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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of restriction requirement in the reply filed on 6/2/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that MPEP § 803 and/or arguing the claims are considered as the same invention in the application. Applicant also argued the species are not mutually exclusive. This is not found persuasive because Inventions mentioned in the restriction are related to multiple different class/subclass and Species mentioned in the restriction are different embodiments which require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
The following are Examiner’s answer based on Applicant’s arguments:
Arguments for Inventions:
Group-1 required: “display housing”, support plate, sticker structure, adhesive areas, tape structure, etc.
Group-2: required: a camera with location on the housing of the display device. Claim 1 is a linking claim. The dependent claims (2-3, 5-11) in Group-1 and Group-2 (claim 4) are two different classes of the inventions.
Group-3: the claims drawn to “a body” with a tape structure comprising adhesive areas. There are no mobile display, support plate etc. in the claims.
In the arguments of the inventions, Applicant use “battery pack” to argue as a same breadth. Examiner would like to remind Applicant that the “battery pack” is not the only one to determine the inventions, especially the “battery pack” is not the essential limitations in most of the claims.
Argument for Species:
Examiner notice that Applicant copy-paste many drawings and paragraphs to argue the species. Examiner would like to invite Applicant to read all the claims closely. Most of the claims define the adhesive tape very detailly including: 1st area, 2nd area, non-adhesive area, 1st adhesive area, 2nd adhesive area, 3rd adhesive area, gap, size, locations and shape of the areas. So the different size, shape, locations of adhesive areas, gap etc. are, of course, very important in the patent review. Therefore, the designs with different adhesive areas, gap, size, locations, and shapes etc. are consider as different embodiments and need to be restricted. All the listed figures (species) in the previous office action are different regarding at least one of the adhesive areas, gap, size, locations, and shapes etc. Examiner would like to invite Applicant to clearly point out what are the species/figures listed in the previous office action comprising the same adhesive areas, gap, size, locations, and shapes etc.
However, Examiner would like to consider Applicant’s arguments regarding the specie G (figures other than fig 6-12). Because Applicant also stated there are not claims drawn to these figures (in specie G), Examiner can remove specie G from the restriction and consider these inventions/embodiments (figures in species G) are not in the original presentation.
Conclusion: Examiner will exam elected group I (claims 1-3, 5-11) based on the elected species B ( Fig 7 only).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5-9 and dependent claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, “a first adhesive area disposed in contact with the non-adhesive area in the first area and attached to the upper surface of the body while providing a first adhesive force, and a second adhesive area disposed in contact with at least the first adhesive area out of the non-adhesive area and the first adhesive area, in the first area, and attached to the upper surface of the body while providing a second adhesive force smaller than the first adhesive force” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner request applicant to clearly point out on the figure and show the support of the claimed limitations, especially “contact”, “upper surface” etc..
In claim 5, “a plurality of non-adhesive areas are provided in two adjacent corner portions of the first area, respectively, and wherein a plurality of first adhesive areas are disposed in contact with respective ones of the plurality of non-adhesive areas” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner request applicant to explain how many non-adhesive areas and 1st adhesive areas in the claims.
In claim 6, “the plurality of first adhesive areas are inclined with respect to each other” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner request applicant to explain how many non-adhesive areas and 1st adhesive areas in the claims.
In claim 7, “the at least one third adhesive area extends along an edge of the first area between the plurality of first adhesive areas” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required.
In claim 8, “further comprising a fixing tape disposed between the support plate and the first adhesive tape and attaching at least a portion of the first area to the support plate” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required.
In claim 9, “the first adhesive tape further includes a second area extending from the first area and disposed to contact at least a portion of a side surface of the body and at least a portion of a lower surface of the body” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required.
The Examiner respectfully requests that the Applicant(s) review all claims for any such similar issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, and/or discussed in the above claim objections (see above discussion) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by FUKUSHIMA (US 20180159097).
With regard claim 1, FUKUSHIMA discloses An electronic device (abstract, see also fig 1-13) comprising: a housing including a support plate (fig 1-2, a housing on 100 with support plate; many “plate shape structures” can be a support plate); a display disposed on one surface of the support plate (at least fig 1, 1); and a battery pack including a body disposed on the other surface of the support plate (at least fig 1-2, 12; see also other embodiments; Examiner consider any plate shape structures are support plates; no label), and a first adhesive tape disposing or attaching the body on or to the other surface of the support plate (at least fig 3-11; see also fig 12, attaching the body on or to the other surface of the support plate with tape on 122), using a first area (at least fig 3-11, using a first area to attach the body on or to the other surface of the support plate; no specific label for “area”; same for the rest of rejections), wherein one surface of the first adhesive tape includes: a non-adhesive area disposed to face an upper surface of the body in at least a portion of an edge of the first area (at least fig 4-5, and/or fig 7-11, a non-adhesive area disposed to face an upper surface of the body in at least a portion of an edge of the first area; Examiner consider the non -adhesive area on top two corners or any other corners; no label), a first adhesive area disposed in contact with the non-adhesive area in the first area and attached to the upper surface of the body while providing a first adhesive force (at least fig 4-5, and/or fig 7-11; Examiner consider the first adhesive area disposed in contact with the non-adhesive area, see above discussion, and also inclined to each other on both sides; no label), and a second adhesive area disposed in contact with at least the first adhesive area out of the non-adhesive area and the first adhesive area (at least fig 4-5, and/or fig 7-11, a second adhesive area disposed in contact with at least the first adhesive area; Examiner consider the second adhesive area is below the 1st adhesive area and smaller than the first adhesive area; no label), in the first area, and attached to the upper surface of the body while providing a second adhesive force smaller than the first adhesive force (at least fig 4-5, and/or fig 7-11; a second adhesive force smaller than the first adhesive force; because of the smaller size of area).
Regarding claim 2, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the non-adhesive area is disposed at a first distance from an upper end of the housing, wherein the second adhesive area is disposed at a second distance from a lower end of the housing, and wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance (at least fig 2-5; the non-adhesive area is on an upper side/direction; the second adhesive area is on the opposite side; no label).
Regarding claim 3, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the non-adhesive area is provided in at least one of corner portions formed by two sides of the first area in order of proximity to the upper end of the housing (at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11; no label).
Regarding claim 5, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed a plurality of non-adhesive areas are provided in two adjacent corner portions of the first area, respectively, and wherein a plurality of first adhesive areas are disposed in contact with respective ones of the plurality of non-adhesive areas (see objection; at least 4-5; see also fig 7-11; a plurality of first adhesive areas are disposed in contact with respective ones of the plurality of non-adhesive areas; no label)..
Regarding claim 6, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the plurality of first adhesive areas are inclined with respect to each other (at least 4-5; see also fig 7-11; the plurality of first adhesive areas are inclined with respect to each other; at least the directions shown in the figure 4-5 or fig 7-11).
Regarding claim 7, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the first adhesive tape further includes at least one third adhesive area disposed at least partially in contact with the second adhesive area in the first area, and attached to the upper surface while providing a third adhesive force greater than the second adhesive force, and wherein the at least one third adhesive area extends along an edge of the first area between the plurality of first adhesive areas (at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11; the area extends along an edge of the first area between the plurality of first adhesive areas and partially in contact with the second adhesive area, Examiner consider as the at least one third adhesive area; Also this area is bigger than the 2nd adhesive area with a third adhesive force greater than the second adhesive force).
Regarding claim 8, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed a fixing tape disposed between the support plate and the first adhesive tape and attaching at least a portion of the first area to the support plate (see paragraph [74-79], [105-106]; at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11)..
Regarding claim 9, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the first adhesive tape further includes a second area extending from the first area and disposed to contact at least a portion of a side surface of the body and at least a portion of a lower surface of the body (at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11; Examiner consider the area extending from the first area and disposed to contact at least a portion of a side surface of the body and at least a portion of a lower surface of the body is the second area)..
Regarding claim 10, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed a portion of the second area is disposed to contact the upper surface of the body (at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11; the portion closer to the adhesive area is disposed to contact the upper surface of the body)..
Regarding claim 11, FUKUSHIMA further disclosed the first adhesive tape further includes slits or cut grooves arranged along a boundary between the first area and the second area (at least fig 4-5; see also fig 7-11; Examiner consider the cut grooves on fig 4 or fig 5 are the slits or cut grooves arranged along a boundary between the first area and the second area)..
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5420. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP: M-Th: 8:30-12:30; 2:30-8:30pm.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JERRY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights