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 .
This action is responsive to the following communication Request for continued examination (RCE) filed on 08/28/2025.
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are pending. Claims 1, 11, and 16 have been amended.
Continued Examination under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/28/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments, filed 08/28/2025, have been entered and fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant submits “independent claim 1 has been amended to clarify that the base has a plurality of receiving bores adjacent the outer perimeter and both the first and second adapters each have a plurality of pillars …… Uke’s interacting features are implemented as a closure latch that holds a split keyboard in a folded-shut position, specifically intended to prevent exposure of the keys” (Remarks, p. 10-11). However, the Examiner respectfully disagree.
The previously cited references Uke and Hosoi, both disclose the newly added claim limitations. Uke in Figs. 14A-14B and paragraph [0095] teach a plurality of pillars 115 extending downwardly from the perimeter wall of the upper housing 105 and each pillar is received within a corresponding receiving bore 120 of the base 110, and both are secured by a snap-fit. Also, Hosoi in Figs. 2, 6-7, 10 and column 5 line 23-67 disclose a plurality of pillars 27 extending downwardly from the perimeter wall of the upper housing 13 and each pillar is received within a corresponding receiving bores of the base 13 wall 26a, and both are secured by a snap-fit. Similarly, both the first and second adapters can be designed in similar way. Therefore, the Examiner maintains his rejection.
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 1-4, 6-8, 10-11, 13, 15-17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uke (US 20040085716), in the view of Jensen (US 5244296), and further in the view of Hosoi (US 5483418).
Regarding claim 1: Uke teaches a convertible keyboard (Figs. 14A-B #100) comprising: a base that defines an upper surface, an outer perimeter, and includes a plurality of receiving bores adjacent the outer perimeter; keys extending upwardly from the base upper surface and arranged inwardly of the base outer perimeter, wherein the keys are actuatable to reciprocate toward and away from the base upper surface during use and present key upper surfaces that are engaged by a user during use (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0095-0096] teach a base 110, keys extending upwardly from the base upper surface and arranged inwardly of the base outer perimeter, and includes a plurality of receiving bores 120 adjacent the outer perimeter, wherein the keys are actuatable to reciprocate toward and away from the base upper surface during use and key upper surfaces that are engaged by a user during use); a first adapter configured to be releasably secured to the base with at least portions of the first adapter arranged outwardly of the keys and aligned with the base outer perimeter, the first adapter having a first profile providing a first height dimension that overlaps a first portion of the keys when viewed in a side elevation and defining a first perimeter wall configured to align with the base outer perimeter, wherein the first adapter includes: a top wall supported by interior walls; and openings defined through the first adapter top wall; a first plurality of pillars extending downwardly from the first perimeter wall, each pillar configured to be received withing a corresponding receiving bore of the base, the engagement between the pillars and receiving bores releasable securing the first adapter to the base by at least on of: (i) snap-fit, (ii) clasp or clip, or (iii) a screw or bolt threaded engagement with the receiving bore and define a first in-use configuration with the keys exposed from above the first adapter and a second adapter configured to be releasably secured to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach a first adapter comprising combination of upper housing 105 + an overlay both are adhered together to form a first adapter configured to be releasably secured to the base, defining a first perimeter wall of 105 configured to align with the base 110 outer perimeter, wherein the first adapter 105 includes: a top wall supported by interior walls were projecting tabs 115 are located; and openings defined through the first adapter top wall for the keys, and the first adapter having a first profile a perimeter shape and/or thickness that overlaps a first portion of the keys protruding out when viewed in a side elevation, and the adapter is interchangeable with a second adapter having a different profile which is configured to be releasable secured to the base 110; a plurality of the first pillars 115 extending downwardly from the perimeter wall of the upper housing 105 and each pillar is received within a corresponding receiving bore 120 of the base 110, and both are secured by a snap-fit).
Uke in current embodiment does not explicitly disclose a second plurality of pillars extending downwardly from the second perimeter wall, each pillar configured to be received withing a corresponding receiving bore of the base, the engagement between the pillars and receiving bores releasable securing the first adapter to the base by at least on of: (i) snap-fit, (ii) clasp or clip, or (iii) a screw or bolt threaded engagement with the receiving bore and define a second in-use configuration with the keys exposed from above the second adapter; the second adapter having a second profile that is less than the first profile and providing a second height dimension that is less than the first height dimension that overlaps a second, lesser, portion of the keys when viewed in the side elevation; grouped in sets of keys with each set of keys including keys of similar function, each opening defining an opening perimeter that surrounds a corresponding set of keys when the first adapter is secured to the base; and wherein the second adapter includes; a opening bounded by the second perimeter wall and defining a continuous length and a continuous width corresponding to a surface area of the base so that all of the keys are arranged in second adapter opening when the second adapter is secured to the base.
However Uke in alternate embodiment teach the second adapter having a second profile that is less than the first profile and providing a second height dimension that is less than the first height dimension that overlaps a second, lesser, portion of the keys when viewed in the side elevation (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] discloses the different adapters (comprising combination of upper housing 105 + an overlay) with different profiles such as differ in color, pattern, texture, and perimeter shape (which can lead of different thickness), and thickness of different overlays can range from 0.3mm to 2.0mm, and a second adapter with 0.3mm overlay vs the first adapter with 2.0mm thick overlay provides profile that is less than the first profile and providing a second height dimension that is less than the first height dimension that overlaps a second, lesser, portion of the keys when viewed in the side elevation). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify first embodiment of Uke, by including the alternate teachings because having two separate adapters with two different thickness overlays allows the user to easily swap between one another much faster, allowing the user to achieve the desired keyboard profile. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Since, Uke Figs. 14A-14B and paragraph [0095] teach a plurality of pillars 115 extending downwardly from the perimeter wall of the upper housing 105 and each pillar is received within a corresponding receiving bore 120 of the base 110, and both are secured by a snap-fit, for the first adapter. Similarly, an identical securing means including a second pillars can be implemented for a not shown second adapter, since it provides a secured connection between the upper housing and the base of the keyboard.
Further, the Examiner would like to point out that, It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to design the different upper housings or adapters of Uke with different size and/or shape thickness, since it has been held that absent persuasive evidence that a particular shape of a claimed apparatus was significant, that shape is a matter of design choice that one of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). Note applicant has not provided any criticality for the claimed shape limitation.
Furthermore, Jensen teaches grouped in sets of keys with each set of keys including keys of similar function, each opening defining an opening perimeter that surrounds a corresponding set of keys when the first adapter is secured to the base (Figs. 1, 4-7 and column 5 lines 10-57 teach grouped in set of keys with each set of keys including keys of similar function, each opening defining an opening perimeter that surrounds a corresponding set of keys). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Uke’s invention by including above teachings of Jensen, because creating the openings for group of similar keys such as number keys, allows the user to easily distinguish the keys and locate them easily, as taught by Jensen.
Furthermore, Hosoi teaches wherein the second adapter includes; a opening bounded by the second perimeter wall and defining a continuous length and a continuous width corresponding to a surface area of the base so that all of the keys are arranged in second adapter opening when the second adapter is secured to the base; and a second plurality of pillars extending downwardly from the second perimeter wall, each pillar configured to be received withing a corresponding receiving bore of the base, the engagement between the pillars and receiving bores releasable securing the first adapter to the base by at least on of: (i) snap-fit, (ii) clasp or clip, or (iii) a screw or bolt threaded engagement with the receiving bore and define a second in-use configuration with the keys exposed from above the second adapter (Figs. 1-2 and column 3 line 45 to column 4 line 35 teach the second adapter 13 includes an opening bounded by the second perimeter wall with hooks 27 and defining a continuous length and width corresponding to a surface area of the base 10 so that all the keys are arranged in second adapter opening, and Figs. 2, 6-7, 10 and column 5 line 23-67 disclose a plurality of pillars 27 extending downwardly from the perimeter wall of the upper housing 13 and each pillar is received within a corresponding receiving bores of the base 13 wall 26a, and both are secured by a snap-fit). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Uke’s invention by including above teachings of Hosoi, because creating one big opening for all the keys allows minimalistic approach to the adapter which can be very easy to manufacture and requires less materials, as taught by Hosoi. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claims 2 & 3: Uke teaches wherein the base is configured to receive one of the first adapter and the second adapter at a time; and wherein the first adapter and the second adapter are configured for quick release from the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008-0010, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach a base and adapters are designed for quick release without any tools).
Regarding claim 4: Uke teaches wherein the second adapter is a low-profile adapter creating a low-profile appearance when secured to the base; and wherein the first adapter is a high-profile adapter creating a high-profile appearance when secured to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach different thickness adapters (combination of upper housing 105 and overlay) will result in a different high and low profiles, and see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claims 6 & 7: Uke teaches wherein the first adapter further comprises a first snap fit configured to releasably attach to the base; and wherein the second adapter further comprises a second snap fit configured to releasably attach to the base; and wherein the first adapter further comprises at least one clasp configured to releasably attach to the base; and wherein the second adapter further comprises a second clasp configured to releasably attach to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0049-0050, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach the plurality of first and second adapters comprising attachment means to be attached to base 110, which are deemed to be snap fitted or clasped together such as #115, #120. Further, it is merely a matter of design choice to design them via any known attachment means).
Regarding claim 8: Uke teaches wherein the first adapter further comprises: a first perimeter wall; and a first plurality of pillars extending downwardly from the perimeter wall; wherein the second adapter further comprises; a second perimeter wall; and a second plurality of pillars extending downwardly from the perimeter wall; wherein the first plurality of pillars is configured to releasably attach the first adapter to the base; and wherein the second plurality of pillars is configured to releasably attach the second adapter to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0049-0050, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach the plurality of first and second adapters comprising perimeter walls and a plurality of pillars 115 on each of the first and second adapters extending downward from the perimeter wall is configured to releasable attach to the base 110).
Regarding claim 10: Uke teaches wherein the first plurality of pillars and the second plurality of pillars further comprises one or more of at least one magnet; at least one snap fit, at least one clasp, and at least one threaded opening base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0049-0050, 0075-0077, 0095-0096]).
Regarding claim 11: Claim 11 recites similar claim limitations as in claim 1, except claim 11 is a method claim. Thus, all the arguments made above for claim 1 are applicable for claim 11.
Regarding claim 13: Uke teaches wherein the first adapter and the second adapter are releasably installed relative to the base without tools (Figs. 14A-B & paragraph [0049] and claim 10).
Regarding claim 15: Uke teaches further comprising the steps of: releasably installing the first adapter relative to a base with a plurality of keycaps; selecting a second adapter; and releasably installing the second adapter on top of the first adapter relative to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0049-0050, 0075-0077, 0095-0096], and see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 16: Claim 16 recites similar claim limitations as in claim 1. Thus, all the arguments made above for claim 1 are applicable for claim 16.
Regarding claim 17: Uke disclose wherein the first adapter is a lows-profile adapter creating a lows-profile appearance when secured to the base; wherein the second adapter is a high-profile adapter creating a high-profile appearance when secured to the base; and wherein the high-profile adapter has a greater vertical height than the low-profile adapter (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach different thickness adapters (combination of upper housing 105 and overlay) will result in a different high and low profiles, and see claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 19: Uke teaches wherein a plurality of keys is releasably connected to the base (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0006, 0012, 0017-0019, 0056-0059 teach wherein a plurality of keys that are replaceable with different keys]).
Regarding claim 20: Uke teaches further comprising a plurality of tools configured to assemble the convertible keyboard (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0009-0010, 0045-0050] teach comprising a plurality of screws and tools configured to assemble the convertible keyboard).
Regarding claim 21: Uke teaches wherein the first adapter is a high-profile adapter having a first height across the first adapter creating a high-profile appearance when secured to the base; wherein the second adapter is a low-profile adapter having a second height across the second adapter creating a low-profile appearance when secured to the base; and wherein the first height is greater than the second height (Figs. 14A-B and paragraph [0008, 0017-0021, 0075-0077, 0095-0096] teach different thickness adapters (combination of upper housing 105 and overlay) will result in a different high and low profiles, and see claim 1 rejection).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uke (US 20040085716) in the view Shim (US 20210286440).
Regarding claim 5: Uke does not explicitly disclose wherein the first adapter further comprises a first plurality of magnets configured to releasably attach to the base; and wherein the second adapter further comprises a second plurality of magnets configured to releasably attach to the base.
However, Shim teaches a keyboard overlay comprising a plurality of magnets configured to releasably attach to the base (Figs. 1, 6 and paragraph [0056-0060]). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uke’s invention by replacing snap fit mechanism of Uke with magnets as taught by Shim, because magnets allows the user to easily attach or detach the adapter from the base, as taught by Shim. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 14: Uke does not explicitly disclose further comprising the steps of: engaging a first plurality of magnets associated with the first adapter with a second plurality of magnets associated with the base; disengaging the first plurality of magnets from the second plurality of magnets associated with the base; engaging a third plurality of magnets associated with the second adapter with the second plurality of magnets associated with the base; and disengaging the third plurality of magnets from the second plurality of magnets associated with the base.
However, Shim teaches a keyboard overlay comprising a plurality of magnets configured to releasably attach to the base (Figs. 1, 6 and paragraph [0056-0060]). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uke’s invention by replacing snap fit mechanism of first and second adapters of Uke with plurality of magnets as taught by Shim, because magnets allows the user to easily attach or detach the adapter from the base, as taught by Shim. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uke (US 20040085716), in the view Hosoi (US 5483418).
Regarding claim 9: Uke does not explicitly disclose further comprising: a threaded opening formed in each of the first plurality of pillars and the second plurality of pillars; a plurality of openings formed in the base; and a plurality of screws; wherein the plurality of screws are configured to be inserted through the plurality of openings formed in the base and into the threaded openings formed in each of the first plurality of pillars and the second plurality of pillars.
However, Hosoi teaches a threaded opening formed in each of the first plurality of pillars and the second plurality of pillars; a plurality of openings formed in the base; and a plurality of screws; wherein the plurality of screws are configured to be inserted through the plurality of openings formed in the base and into the threaded openings formed in each of the first plurality of pillars and the second plurality of pillars (Figs. 1, 4, and 10 and column 4 line 40 to line 54 teach a threaded openings are formed in each of the plurality of pillars and a plurality of openings formed in the base, and a plurality of screws are inserted to secure the two top and base components together). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uke’s invention by replacing snap fit mechanism of Uke with screw mechanism as taught by Hosoi, because screws can provide very secure attaching means and are very well-known and widely used in the art, as taught by Hosoi. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uke (US 20040085716), in the view of in the view Sweetser (US 20150131852).
Regarding claim 18: Uke does not explicitly disclose further comprising a plurality of lights configured to be releasably attached to one of the bases, the first adapter and the second adapter.
However, Sweetser teaches a plurality of lights configured to be releasably attached to one of the bases, the first adapter and the second adapter (Figs. 1a-1b and paragraph [0036] teach a plurality of lights 106 detachable attached to the keyboard). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uke’s invention by including above teachings of Sweetser, because lights can provide illumination, as taught by Sweetser. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIT CHATLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1610. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 5712707230. 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.
/AMIT CHATLY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624