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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered.
3. Claims 1-10 are pending. Bolded claim language below regards newly amended subject matter with a corresponding new rejection citation. Newly amended subject matter that is not bolded does not comprise a new rejection citation (utilizes previous interpretation that is unchanged in view of the new language) or is a newly added claim.
Claim Objections
4. Applicant is advised that should claim 1 be found allowable, claims 5 and 6 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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, 3, and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Bruegl et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0162931), herein after referred to as Bruegl.
Regarding independent claim 1, Bruegl discloses a display device (Figures 10 and 12-18 display device 10.) comprising:
a display module (20) having a display panel (40) (Figure 7 display element/panel 40 as a part of the display unit/module 20.); and
a housing (30) for receiving the display module (20) (Figure 7 carrier/housing 30 depicted to surrounding each surface except the display panel 40.);
wherein the housing (30) includes a plurality of bistable elements (53) (Figure 7 depicts movement mechanism 50 coupled with housing 30. Figures 16-18 depict a variation of the movement mechanism 50 with coupling levers 53 to including predetermined buckling points 53-3 as described in paragraphs [0086]-[0087]. Figures 16 and 18 depicts one of the stable states G and figure 17 depicts when a force greater than a specified force, exampled as 5g in paragraph [0036], rotates the display to the other stable state N. An element comprising two stable states describes a bistable element.), each of the bistable elements (53) forming a respective resilient fastening element (50) disposed on each side of two opposite sides of the housing (30) (Figure 7 depicts resilient fastening elements 50 on opposite sides of the housing 30.), each of the plurality of resilient fastening elements (50) being structured such that a force (5g paragraph [0036]) acting perpendicularly (figure 16 x axis) on the display panel (40) causes a rotation of the display panel (40) of the display device (10) about an axis (y) perpendicular to two opposite sides (Figures 16-18 depicts rotation) and causes the plurality of bistable elements to flexurally buckle from a first stable state to a second stable state (Paragraphs [0036], [0086]-[0087], and [0099] describes the buckling point 53-3 in regards to the rotation motion of figures 16-18 and the use state G and non-use state N.).
Regarding claim 3, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the resilient fastening elements (50) are an integral constituent part of the housing (30) (Figures 7 and 16 depicts element 50 to be fastening 53-1 to housing 30 as described in paragraph [0066].).
Regarding claim 5, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the resilient fastening elements are bistable elements (Figures 16 and 18 depicts one of the stable states G and figure 17 depicts when a force greater than a specified force, exampled as 5g in paragraph [0036], rotates the display to the other stable state N. An element comprising two stable states describes a bistable element.).
Regarding claim 6, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 5, wherein the bistable elements implement a flexural buckling mechanism (Paragraphs [0036], [0086]-[0087], and [0099] describes the buckling point 53-3 in regards to the rotation motion of figures 16-18 and the use state G and non-use state N.).
Regarding claim 7, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 6, wherein an arm length of the bistable elements is chosen such that a resultant elastic deformation path enables a jump from a first state to a second state (Figure 17 depicts the jump state between a stable state of figure 16 and stable state of figure 18. Paragraph [0066] describes the arm of coupling elver 53 (part of element 50) is chosen to enable rotation.).
Regarding claim 8, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 7, wherein the bistable elements when jumping from the first state to the second state are stressed beyond a yield point (Paragraphs [0036], [0055], and [0080] describes a predefined minimum magnitude for buckling the element 50.).
6. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruegl in view of Araoka et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2013/0195711), herein after referred to as Araoka, and further in view of Duncan et al. (US Patent A11,363,745), herein after referred to as Duncan.
Regarding claim 4, Bruegl discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1.
Bruegl does not specifically disclose wherein the housing and the resilient fastening elements are made from a magnesium-based material.
Araoka discloses wherein resilient fastening elements/springs are made from a magnesium-based material (Paragraph [0001] describes using magnesium material for a spring for high strength bending and twisting stress products.).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the current application to enable Bruegl’s resilient fastening elements with the known technique of being made from a magnesium-based material yielding the predictable results of providing a high strength bending and twisting stress product as disclosed by Araoka (paragraph [0001]).
Duncan discloses wherein the housing are made from a magnesium-based material (Column 9 lines 29-37).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the current application to enable Nemeth’s housing with the known technique of magnesium yielding the predictable results of providing effective shielding against electromagnetic waves when housing electrical components as described by Duncan (Column 9 lines 29-37).
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 9-10 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claims 9 and 10, Nemeth et al. (US Patent 9,979,923) discloses a motor vehicle (abstract) comprising:
a display device (Figures 1A-3B reference video display system 100.), comprising:
[ ] a display panel (130) (Figures 1A-3B reference display screen 130 described in column 2 lines 49-53 to comprise multiple layers.); and
[ ];
wherein the housing (110) on two opposite sides has resilient fastening elements (140) (Figure 1A reference energy absorbing support members 140 disposed on opposite sides of 130 and 110. Column 3 lines 48-60 describes 140 as spring loaded which may be configured for resetting/returning the housing 120 and display screen 130 back to their initial position when the force 150 is no longer applied to the display screen 130 (describing 140 as resilient). Column 2 lines 47-49 describes the display screen 130 to be mounted to assembly 110 by support members 140 describing the support members 140 as fastening elements.) which are designed in such a manner that a force (150) acting perpendicularly on the display panel (130) causes a rotation of the display device about an axis perpendicular to the two opposite sides (Figures 3A-3B depicts force 150 applied perpendicularly to the display 130 causing the display 130 to rotate as described in column 4 lines 20-26.); and
[ ].
Nemeth does not specifically disclose the separation of components within the display panel/screen (130) including the housing or display panel. Please note housing 120 is described in column 2 lines 39-53 to incorporate the control systems for display screen 130.
Liu discloses wherein a display module (210) includes a display panel (205) and a housing (220) for receiving a display module (210) (Figure 2 and paragraph [0051]). Please note figures 2-3 depict a wire harness 240 of the display circuit 215 to be connected to the display adaptor 315 described in paragraph [0064] to send signals between the display and vehicle (describing a control system). This describes a similar arrangement to Nemeth wherein control systems are external to the display module, housing, and display panel.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the current application to enable Nemeth’s display module with the known technique of including a display panel; and a housing for receiving the display module yielding the predictable results of securing the display screen/panel therebetween as disclosed by Liu (paragraph [0051]).
Please note the combination enables Nemeth 130 to designate the Liu 210+205+220 effectively enabling any one of 210+205+220 (including housing 220) to be considered to including the resilient fastening elements.
However, the embodiment of Nemeth figures 1A-3B, utilized in combination with Liu, is not disclosed to be incorporated into the dashboard. Therefore, none of the cited arts disclose the above subject matter further including wherein the display device is fastened to assigned fastening points of the dashboard by the plurality of resilient fastening elements.
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered and relate towards newly amended subject matter. Newly cited art Bruegl is utilized to reject the subject matter making the arguments moot.
Please note that Bruegl is utilized for a display mounted on a roof of a vehicle and is not considered combinable in view of mounting the display in the dashboard of a vehicle. Further, Shout et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0227307) discloses a buckling mechanism 40. However, the mechanism 40 is buckling only in regards to a straight translation force and does not regard the rotation of the display. Therefore Shout is not considered combinable since the display would be unable to perform the claimed function of rotation of the housing about an axis perpendicular to the two opposite sides and causes the plurality of bistable elements to flexurally buckle.
This action is non-final.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E LEIBY whose telephone number is (571)270-3142. The examiner can normally be reached 11-7.
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 on 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E LEIBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621