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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, Species 2, Claims 8-15, 26, and 27 in the reply filed on 3/2/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0055]: “As illustrated in FIG. 11, when the electronic device is in the closed orientation, the sliding mechanism 160 has a first distance…” should be replaced with “As illustrated in FIG. 11, when the electronic device is in the opened orientation, the sliding mechanism 160 has a first distance…” to be consistent with the rest of the specification.
Paragraph [0056]: “As illustrated in FIG. 12, when the electronic device is in the opened orientation…” should be replaced with “As illustrated in FIG. 12, when the electronic device is in the closed orientation…” to be consistent with the rest of the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“sliding mechanism” (claims 13-15)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim limitations “means for rotating” (claims 26-27), “means for changing” (claims 26-27), “means for passively stopping” (claim 27) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim or no association between the structure and the function can be found in the specification. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(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 8-13, 15, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (US 12,537,888), herein referred to as ‘888.
For Claim 8, ‘888 discloses a hinge for a foldable portable electronic device, the hinge comprising:
a gear set (17, 18) having an axis of rotation;
a first pair of rotational arms (Annotated Figure 17: 153A, 153B) coupled to the gear set; and
a first guide set (Annotated Figure 17: 152A, 152B) coupled to the first pair of rotational arms (153A, 153B) and capable of being coupled to a display (400) of the foldable portable electronic device, the first guide set (152) having a first guide (Annotated Figure 17: 152A) on a first side of the axis of rotation and a second guide (152B) on a second side of the axis of rotation,
wherein the gear set (17, 18) is to rotate the first pair of rotational arms (153A, 153B) and the first guide set (152A, 152B) about the axis of rotation to move the foldable portable electronic device between an opened orientation (Figure 9A) and a closed orientation (Figure 9B), the first guide (152A) and the second guide (152B) angled relative to each other in the closed orientation (as seen in Figures 9B and 11) to cause a first end of the display and a second end of the display to be separated a first distance and a middle portion of the display to define a gap of a second distance greater than the first distance (as seen in Figure 9B).
For Claim 9, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 8, further including a second pair of rotational arms (as seen in Figures 10-11 showing a second half of the hinge on the right side that is mirror symmetrical of the half of the hinge on the left side).
For Claim 10, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 9, further including a second guide set coupled to the second pair of rotational arms and couplable to the display of the foldable portable electronic device, the second guide set having a third guide on the first side of the axis of rotation and a fourth guide on the second side of the axis of rotation (as seen in Figures 10-11 showing a second half of the hinge on the right side that is mirror symmetrical of the half of the hinge on the left side).
For Claim 11, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 10, wherein the gear set (17, 18) is further to rotate the second pair of rotational arms and the second guide set about the axis of rotation to move the foldable portable electronic device between the opened orientation and the closed orientation, the third guide and the fourth guide angled relative to each other in the closed orientation to cause the first end of the display and the second end of the display to be separated the first distance and the middle portion of the display to define the gap of the second distance greater than the first distance (as seen in Figures 10-11 showing a second half of the hinge on the right side that is mirror symmetrical of the half of the hinge on the left side)..
For Claim 12, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 8, wherein the gear set (17, 18) is to cause the foldable portable electronic device to have a first thickness in the opened orientation (Figure 9A) and a second thickness in the closed orientation (Figure 9B), the second thickness greater than the first thickness, the second thickness substantially uniform (as seen in Figures 9A, 9B, 11).
For Claim 13, ’888 discloses the hinge of claim 8, further including a sliding mechanism (151) capable of modifying a force applied to the display between the opened orientation and the closed orientation.
For Claim 15, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 13, wherein the sliding mechanism (151) is capable of providing a tensile force to a top of the display in the opened orientation (as seen in Figure 31).
For Claim 26, as best understood, ‘888 discloses a hinge for a foldable electronic device, the hinge comprising:
means (152A, 152B) capable of guiding a display of the foldable electronic device between an opened orientation (Figure 9A) and a closed orientation (Figure 9B);
means (153A, 153B) capable of rotating the guiding means about an axis of rotation; and
means (151) capable of changing a force applied to the display as the display is guided between the opened orientation and the closed orientation (as seen in Figure 31),
wherein the force changing means (151) is operatively coupled to the rotating means (153A, 153B), and
wherein in the closed orientation (Figure 9B), the guiding means causes the display (400) to have a waterdrop cross-sectional shape (as seen in Figure 9B).
For Claim 27, as best understood, ‘888 discloses the hinge of claim 26, further including means (Figure 33: 301) capable of passively stopping the rotating means.
PNG
media_image1.png
771
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: ‘888 does not teach or render obvious wherein the sliding mechanism provides a compressive force to a top portion of the display and a tensile force to a bottom portion of the display in the closed orientation, and the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof, of the 112(f) limitations outlined above, as required by dependent claim 14. These limitations, in combination with all the other limitations of claims 8, 13, and 14, define over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0431053 teaches a similar hinge that is pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure, but has not been relied upon in the current rejection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey O'Brien whose telephone number is (571)270-3655. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7-5:30.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
/Jeffrey O'Brien/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights