DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the above identified patent application filed on May 23, 2025. Claims 1 – 6 are pending and currently being examined.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1 – 23 are too faint (i.e. Grayscale) for publication or reproduction. Each of the figures mentioned above need to be replaced with black and white drawings. §See MPEP 608.02(VII)(B).
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (U.S. Patent Number 5,230,495) to Brackus.
Regarding claim 1, Brackus discloses an accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) for attachment to a vehicle for detachably attaching and securely holding an accessory electronic device, the accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) comprising:
an elongated extension portion (12) with two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1) adapted to rigidly engage with portions of a vehicle's dashboard (See Figure 3); and
an accessory electronic device holder mounting portion (20) spaced away from the two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1), which device holder mounting portion (20) is adapted to engage (i.e. via Mounting Holes (22) in Figure 1) with an accessory electronic device caddy that physically retains an accessory electronic device (i.e. Cellular Phone) (See Column 2, lines 50 – 55).
Regarding claim 2, Brackus discloses wherein the two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1) extend from the elongated extension portion (12) and have mounting holes (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1), which mounting holes (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1) attach with screws to preexisting screw mounting holes in the vehicle (See Figure 3).
Regarding claim 6, Brackus discloses a method for equipping a vehicle with an accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) for detachably attaching and securely holding an accessory electronic device, the method comprising:
providing an accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) comprising an elongated extension portion (12) with two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1) adapted to rigidly engage with portions of a vehicle's dashboard (See Figure 3) and an accessory electronic device holder mounting portion (20) spaced away from the two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1), which device holder mounting portion (20) is adapted to engage (i.e. via Mounting Holes (22) in Figure 1) with an accessory electronic device caddy that physically retains an accessory electronic device (i.e. Cellular Phone) (See Column 2, lines 50 – 55) ;
affixing the accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) to the vehicle with the two spaced apart attachment positions (i.e. via Left & Right (14) in Figure 1); and
attaching the accessory electronic device caddy to the accessory electronic device holder mounting portion (20) of the accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) (See Figures 1 – 9).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (U.S. Patent Number 5,230,495) to Brackus in view of (U.S. Patent Number 6,428,072 B1) to Moore.
Regarding claim 3, Brackus does not explicitly disclose further comprising clips that mount to preexisting screw mounting position in a vehicle’s dashboard, which clips have slotted mounting apertures at first ends for screw attachment to the vehicle and screw holes at second ends for screw attachment to the two spaced apart attachment positions of the elongated extension portion of the accessory electronic device holding bracket.
Moore teaches the bracket (70) further comprising clips (i.e. Left & Right (70C) in Figures 5A & 5B) that mount to preexisting screw mounting position in a vehicle’s dashboard, which clips have slotted mounting apertures (i.e. Upper Left & Right Slotted Apertures of (70C) in Figures 5A & 5B) at first ends (i.e. Top Upper End Portion of (70C) in Figures 5A & 5B) for screw (18A) attachment to the vehicle and screw holes (i.e. Lower Left & Right Rounded Holes adjacent (70D) in Figures 5A & 5B) at second ends (i.e. Bottom Lower End Portion of (70D) in Figures 5A & 5B) for screw (18A) attachment to the two spaced apart attachment positions of the elongated extension portion (i.e. Angled Side Portion of (70) in Figures 5A & 5B) of the accessory electronic device holding bracket (70) (See Figures 5A & 5B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make clips that mount to preexisting screw mounting position in a vehicle’s dashboard, which clips have slotted mounting apertures at first ends for screw attachment to the vehicle and screw holes at second ends for screw attachment to the two spaced apart attachment positions of the elongated extension portion of the accessory electronic device holding bracket as taught by Moore with the accessory electronic device holding bracket of Brackus in order to provide securing to the bracket in various desired locations (See Column 5, lines 7 – 17).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (U.S. Patent Number 5,230,495) to Brackus in view of (U.S. Patent Number 3,722,843) to Enckler.
Regarding claim 4, Brackus does not explicitly disclose further comprising a power cord (40) adapted to electrically connect with electrical power lines or cables in the dash area of the vehicle, which power cord is connected to either the accessory electronic device caddy which holds an accessory electronic device or directly to an accessory electronic device.
Enckler teaches a power cord (40) adapted to electrically connect with electrical power lines or cables in the dash area of the vehicle, which power cord (40) is connected to either the accessory electronic device caddy which holds an accessory electronic device or directly to an accessory electronic device (See Column 1, lines 34 – 40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make a power cord adapted to electrically connect with electrical power lines or cables in the dash area of the vehicle, which power cord is connected to either the accessory electronic device caddy which holds an accessory electronic device or directly to an accessory electronic device as taught by Enckler with the accessory electronic device holding bracket of Brackus in order to connect to portable electronic articles (See Column 1, lines 38 & 39).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (U.S. Patent Number 5,230,495) to Brackus in view of (U.S. Patent Number 4,094,486) to Sunderlin.
Regarding claim 5, Brackus lacks and does not explicitly discloses further comprising a grasping handle that extends from the device holder mounting portion.
Sunderlin teaches an accessory electronic device holding bracket (10) further comprising a grasping handle (68 & 70) that extends from the device holder mounting portion (30) (See Column 3, line 16 – 21) (See Figures 1, 2 & 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to make a grasping handle that extends from the device holder mounting portion as taught by Sunderlin with the accessory electronic device holding bracket of Brackus in order to allow the user to easily grasp the gripping section to lock or release the bracket in place (See Column 3, lines 19 – 21).
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 LESTER L VANTERPOOL whose telephone number is (571)272-8028. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathan J. Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/L.L.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
