Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 19/085,739

PROTECTIVE ENCLOSURE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Priority
Apr 04, 2024 — SE 2430183-0
Examiner
WU, JERRY
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Topgolf Sweden AB
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
678 granted / 991 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1026
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.7%
+18.7% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 991 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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. Claim Objections Claims 1, 11 and dependent claims are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 1, 11, “at least one hinge coupled between the lid and the base shell to enable relative pivoting thereof between open and closed states such that an interface of the hinge is within a space defined by the face edge, the rear wall, the top side, the bottom side, the left side, and the right side of the base shell” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner invite Applicant to clearly determine, at least, the limitations for “an interface of the hinge is within a space defined by the face edge, the rear wall, the top side, the bottom side, the left side, and the right side of the base shell” on the drawing with labels. 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, discussed in the above claim objections 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsu (US 20200081503). With regard claim 1, Hsu discloses An enclosure for a display screen, the enclosure (abstract, see also fig 1-12) comprising: a base shell having a face edge extending forward of a rear wall to define a top side, a bottom side, a left side and a right side (at least fig 1, the base shell on the bottom, 110; having a face edge extending forward of a rear wall to define a top side, a bottom side, a left side and a right side; rear wall on the rear side near 200;); a lid having a front cover and first and second side walls (at least fig 1, lid on top, 120, with front cover and first and second side walls; at least 4 side walls on all the sides); and at least one hinge coupled between the lid and the base shell to enable relative pivoting thereof between open and closed states (at least fig 1, compare fig 6-10; paragraph [70]-[76]) such that an interface of the hinge is within a space defined by the face edge, the rear wall, the top side, the bottom side, the left side, and the right side of the base shell (at least fig 1, compare fig 6-10; paragraph [70]-[76]; see claim objections). Regarding claim 11, Hsu further disclosed A protective enclosure, (abstract, see also fig 1-12) comprising: a base shell having a face edge extending forward of a rear wall to define a top side, a bottom side, a left side and a right side (at least fig 1, the base shell on the bottom, 110; having a face edge extending forward of a rear wall to define a top side, a bottom side, a left side and a right side; rear wall on the rear side near 200;); a lid having a front cover and first and second side walls (at least fig 1, lid on top, 120, with front cover and first and second side walls; at least 4 side walls on all the sides); and at least one hinge configured for coupling between the lid and the base shell to enable relative pivoting thereof between open and closed states (at least fig 1, compare fig 6-10; paragraph [70]-[76]) such that an interface of the hinge is within a space defined by the face edge, the rear wall, the top side, the bottom side, the left side and the right side of the base shell (at least fig 1, compare fig 6-10; paragraph [70]-[76]). Regarding claim 2, Hsu further disclosed the hinge offers a torque resisting relative pivoting of the lid and base shell (at least fig 12, paragraph [73]-[75]). Regarding claim 12, Hsu further disclosed the hinge is configured to offer a torque resisting relative pivoting of the lid and base shell (at least fig 12, paragraph [73]-[75]). Regarding claim 3, Hsu further disclosed the hinge limits a range of relative pivoting between the lid and the base shell in at least one direction (at least fig 6-8). Regarding claim 13, Hsu further disclosed the hinge is configured to limit a range of relative pivoting between the lid and the base shell in at least one direction (at least fig 6-8). Regarding claim 4, Hsu further disclosed a bezel provided to the face edge of the base shell (at least fig 1, or fig 4-6; a bezel provided to the face edge of the base shell; no label). Regarding claim 14, Hsu further disclosed a bezel configured for mating with the face edge of the base shell (at least fig 1, or fig 4-6; a bezel provided to the face edge of the base shell; no label). Regarding claim 5, Hsu further disclosed the at least one hinge further comprises a first hinge coupled between an interior surface of the rear wall of the base shell and an interior surface of the first side wall of the lid (at least fig 2-3, see also 4-6) and a second hinge coupled between the interior surface of the rear wall of the base shell and an interior surface of the second side wall of the lid (at least fig 2-3, see also 4-6; another hinge different from the first hinge). Regarding claim 15, Hsu further disclosed the at least one hinge further comprises a first hinge configured for coupling between an interior surface of the rear wall of the base shell and an interior surface of the first side wall of the lid (at least fig 2-3, see also 4-6) and a second hinge configured for coupling between the interior surface of the rear wall of the base shell and an interior surface of the second side wall of the lid (at least fig 2-3, see also 4-6; another hinge different from the first hinge). Regarding claim 6, Hsu further disclosed the at least one hinge further comprises: a knuckle coupled to the base shell through a leaf (at least fig 2-3, structure on 271, 273, 261, 263, or another hinge structure on fig 4-8); and a shaft rotatable within the knuckle and coupled to the lid (at least fig 2-3, fig 4-8; a shaft rotatable within the knuckle and coupled to the lid; no label). Regarding claim 16, Hsu further disclosed the at least one hinge further comprises: a knuckle configured for coupling to the base shell through a leaf (at least fig 2-3, structure on 271, 273, 261, 263, or another hinge structure on fig 4-8); and a shaft rotatable within the knuckle and configured for coupling to the lid (at least fig 2-3, fig 4-8; a shaft rotatable within the knuckle and coupled to the lid; no label). Regarding claim 7, Hsu further disclosed the lid is fixedly mounted to the shaft (at least fig 1-4, fig 6). Regarding claim 17, Hsu further disclosed the lid is configured for fixed mounting to the shaft (at least fig 1-4, fig 6). Regarding claims 8, 18, Hsu further disclosed a gasket surrounding the shaft (at least fig 2-3 or fig 6-8; any structure surrounding the shaft, Examiner consider as a gasket). Regarding claim 9, Hsu further disclosed relative pivoting between the lid and the base shell is limited by a tab mounted to the shaft (at least fig 2-3, or fig 6-8; any protruding tab structure mounted to the shaft) and a stationary stop mounted to the base shell (at least fig 6-8, fig 9-10; the structure to stop the pivoting). Regarding claim 19, Hsu further disclosed a tab mounted to the shaft (at least fig 2-3, or fig 6-8; any protruding tab structure mounted to the shaft) and a stationary stop mounted to the base shell are configured to limit relative pivoting between the lid and the base shell (at least fig 6-8, fig 9-10; the structure to stop the pivoting). Regarding claim 10, Hsu further disclosed the shaft extends through an opening in at least one of the left side and right side of the base shell (at least fig 1, fig 2-3; see also fig 9-11). Regarding claim 20, Hsu further disclosed the shaft is configured to extend through an opening in at least one of the left side and right side of the base shell (at least fig 1, fig 2-3; see also fig 9-11). 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 20, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12696414
TRAY AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12687889
Electronic Device and Method for Assembling Electronic Device
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12684711
CASING ASSEMBLY AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12669852
TILING ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12669869
Dynamic Packaging for a Wearable Bionsensor
1y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+20.1%)
2y 5m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 991 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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