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 virtue of the Application filed on 02/07/2025 claims 1-8 are pending wherein claims of which 1 is recited in independent form.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, without importing limitations from the specification. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is only limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked and is otherwise given the broadest reasonable interpretation. The Examiner has not identified any language which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, therefore the limitations will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation, without importing limitations from the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 8 are objected to because the claims set forth acronyms without clearly defining in the claims what the acronyms stand for (i.e. UFS, IC). Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20150133204 Ivanovski et al (hereinafter d1) in view of US-20250348216 to Dubey et al (hereafter d2) in view of US-20220108041 to Semeikin (hereinafter d3).
Regarding claim 1, as to the limitations “An integrated storage expansion mobile phone case, comprising a mobile phone case body and a combined male-female connector, wherein a cavity for accommodating a mobile phone is provided at an interior of the mobile phone case body, a through hole is provided in a side wall of the mobile phone case body, and the position of the through hole is aligned with the position of a mobile phone charging port; the combined male-female connector passes through and is fixedly arranged in the through hole, with a male connector of the combined male-female connector being located at the interior of the mobile phone case body, and a female connector of the combined male-female connector being flush with an outer wall of the mobile phone case body; a memory chip, a current controller, and a circuit connector are embedded in the end of the interior of the mobile phone case body close to the through hole, one end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the memory chip and the current controller, the other end of the current controller is electrically connected to the memory chip, and the other end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the combined male-female connector” d1 discloses a case suitable for a mobile phone (see Figs. 1-3) including integrated expandable storage (see d1 Fig. 3), the mobile phone case including at least a body (see d1 Figs. 1-4 element 11) wherein the body includes a connector fairly construed as a male-female connector (see d1 paras. 0045, 0058-0059, 0061-0062, 0064-0065, 0068); the body of the case is appropriate for accommodating mobile device (see d1 Figs. 1-4, 8-13), the case also including a through hole aligned with a charging port (see d1 Figs. 1-4, 8-13 element 21, para. 0062, 0065), wherein the connector passes through the through hole in for orientation of the male connector at the interior of the case body (see d1 para. 0059, 0061-0065), such that a female connector is flush with an outer wall (see d1 Fig. 14, 1-4); the case including embedded memory chips (see d1 Figs. 3, 9, 13; para. 0056-0059) an appropriate circuitry to connect the memory with the connectors such that they are embedded in the end of the interior of the mobile phone case body close to the through hole, one end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the memory chip and the current controller, the other end of the current controller is electrically connected to the memory chip, and the other end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the combined male-female connector (see d1 para. 0038-0039, 0042-0046, 0055-0056, 0058-0059, 0065-0066). The disclosure appears to meet all the limitations of the claim question under BRI of the limitations.
However, in order to provide the most complete and effective examination, or in the event d1 is shown to not teach any limitation from the claim, attention is directed to d2 which also addresses all the limitations noted above which are met by d1 and further discloses teachings relative to the limitations of claim 1, wherein d1 and d2 meet all the limitations in question, possibly alone, but certainly in combination. Wherein d2, in a similar field of endeavor further suggests an expandable and modular protective mobile device case apparatus comprises a protective shell configured to receive a mobile device including a connector (see d2 Figs. 1-3, para. 0023-0026) via a through hole is provided in a side wall of the mobile phone case body, and the position of the through hole is aligned with the position of a mobile phone charging port (see d1 Figs. 1-3 para. 0036—0037); the combined male-female connector passes through and is fixedly arranged in the through hole, with a male connector of the combined male-female connector being located at the interior of the mobile phone case body, and a female connector of the combined male-female connector being flush with an outer wall of the mobile phone case body (see d1 Figs. 1-3); a memory chip, a current controller, and a circuit connector are embedded in the end of the interior of the mobile phone case body close to the through hole, one end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the memory chip and the current controller, the other end of the current controller is electrically connected to the memory chip, and the other end of the circuit connector is electrically connected to the combined male-female connector (see d1 Fig. 1, 4-5), which are similarly mapped to the limitations of claim 1. Thus, starting from d1 and looking d2, the skilled person would find d2 as it is in the same field of endeavor and is directed to a similar problem and would consider to combine, in an manner obvious to a POSITA, the teachings of d2 into the case of d1 arriving in this way at the subject-matter of the present claim, which is considered to be obvious in view of the disclosure of d1 in combination with the disclosure of d2.
Regarding a motivation to combine d1 and d2, it is noted that d1 and d2 are executed in similar field of endeavor (wireless device casings), involving similar procedure (provide expandable memory) wherein the disclosure of d1 and/or d2 also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve ease of use (see d2 para. 0002). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1 and/or d2, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1 with the teaching of d2 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved network performance, among many other reasons obvious in the disclosure of d1 and/or d2. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless device cases) in a similar manner (expandable memory) for similar purposes (enhanced ease of use) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
In order to provide the most complete and effective examination regarding the known types of memory, or in the event d1, d2 is shown to not teach any limitation from the claim, attention is directed to d3 which further discloses known memory configuration at the time of filing, relative to the limitations of claim 1, wherein d1, d2, d3 meet all the limitations in question, possibly alone, but certainly in combination. Wherein d3, in a similar field of endeavor further suggests circuitry wherein memory is known to provide memory storage chip 240 may vary to offer storage volumes of 128 Gb, 256 Gb, 512 Gb, 1 Tb, 2 Tb, or another amount (see d3 para. 0045). Thus, starting from d1 and/or d2 and looking to d3, the skilled person would find d3 as it is in the same field of endeavor (memory devices) and is directed to a known memory chip configurations and would consider to combine, in an manner obvious to a POSITA, the teachings of d3 into the case of d1/d2 arriving in this way at the subject-matter of the present claim, which is considered to be obvious in view of the disclosure of d1/d2 in combination with the disclosure of d3.
Regarding a motivation to combine d1/d2 and d3, it is noted that d1 and d3 are executed in similar field of endeavor (wireless devices), involving similar procedure (provide memory) wherein the disclosure of d1/d2 and/or d3 also contains ample teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention including to improve ease of use (see d3 para. 0010). Such teaching, suggestion, and/or motivation, is found in references d1/d2 and/or d3, as well as being found squarely within the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would look to modify d1/d2 with the teaching of d3 in order to achieve the stated advantages of improved network performance, among many other reasons obvious in the disclosure of d1/d2 and/or d3. Furthermore, the techniques are employed in the same field of endeavor (wireless devices) in a similar manner (expandable memory) for similar purposes (enhanced ease of use) which would yield a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1,wherein the mobile phone case body is made of a rigid plastic or a composite material” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests known material utilized in phone cases including at least composite or plastic (see d1 para. 0040-0041).
Regarding claim 3, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1,wherein the male connector of the combined male-female connector is a USB plug or a Lightning plug, and the female connector of the combined male-female connector is a USB interface or a Lightning interface” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests known connectors which would be obvious implementation choices including at least USB (d1 para. 0055, 0059), Lightning (d2 para. 0023),
Regarding claim 4, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 3, wherein the USB plug is a Micro-B plug or a Type-C plug, and the USB interface is a Micro-B interface or a Type-C interface” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests known and obvious connector types including Micro-B and Type-C (see d2 para. 0023, d1 para. 0059).
Regarding claim 5, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1,wherein the memory chip is a UFS memory chip” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests Flash memory from which UFS is obvious (see d1 para. 0060, d2 para. 0021).
Regarding claim 6, as to the limitation “The integrated memory expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1, wherein the memory chip has a capacity ranging from 128 GB to 1 TB” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests known memory configuration including various capacity (see d3 para. 0045).
Regarding claim 7, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1, wherein the combined male-female connector, the memory chip, the current controller, and the circuit connector are each integrally formed on the mobile phone case body” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests integral formation on case (see d1 Figs. 3-5, 9-14; d2 para. 0055, 0090).
Regarding claim 8, as to the limitation “The integrated storage expansion mobile phone case according to claim 1, wherein the current controller is an integrated IC module” d1 in view of d2 in view of d3 suggests an integrated IC module (see d2 para 0055, 0090, 0109; d1 para. 0068-0069).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN SCOTT TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-3189. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs. 9:00-4:00.
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, JINSONG HU can be reached on 5712723965. 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.
/NATHAN S TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
