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 .
Amendment filed 8/4/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5-8 and 21-27 remain pending in the present application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5-8, 21-25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wakitani US 8215483 (hereinafter Wakitani).
Re. Cl. 1, Wakitani discloses: A standing remote sleeve (100, Fig. 5a), comprising: a body having a front (see Fig. 5a, where 114 and 116) and a back (see Fig. 5b), two opposing sides (see Fig. 5a), a top (with 120, Fig. 5a), and a bottom (with 122, Fig. 5); a first compartment disposed within the body and configured to accept a remote (see Fig. 8, where remote 14 is located); and wherein: at least the back, the two sides, and the bottom wrap around the contours of an accepted remote onto a portion of a front of the remote (see Fig. 8a); the bottom is configured such that the front of the remote is positioned at a predetermined angle in the range of 70-90 degrees with respect to a flat surface when the base is in stationary contact with the surface (see Fig. 9, the flat bottom surface of the sleeve as shown would enable the positioning claimed in the claimed intended use when the bottom is rested upon a flat horizontal surface; it is the Examiner’s position that on a flat horizontal surface, the remote 14 would be at a perpendicular angle to the flat horizontal surface).
Re. Cl. 5, Wakitani discloses: a cavity disposed within the body and configured to accept at least one tracking device (see 122, Fig. 6e and 8 in the back of 100, due to the flexibility of the material of 100, the cavity 122 is configured to accept a tracking device between remote 14 and sleeve 100),the cavity comprising locating features configured to retain an accepted tracker in a predetermined orientation relative to the body (due to the material of the sleeve 100 (i.e. silicon rubber in Col. 8, Lines 46-50) and the surface of 14, a tracker could be located and retained therein between the locating features (i.e. surface of 14 and material properties of 100)).
Re. Cl. 6, Wakitani discloses: the cavity is configured to orient an accepted tracking device such that a sound emitted by the tracking device is generally directed towards a back of the body thereby increasing a volume of the emitted sound in a vicinity of the standing remote sleeve (see Fig. 6e, the cavity opens to the back of the sleeve 100 and therefore would function as claimed).
Re. Cl. 7, Wakitani discloses: the standing remote sleeve further comprises at least one of a bottom cut-out speaker channel (120, Fig. 6d in the back of 100) and a side cut-out speaker channel thereby increasing a volume of the emitted sound in a vicinity of the standing remote sleeve.
Re. Cl. 8, Wakitani discloses: the cavity is configured to accept a first tracking device and a second tracking device that is different from the first tracking device (see Fig. 6e and 8, due the flexible material of 100, the cavity 122 is configured to accept two tracking devices, having slightly different configurations as claimed in the claimed intended use).
Re. Cl. 21, Wakitani discloses: the body comprises a silicone material (silicon rubber, Col. 8, Lines 46-50).
Re. Cl. 22, Wakitani discloses: the body comprises an opening (114, 116, Fig. 5a) in the front that provides access to a button of the remote, the opening having a width that is less than a width of the front (see Fig. 8a).
Re. Cl. 23, Wakitani discloses: the body comprises an opening in the top (120, Fig. 8a) that allows the functionality of an infrared sensor of the remote to communicate with an infrared receiver, the opening having an width that is less than a width of the top (see Fig. 8a, the opening 120 would enable for an infrared sensor to communicate as claimed in the claimed intended use).
Re. Cl. 24, Wakitani discloses: the bottom is configured such that the front of the remote is positioned at an angle of approximately 80 degrees with respect to a flat surface when the base is in stationary contact with the surface (see Fig. 9d-e, the bottom is configured to be used as claimed in the claimed intended use by resting on a flat horizontal structure where the remote is perpendicular to that surface).
Re. Cl. 25, Wakitani discloses: the bottom comprises a widened base extending toward the back (see Fig. 6d).
Re. Cl. 27, Wakitani discloses: the widened base comprises a cavity configured to accept at least one tracking device (122, Fig. 6c, e), the cavity comprising locating features configured to retain an accepted tracker in a predetermined orientation relative to the body (see Fig. 6c, e; due to the material of the sleeve 100 (i.e. silicon rubber in Col. 8, Lines 46-50) and the surface of 14, a tracker could be located and retained therein between the locating features (i.e. surface of 14 and material properties of 100)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakatani.
Re. Cl. 26, Wakatani discloses the widened base has a front to back depth that is greater than a maximum separation distance between the front and the back adjacent to an opening in the front that provides access to a button of the remote (see Fig. 6d, the base or bottom widens in a curved manner which is greater than a front to back distance of the top portion near opening 114 as shown). However, Wakatani does not explicitly disclose that the widening is at least 30 percent greater as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the device of Wakatani to have its base widened as claimed as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 5-8 and 21-27 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Butler US 4824059, Clark US 2008/0121541, Hodges US 2005/0098456, and Le Blanc US 5305980 disclose other known remote sleeves presented to the Applicant for their consideration.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER E GARFT whose telephone number is (571)270-1171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m..
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at (571)272-4797. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GARFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights