Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. It would be of great assistance to the office if all incoming papers pertaining to a filed application carried the following items:
i. Application number (checked for accuracy, including series code and serial no.).
ii. Group art unit number (copied from most recent Office communication).
iii. Filing date.
iv. Name of the examiner who prepared the most recent Office action.
v. Title of invention.
vi. Confirmation number (See MPEP § 503).
3. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
4. Claim interpretation: When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations does have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional.
5. Terminal Disclaimer filled on 08/07/2025 was approved.
Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 102
6. 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 1 & 16-17 are rejected under 35 USC 102 as being clearly anticipated by Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508).
Regarding claim 1, Kim et al discloses an electronic device, comprising: a device housing (Fig. 3B & 5); a blade assembly carrying a blade and slidably coupled to the device housing (Fig. 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 coupled to the device housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); a translation mechanism operable to slide the blade assembly relative to the device housing (Fig. 3B & 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 in the housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); one or more processors operable with the translation mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6: Processor, driving motor-665 with gear-667); wherein the one or more processors are operable to cause the translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade assembly between: an extended position where the blade extends beyond an edge of the device housing (Para. 100: Motor with gear- translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade- The gear 667 enable the flexible display 660 to slide in or out based on the driving force from the motor 665 and Para. 90: The driving structure according to an embodiment may perform a driving operation for automatically providing a slide operation (a slide in or slid-out) of the display 303 in the electronic device 101. When the user presses an open trigger button -input key 341 of FIG. 3A, exposed outward from the electronic device 101, the display 303 may automatically slide in or out) & (Para. 104 & Fig. 3B: Extended position beyond an edge of the device housing)); and a retracted position where a major surface of the blade abuts a major surface of the device housing (Fig. 3A: retracted position & Para. 90: Slide in operation); and the one or more processors cause the translation mechanism to slide to the extended position in response to one or more sensed triggers (Para. 104: The processor 620 according to an embodiment may identify a slide operation (a slide-in or slide-out operation) start event of the flexible display 660. For example, the processor 620 may identify (automatic) slide-in or slide-out start of the flexible display 660 based on the user’s pressing an open trigger button. sensed triggers-pressing an open trigger button).
Regarding claim 16, Kim et al discloses an electronic device (Fig. 3B & 5), comprising: a device housing; a blade assembly carrying a blade and slidably coupled to the device housing (Fig. 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 coupled to the device housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); a translation mechanism operable to slide the blade assembly relative to the device housing (Fig. 3B & 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 in the housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); one or more processors operable with the translation mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6: Processor, driving motor-665 with gear-667); wherein the one or more processors are operable to automatically and pre-emptively cause the translation mechanism to slide the blade assembly between: an extended position where the blade extends beyond an edge of the device housing (Para. 100: Motor with gear- translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade and Para. 90: The driving structure according to an embodiment may perform a driving operation for automatically providing a slide operation (a slide in or slid-out) of the display 303 in the electronic device 101. When the user presses an open trigger button -input key 341 of FIG. 3A, exposed outward from the electronic device 101, the display 303 may automatically slide in or out) & (Fig. 3B: Extended position beyond an edge of the device housing)); and a retracted position where a major surface of the blade abuts a major surface of the device housing (Fig. 3A: retracted position & Para. 90: Slide in operation automatic & Para. 90-104).
Regarding claim 17, Kim et al discloses the one or more processors automatically cause the translation mechanism to slide to a peek position in response to one or more triggers (Para. 90: The driving structure according to an embodiment may perform a driving operation for automatically providing a slide operation (a slide in or slid-out) of the display 303 in the electronic device 101. When the user presses an open trigger button -input key 341 of FIG. 3A, exposed outward from the electronic device 101, the display 303 may automatically slide in or out).
Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 103
7. 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 of this title, 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 2, 3 & 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508) and further in view of Chen et al (Pub No. 2024/0073313).
Regarding claim 2, Kim et al is silent regarding the one or more triggers comprise the electronic device being oriented in a landscape orientation in three-dimensional space.
Chen et al discloses the one or more triggers comprise the electronic device being oriented in a landscape orientation in three-dimensional space (Para. 167: Screen trigger to switch screen orientation in a landscape orientation) & (Para. 129 & 168).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to providing landscape orientation of the display of the device to the user for user convenience.
Regarding claim 3, Kim et al is silent regarding the one or more triggers further comprise an application operating on the one or more processors entering a full-screen, immersive mode of operation.
Chen et al discloses the one or more triggers further comprise an application operating on the one or more processors entering a full-screen, immersive mode of operation (Para. 167-168: Screen trigger to switch full screen orientation in a landscape orientation).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to providing full screen landscape orientation of the display of the device to the user for user convenience.
Regarding claim 5, Kim et al is silent regarding sensed trigger comprising input method editor operable to create one or more of an email message and/or a text message.
Chen et al discloses sensed trigger comprising input method editor operable to create one or more of an email message and/or a text message (Para. 121: Text displaying & Para. 167-168: User input screen trigger button).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use text editing display system to adjust display for the text messaging for user convenience.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508) and further in view of Gelardi et al (Pat No. 2022/0100829).
Regarding claim 6, Kim et al discloses an electronic device (Fig. 3B & 5), comprising: a device housing; a blade assembly carrying a blade and slidably coupled to the device housing (Fig. 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 coupled to the device housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); a translation mechanism operable to slide the blade assembly relative to the device housing (Fig. 3B & 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 in the housing) & (Para. 86 & 96); one or more processors operable with the translation mechanism (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6: Processor, driving motor-665 with gear-667); and an artificial intelligence classifier operable with the one or more processors (Para. 34: Artificial intelligence model with processor): wherein the one or more processors are operable to cause the translation mechanism to slide the blade assembly between: an extended position where the blade extends beyond an edge of the device housing (Para. 100: Motor with gear- translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade and Para. 90: The driving structure according to an embodiment may perform a driving operation for automatically providing a slide operation (a slide in or slid-out) of the display 303 in the electronic device 101. When the user presses an open trigger button -input key 341 of FIG. 3A, exposed outward from the electronic device 101, the display 303 may automatically slide in or out) & (Fig. 3B: Extended position beyond an edge of the device housing)); and a retracted position where a major surface of the blade abuts a major surface of the device housing (Fig. 3A: retracted position & Para. 90: Slide in operation & Para. 90 & 104).
Kim et al does not explicitly discloses triggers created by the artificial intelligence classifier.
Gelardi et al discloses screen triggers created by the artificial intelligence classifier (Para. 27-30: Screen authentication triggered and access control of the device based on classifier. Classify screen trigger based on the artificial intelligence classifier).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use artificial intelligence classifier to classify user behaviors to control screen of the device for user convenience.
Claims 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508), in view of Gelardi et al (Pat No. 2022/0100829) and further in view of Delaporte (Pat No. 11997805).
Regarding claim 7, Kim et al is silent regarding the artificial intelligence classifier is operable to generate one or more triggers causing the one or more processors to cause the translation mechanism to slide the blade assembly to the extended position.
Delaporte discloses the artificial intelligence classifier is operable to generate one or more triggers causing the one or more processors to cause the translation mechanism to slide the blade assembly to the extended position (Abstract & Claim 1: “… the flexible touch-sensitive display further includes a fully expanded unfolded state; and (b) a sensor integrated to detect and generate data from the folding motion and position of the first structural support segment in relation to the second structural support segment; and (c) an actuator attached to at least one structural support segment such that when an artificial intelligence algorithm is run on the apparatus the actuator can fold or unfold the apparatus based upon user inputs processed by the artificial intelligence algorithm”) & (Fig. 7).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to control device screen based on the user need and expend the display screen whenever necessary based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 8, Kim et al discloses triggers generated as a function of user preferences based upon manual state change trigger behaviors (Para. 90: User manually press button-341 for state change).
Regarding claim 9, Kim et al is silent regarding artificial intelligence classifier trained using weighted variables.
Delaporte discloses artificial intelligence classifier trained using weighted variables (Fig. 5: AI training state). Examiner taking official notice that artificial intelligence classifier use weighted variables for training/ learning purpose.
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to train and control device screen based on the user need and expend the display based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 10, Kim et al is silent weighted variables comprising a current foreground application.
Delaporte discloses weighted variables comprising a current foreground application (Abstract & Fig. 5: AI training state). Examiner taking official notice that artificial intelligence classifier use weighted variables for training/ learning purpose.
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to train and control device screen based on the user need and expend the display based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al is silent regarding weighted variables comprising a device orientation
Delaporte discloses weighted variables comprising a device orientation (Abstract & Fig. 5: AI training state- orientation of the device).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to train and control device screen based on the user need and expend the display based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 12, Kim et al is silent regarding weighted variables comprising an application type.
Delaporte discloses weighted variables comprising an application type (Abstract & Fig. 5: AI training state- orientation of the device & Col. 6 Line 5-25).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to train and control device screen based on the user need and expend the display based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 13, Kim et al is silent regarding weighted variables comprising an application display mode.
Delaporte discloses weighted variables comprising an application display mode (Abstract & Fig. 5: AI training state- orientation of the device & Col. 6 Line 5-25).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to train and control device screen based on the user need and expend the display based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 14, Note the rejection set forth above, Kim et al discloses a manual trigger to the extended position (Para. 90: User manually press button-341 for state change).
Regarding claim 15, Kim et al is silent regarding the artificial intelligence classifier configured to continually learn user preferences for the extended position based upon user actions and to automatically trigger the extended position.
Delaporte discloses the artificial intelligence classifier configured to continually learn user preferences for the extended position based upon user actions and to automatically trigger the extended position (Abstract & Claim 1) & (Fig. 5 & 7).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to control device screen based on the user need and expend the display screen whenever necessary based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508) and further in view of Lee et al (Pub No. 11616869).
Regarding claim 20, Kim et al is silent regarding the one or more processors preclude the blade assembly from transitioning to the peek position when a privacy mode of operation is enabled.
Lee et al discloses the one or more processors preclude the blade assembly from transitioning to the peek position when a privacy mode of operation is enabled (Col. 22 Line 35-50: Private mode and phone angle controlled).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use phone control system in a private mode for user privacy.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508) and further in view of Ma et al (Pat No. 2019/0327774).
Regarding claim 4, Kim et al is silent regarding sensed triggers exclude user input.
Ma et al discloses sensed triggers exclude user input (Para. 40: automatically trigger an opening of an operation interface on the mobile phone 200-without user input).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to providing full screen landscape orientation of the display of the device to the user for user convenience.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (Pub No. US 2023/0122508) and further in view of Delaporte (Pat No. 11997805).
Regarding claim 18, Kim et al is silent regarding the one or more triggers comprise the electronic device engaging in a voice call.
Delaporte discloses the one or more triggers comprise the electronic device engaging in a voice call (Abstract & Claim 1 & Col. 7 Line 53-66: Voice call command to expand/ the display) & (Fig. 8).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to control device screen based on the user need and expend the display screen whenever necessary based on auto feedback/ trigger.
Regarding claim 19, Kim et al is silent regarding triggers comprise an application operating on the one or more processors requesting a front-facing imager positioned beneath the blade assembly.
Delaporte discloses triggers comprise an application operating on the one or more processors requesting a front-facing imager positioned beneath the blade assembly (Abstract & Claim 1 & Fig. 7: expand the display based on the image capture of multiple people).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use AI algorithm to control device screen based on image captured by the camera and expend the display screen whenever necessary.
Response to Arguments
8. i. Applicant’s arguments, with regards to claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
ii. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues “while claim 1 initiates sliding of a blade assembly in response to one or more sensed triggers, Kim adjusts the speed of the motor-or halts its operation based upon sensed triggers. Kim therefore fails to teach each and every limitation of claim 1. Reconsideration of the rejection is respectfully requested.”
Examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant arguments because Kim either expressly or inherently discloses each and every limitations of claim 1. Kim discloses the one or more processors are operable to cause the translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade assembly between: an extended position where the blade extends beyond an edge of the device housing (Para. 100: Motor with gear- translation mechanism to automatically slide the blade. The motor 430 may have a specified diameter to provide the specified force. The gear 667 according to an embodiment may enable the flexible display 660 to slide in or out based on the driving force from the motor 665. and Para. 90: The driving structure according to an embodiment may perform a driving operation for automatically providing a slide operation (a slide in or slid-out) of the display 303 in the electronic device 101. When the user presses an open trigger button -input key 341 of FIG. 3A, exposed outward from the electronic device 101, the display 303 may automatically slide in or out) & (Fig. 3B: Extended position beyond an edge of the device housing)). Based on the user input-Trigger the automatic display slide in or out. (Para. 104: Auto slide based on a sensed trigger- processor 620 identify automatic slide-in or slide-out start of the flexible display 660 based on the user’s pressing an open trigger button).
iii. In response to applicant's argument (regarding claim 1) that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. artificial intelligence classifier can generate triggers- applicant arguments page 1) are not recited in the rejected claim. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
I ii. Regarding claim 1, On page 13, applicant argues “a blade assembly that abuts two exterior surfaces of a device housing. As described in the specification, the claimed invention employs a single, unitary device housing, with a blade assembly that wraps around and slides along opposed major surfaces and at least one minor surface of that single housing”.
Examiner respectfully disagree with the applicant arguments because Kim either expressly or inherently discloses each and every limitations of claim. Kim discloses a blade assembly carrying a blade and slidably coupled to the device housing (Fig. 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 coupled to the device housing see Para. 86 & 96); a translation mechanism operable to slide the blade assembly relative to the device housing (Fig. 3B & 5: Blade-410 slidably with gear-420 in the housing) & (Para. 86 & 96). In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. a blade assembly that wraps around and slides along opposed major surfaces and at least one minor surface) are not recited in the rejected claim. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
CONCLUSION
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to Patent Examiner Md Talukder whose telephone number is (571) 270-3222. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Th 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors, Wesley Kim can be reached on 571-272-7867.
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.
/MD K TALUKDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648