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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0167739 to Reyes (Ref. 1 hereafter).
Referring to claim 1, Ref. 1 discloses a consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis (24, Fig. 1a) comprising: one or more input devices (keyboard, not numbered), adjacent to electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding material (“shielding” – [0040]).
Although Ref. 1 does not expressly teach the one or more input devices and electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding material heat staked with a plurality of plastic heat stakes to a printed circuit board (PCB), Official Notice is taken that it is well-known in the art of electronic devices to utilize heat staking to provide a secure, vibration-resistant attachment of electronic components to a plastic housing.
As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ref. 1 to include a plurality of plastic heat stakes for securing a PCB (12, Fig. 4a) and EMI shielding to the plastic housing to eliminate high frequency vibration during manufacture.
Ref. 1 also discloses wherein the printed circuit board (12) is removably attached to the consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis (24), but does not expressly teach the use of a plurality of metal screws connecting to a plurality of plastic threaded inserts (Use EQUIVILANCY).
Likewise, Ref 1. discloses wherein the consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis (24) comprises a plurality of plastic buttons (i.e., “push-release” 16, Fig. 2, [0029]) molded onto a first channel (above 28, Fig. 2), wherein the plurality of plastic buttons (16) are sized, shaped, and configured to snap into a slot (19) of a lower cover (i.e., locking buttons can be reversed on side walls 26/28, see [0027]) to securely lock the consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis (24) into lower cover (22) as the first channel (above 28) of the plastic chassis (24) slides between a plastic part (inside wall of 26) and the lower cover (22), wherein the plastic part and the lower cover (22) optionally are ultrasonically welded together ([0029]), wherein a power source (15, Fig. 6) is held in position in a second channel (not shown) of the consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis (24).
Lastly, although the following limitations are not taught in Ref. 1:
(a) the second channel has a plastic tab, wherein the plastic tab optionally has a molded-in wire channel;
(b) wherein one or more optional audio output devices are removably mounted to consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis with one of metal screws and plastic inserts (109); and
(c) wherein one or more optional seamless optical input devices are removably mounted directly to the consolidated plastic human-machine interface (HMI) chassis by snap fit, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well-known in the art of electronic devices having plastic housings to include such elements for (1) holding wire; (2) removable holding audio devices (e.g., speakers); and (3) removable holding optical devices (e.g., cameras) more easily with snap-fitting holders to the plastic housing.
As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ref. 1 to include such to easily connect and remove the elements as needed.
Referring to claim 2, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the one or more input devices are selected from the group consisting of a keyboard, a track pad, an optical scanner, a camera, and a microphone. See trackpad of Fig. 2.
Referring to claim 3, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the power source comprises a battery (16). See Figs. 5.
Referring to claim 4, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the one or more optional audio output devices comprise speakers. See the rejection to claim 1 above.
Referring to claim 5, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the one or more optional seamless optical input devices comprise a camera. See the rejection to claim 1 above.
Referring to claim 6, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the plastic comprises a thermoplastic (see [0039]).
Referring to claim 7, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 6, wherein the thermoplastic comprises polycarbonate (see [0039]).
Referring to claims 8-10, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 7, but does not expressly teach the polycarbonate is homopolycarbonate, thermally conductive polycarbonate, or contains a filler selected from the group as claimed.
However, it is recognized in the art of plastic enclosure device housings to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have utilized a homopolycarbonate, thermally conductive polycarbonate, or one of the fillers from the group as claimed for the housing of Ref. 1, based on the specific needs and environments in which the device is used.
Referring to claim 11, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding material is selected from the group consisting of metals, conducting plastics, and conducting polymers (see [0040]).
Referring to claim 12, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis of claim 1, wherein the human-machine interface (HMI) is included in one selected from the group consisting of a laptop computer (emphasis by the Examiner), a tablet computer, a notebook computer, a desktop computer, a television, a gaming device, an advertising display, a battery, a monitor, a camera, a server, an access control, point of sale equipment, an e-reader, a projector, a thermostat, a home automation portal, a kitchen appliance, an automotive part, a healthcare device, a surgical device, a smart hub, a mobile phone, a GPS receiver, a transceiver, a remote control, a head lamp, control electronics, a router -WLAN or LAN, a wired or wireless access point, and an electrical power source. See Figs. 1-6.
Referring to claim 13, Ref. 1 as modified, discloses the HMI chassis as substantially claimed in claim 1, but does not expressly teach the process of recycling the device. However, it is well settled that the presence of process limitations in product claims, which product does not otherwise distinguish over the prior art, cannot impart patentability to said product. In re Johnson, 157 USPQ 670, 1968.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have utilized the claimed process in order to meet the standards required for recycling.
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 ANTHONY Q EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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 at 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 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.
/Anthony Q Edwards/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
January 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights