nor is it defined in the disclosure.
Second, from the Examiner’s understanding of Applicant’s disclosure, the first/second arcuate outer edge portions are part of the first/second cover parts, respectively, and the hinge links the cover portions and closes off the notch portions. The requirement that “the hinge portion is configured such that… a middle region in a circumferential direction of at least the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion is deformed into a protruding shape that protrudes to an inward side of the first cover portion and the second cover portion” is confusing, as the hinge is a separate component from the first/second arcuate portions and defines the elastically deformable element, but the claims then require that “a middle region in a circumferential direction of at least the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion is deformed into a protruding shape that protrudes to an inward side of the first cover portion and the second cover portion”. As far as the Examiner understands Applicant’s disclosure, it is the hinge #12 that is deformed into a protruding shape that protrudes to an inward side of the first cover portion and the second cover portion, not the first/second arcuate outer edge portions “26A/36A, and the claims will be interpreted in this way. It is further noted that the first and second cover portions only face each other when the cover is in a closed state as in Figure 2A/B, and when opened as in Figure 3A/B, they are at a 90-degree angle to one another are not facing one another as claimed, and the claims will be interpreted in this way. Applicant must amend or clarify the indefinite claim language.
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Garg (7,246,714).
With respect to claim 1, Garg teaches a soundproofing cover (Figures 1-5 and 9A-E, # 6) comprising: a first cover portion (8) that is fashioned in a shape of a housing, and of which a part of a first outer edge portion (32) makes up a first arcuate outer edge portion (See annoted view of Figure 3 provided below, defined by arcuate side portion of first outer edge portion extending between the denoted “end of arcuate portions”), the first arcuate outer edge portion including a first notch portion (defined by well portion #50 attached to/included with the first arcuate portion); a second cover portion (10) that is fashioned in a shape of a housing, and of which a part of a second outer edge portion (30) makes up a second arcuate outer edge portion (See annoted view of Figure 3 provided below, defined by arcuate side portion of second outer edge portion extending between the denoted “end of arcuate portions”), the second arcuate outer edge portion including a second notch portion (defined by well portion #50 attached to/included with the second arcuate portion), in which the second outer edge portion (30) is abuttable against the first outer edge portion (32) in a state in which the first notch portion (52) and the second notch portion (50) face each other (see Figure 9E); and a hinge portion (40) that is elastically deformable, linking the first cover portion (8) and the second cover portion (10), and also closing off the first notch portion (52) and the second notch portion (50) facing each other (when arranged as in Figure 9E), in which the hinge portion (40) is configured such that, when the second cover portion (10) is opened to a predetermined angle of less than 180 degrees with respect to the first cover portion (8) (as seen in Figure 9B), a middle region (region including hinge structure #12) in a circumferential direction of at least the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion is deformed into a protruding shape (see portion #40) that protrudes to an inward side of the first cover portion (8) and the second cover portion (10) (clearly seen in Figure 9B). Regarding the “soundproofing” ability of cover #6, note that it can be made of thermoplastic polyolefins (Col. 2, Lines 32-47), which are well known to have utility in sound absorbing/soundproofing, and are therefore considered to make cover #6 a “soundproofing” cover in accordance with the claim interpretation noted above.
PNG
media_image1.png
465
994
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Garg teaches wherein when opening the second cover portion (10) to the predetermined angle of less than 180 degrees with respect to the first cover portion (8), an end portion of the hinge portion (defined by left/right ends of portion #40) in the circumferential direction of the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion assumes an arc shape (see arc shape of portion #40).
With respect to claim 3, Garg teaches wherein the hinge portion (40) is configured such that, when the second cover portion (10) is closed (See Figure 9E) with respect to the first cover portion (10), at least the middle region (region including hinge structure #12) in the circumferential direction of the first arcuate outer edge portion and the second arcuate outer edge portion is deformed into a protruding shape (see portion #40 in Figure 9E) that protrudes to an outward side from the first cover portion (8) and the second cover portion (10).
With respect to claim 4, Garg teaches wherein a plate thickness of the hinge portion (40) is constant.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pertinent arts of record relating to Applicant’s disclosure are disclosed in the PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY AUSTIN LUKS whose telephone number is (571)272-2707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:00-5:00).
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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.
/JEREMY A LUKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights