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 § 102
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by An (US 2011/0310055).
Regarding claim 1, An teaches vibration panel, comprising: a fixed substrate (circuit board 70); a piezoelectric device (haptic feedback actuator device 120 [0048]), located on the fixed substrate (Fig. 1), and configured to generate an inverse piezoelectric effect to generate vibration under an action of an alternating voltage signal ([0015]); and a vibration transmission structure (vibration plate 40), located on the piezoelectric device, and configured to transmit force generated during vibration of the piezoelectric device ([0049]).
Regarding claim 2, An teaches wherein the fixed substrate is a metal substrate, a glass substrate, a ceramic substrate, or a printed circuit board (circuit board 70).
Regarding claim 3, An teaches wherein the vibration transmission structure is located on a central area of the piezoelectric device (Fig. 1-3 show vibrating plate 40 being disposed on actuator 50. Since the vibrating plate cover all of actuator 50 then it is understood that the vibrating plate is located in a central area.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (US 2011/0310055) in view of Miyata (US 2018/0209838).
Regarding claim 4, An teaches the limitations as discussed above but does not teach wherein density of the vibration transmission structure is greater than 0.01 g/cm3.
However in the field of manufacturing a piezoelectric device, Miyata teaches where a piezoelectric element 2 comprises a porous layer [0045] and the density of the vibration transmission structure is greater than 0.01 g/cm3 ([0051] teaches the density of the porous layer is 0.02 g/cm3
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of manufacturing a piezoelectric device as taught by Miyata. This combination would improve protection of a piezoelectric element as taught by Miyata [0005].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (US 2011/0310055) in view of Miyata (US 2018/0209838) and Choi (US 2021/0407488).
Regarding claim 5, The combination teaches the limitations as discussed above but fails to teach wherein a material of the vibration transmission structure comprises foam tape.
However in the field of manufacturing a display deice with a vibration device, Choi teaches a method using a vibration transmission structure comprising foam tape ([0103] a first adhesive member attaches the vibration devices 500 and the display panel 110. The firs adhesive member 402 can be double-sided foam tape or single-sided foam tape.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of manufacturing a piezoelectric device as taught by Miyata and the method of manufacturing as taught by Choi. This combination would improve protection of a piezoelectric element as taught by Miyata [0005].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (US 2011/0310055) in view of Steeves (US 2011/0080347).
Regarding claim 7, An teaches the limitations as discussed above but does not explicitly teach a first adhesive layer located between the piezoelectric device and the fixed substrate; wherein the first adhesive layer is configured to connect the piezoelectric device with the fixed substrate.
However in the field of manufacturing a piezoelectric device, Steeves teaches a first adhesive layer located between the piezoelectric device and the fixed substrate ([0061] teaches the flexible PCB 700 includes any form of copper foil laminated to a resin substrate using an adhesive. Reasonable interpretation is that PCB 700 includes an adhesive); wherein the first adhesive layer is configured to connect the piezoelectric device with the fixed substrate ([0059-0060] teaches how the signal electrical connecter 408 or piezoelectric device is connected to PCB 700 through coupling structure 604).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of manufacturing a piezoelectric device. This combination would improve the tactile feedback provided to users as taught by Steeves.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (US 2011/0310055) in view of OH (US 2021/0041954).
Regarding claim 13, An teach the limitations as discussed above but fail to teach wherein a quantity of the piezoelectric devices is multiple, and all the piezoelectric devices are uniformly distributed.
However in the field of manufacturing a piezoelectric device, Oh teaches wherein a quantity of the piezoelectric devices is multiple, and all the piezoelectric devices are uniformly distributed (Figs. 17-22 show that multiple piezoelectric devices are disposed in the device VBR_M main vibrators and VBR_S sub vibrators).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of duplicating piezoelectric devices as taught by Oh. This combination produces a device capable of providing haptic feedback at any location of a device.
Regarding claim 14, Oh teaches wherein the piezoelectric devices are disposed at four corners of the fixed substrate and at a central position of the fixed substrate ((Figs. 17-22 show that multiple piezoelectric devices are disposed in the device VBR_M main vibrators and VBR_S sub vibrators. It is obvious the piezoelectric devices can be disposed at any location by rearranging the parts).
Regarding claim 15, Oh teaches wherein a plurality of rows and columns(VBR_S are arranged in rows and columns along the edges of the device) of the piezoelectric devices arranged in an array are disposed on the fixed substrate((Figs. 17-22 show that multiple piezoelectric devices are disposed in the device VBR_M main vibrators and VBR_S sub vibrators. It is obvious the piezoelectric devices can be disposed at any location including an array by rearranging the parts)..
Regarding claim 16, Oh teaches wherein at least two piezoelectric device arrangement units are disposed on the fixed substrate; wherein the piezoelectric device arrangement unit comprises four piezoelectric devices arranged in a square and one piezoelectric device in a center of the square((Figs. 17-22 show that multiple piezoelectric devices are disposed in the device VBR_M main vibrators in the center while VBR_S sub vibrators are arranged along the edges following the square shape of the device).
Regarding claim 17, Oh teaches wherein the piezoelectric devices are disposed at central positions of respective side edges of the fixed substrate. ((Figs. 17-22 show that multiple piezoelectric devices VBR_S sub vibrators are arranged along the edges following the square shape of the device).
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (US 2011/0310055) in view of Murayama (US 2008/0122315).
Regarding claim 6, An teaches the limitations as discussed above but fails to teach a fixing structure connected with a side edge of the fixed substrate; wherein the fixing structure comprises a screw or viscose.
However in the field of manufacturing a display device, Murayama teaches a manufacturing method where a fixing structure connected with a side edge of the fixed substrate; wherein the fixing structure comprises a screw or viscose ([0010] panel frame is fixed to the body substrate 501 by a screw.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of manufacturing a piezoelectric device. This combination would improve user experience by securing the components of the device.
Regarding claim 18, An teaches the limitations as discussed above but fails to teach a touch display panel stacked with the vibration panel; wherein, a touch surface of the touch display panel is far away from the vibration panel, the vibration transmission structure of the vibration panel is disposed in contact with the touch display panel, and the vibration transmission structure of the vibration panel is configured to transmit force generated by vibration of the piezoelectric device to the touch display panel, so that the touch display panel resonates to realize haptic feedback.
However in the field of manufacturing a touch input device Murayama teaches a touch surface of the touch display panel (Fig. 18 touch panel 24) is far away from the vibration panel (Fig. 18 actuator 125), the vibration transmission structure of the vibration panel is disposed in contact with the touch display panel (Fig. 18 108), and the vibration transmission structure of the vibration panel is configured to transmit force generated by vibration of the piezoelectric device to the touch display panel, so that the touch display panel resonates to realize haptic feedback [0009-0011][0066].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device as taught by An with the method of manufacturing a piezoelectric device. This combination would improve the haptic feedback provided to users as taught by Murayama.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 and 19-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 8 is objected to as allowable based on “….a flexible printed circuit located between the piezoelectric devices and located on one side of the first adhesive layer facing away from the fixed substrate; wherein the piezoelectric device is electrically connected with the flexible printed circuit through the conductive connection part.”
Claim 19 is objected to as allowable based on “….wherein a peripheral area of one side of the bottom frame facing the vibration panel is provided with a second adhesive layer, the second adhesive layer is fixedly connected with the peripheral area of the fixed substrate, and the vibration transmission structure is disposed in contact with the bottom frame.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE L MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)270-5806. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/ANDRE L MATTHEWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621