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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I, Species of Fig. B and claims 1-5,7-8,10-13 in the reply filed on 11-10-2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6,9 are withdrawn, furthermore claim 7 depend from claim 6 which is also withdrawn, furthermore, Group II method claims 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species/Groups, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on 05/25/2016. Applicant argued that the election was not properly established and that Kajanus does not show shared technical features of Groups I and II, which include haptic transducer, having 2 half’s, permanent magnets and coils, and swivel or elastic deforming joints.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out that this is not a rejection to do precise “item to item matching” as being done in the rejection below. “Kajanus” was used as an example prior art which as indicated in prior action, Examiner showed that Fig.1 from Kajanus shows the haptic device with magnets and coils on 2 half’s showing in fig.1, and that Kajanus has 120 on one half 104, in fig.1 and 110 in other half 102 and the elastic movement part is 106, or elastic structure which is the elastic deforming joints. It is not a detailed office action and fig.1 details along with fig.2a, 2b, and fig.3 show the technical features claimed and are not special technical features, furthermore, group II are “method” claims in class G06F3/016, and group I are apparatus claim that has some function, and are classified in class H02K33/16 as an apparatus claim. And the Group I and Group II, the technical features do no make a contribution over the cited reference, furthermore they do not make contribution over the Cho and Stryker reference as shown in the rejection below as cited art.
PNG
media_image1.png
565
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/06/2024,02/26/202406/08/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “METHOD AND ARRANGEMENT FOR PRODUCING HAPTIC EFFECT HAVING HAPTIC TRSNSDUCER WITH FIRST AND SECONDS HALVES WITH MAGNETS AND COILS ON BOTH HALVES”
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.
Claims 2-3,5-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 2-3,5-10 recite “An arrangement”. It should be “the arrangement” as it is not a first recitation device. Clarification is needed.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
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 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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1-3,5,8,10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho (US PG Pub 20200379515 hereinafter “Cho” in view of Stryker (PG Pub 20160284497 hereinafter “Stryker”).
Re-claim 1, Cho discloses an arrangement (fig.1 flexible display) for producing haptic effects (flexible display) in a user device (1, display or device, P[0004]), comprising:- a first part of the user device,(110) - a second part (120) of the user device (3,1), which second part constitutes a hand-held body (120 is bottom of cell/screen device) of the user device (3,1)- a movable attachment (200) between said first (110) and second parts (120) of the user device (3,1), for allowing a user (any person to hold device, or camera in any direction, a folded device) of the user device to hold the second part (120) by hand and move (fold the screen or device in fig.1)) the first part (110) in relation to the second part (120) during use of the user device (3,1), wherein said movable attachment (200) is a swivel joint, slide joint, or elastically deforming joint (slide, pivot,), and- a haptic transducer (P[0118],attractive force by each of magnet, see fig.12 showing arrows of attraction between magnets and coils and providing NS magnetic attraction of same or different poles) for producing haptic effects for said user during said use of the user device; wherein said haptic transducer comprises:- a first half (111_2,see fig.13) and a second half (121_2, see fig.12,see fig.14),- an arrangement of permanent magnets (MA1-MA4), of which at least a first permanent magnet (see fig.13 showing MA1) is located in said first half (fig.13) and at least a second permanent magnet (MA4) is located in said second half (Fig.14), and- at least one coil (131) located in said haptic transducer and configured to create, under influence of an electric current flowing through said coil (P[0140, current goes thru coil, electromagnet), dynamic magnetic forces (arrows in fig.12 show attractive electromagnetic forces between coils and magnets attraction, P[0142, attractive forces act between magnets, and magnets etc.) in said haptic transducer (fig.12-14); wherein said first half (111_2) is attached to said first part of the user device (110_2) and said second half (121_2) is attached to said second part of the user device (120_2); and the arrangement comprises:- - a controllable driver circuit (P[0084], controller) for generating said electric current to said coil in response to a control signal (P[141],electromagnets receive electric current to coils 131-134, and controller controls magnitude of attractive force acts, repulsive act, between electromagnets 131-134 via control signals).
Cho fails to explicitly recite a detector configured to produce a detection signal in response to the user applying to said first part a force for moving the first part in relation to the second part, and - a controller coupled to said detector and to said driver circuit, said controller configured to produce said control signal in response to receiving said detection signal.
However, Stryker teaches a detector (106) configured to produce a detection signal (P[0026], detector receives “magnetic signature, signal then engages switches as sign control signal of fig.2d) in response to the user applying to said first part a force for moving the first part in relation to the second part (user moves the device, relative movement between magnets, see P[0022], detected by detector, sensor, see end of P[0021], see P[0022]) , and - a controller (Control FET) coupled to said detector (106) and to said driver circuit (see fig.2d, FET switch is driver output to 102, see P[0033]), said controller (see fig.2c,2c) configured to produce said control signal ((see fig.2d,2c) in response to receiving said detection signal (from 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Cho wherein a detector configured to produce a detection signal in response to the user applying to said first part a force for moving the first part in relation to the second part, and - a controller coupled to said detector and to said driver circuit, said controller configured to produce said control signal in response to receiving said detection signal as suggested by Stryker to further control and digitize the device, and provide additional sensors and control to a digital device/circuit for further analysis and signal control using analog or digital means and interface and using sensors such as Hall affect sensors (P[0022],P[0033]).
PNG
media_image2.png
552
782
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
415
662
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
491
630
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
359
399
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
243
331
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
549
645
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
589
443
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 2, Cho as modified discloses An arrangement according to claim 1,
Cho as modified fails to explicitly teach wherein the second part of the user device comprises a current source for feeding said electric current into said at least one coil.
However, Stryker teaches wherein the second part of the user device (any one of 120,100) comprises a current source (104) for feeding said electric current into said at least one coil (102, see P[26]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Cho wherein the second part of the user device comprises a current source for feeding said electric current into said at least one coil as suggested by Stryker energize the electromagnet (Stryker,P026]).
Re-claim 3, Cho as modified discloses the arrangement according to claim 1, wherein said first (110) and second parts (120) and said movable attachment (200) are configured to allow said user to utilize said first part as a trigger (move first part 110, magnets and coils disconnect magnetic transfer) to be pulled by a finger (screen of laptop or screen of hand held device is typically held by hand to be opened and closed) of the same hand (typically a cell phone or a pad could be held by one hand and folded open by the same hand, or parts of table, smart phone or mobile phone held by one hand) that holds the second part (120).
Re-claim 5, Cho as modified discloses the arrangement according to claim 1.
While Cho shows haptic transducer, but no detector, therefore are different elements.
Cho fails to explicitly teach wherein said detector and said haptic transducer are different elements.
However, Stryker shows said detector (sensor 104) and said haptic transducer (transducer 100 or 120, or could be any of the parts can be coils 102) are different elements (detector is sensor 106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Cho wherein said detector and said haptic transducer are different elements as shown by Stryker energize the electromagnet and the sensor to detect magnetic signature and send Sense output signal to controller and connect to controller/output/input (Stryker,P0026]).
Re-claim 8, Cho as modified discloses the arrangement according to claim 1, wherein:- said first part (110_2) is movable in relation to said second part (120,120_2) between a released position (released position could be first position when being unfolded from folded position at fig.3, showing flat screen) and an operated position (any of positions between folded portion and fully flat position ) - in said released position (see fig.12, showing first distance, of half’s, being first distance from each other 120 from 110) the first and second halves of the haptic transducer are located at a first distance from each other (annotated fig.12), and- in said operated position (operation start from release from fig.3 to full slab look on fig.12 or vice versa, it is an operational limitation based on operation or opening and closing of the device screen, which changes based on opening need of the device screen) said first and second halves(110,120) of the haptic transducer are located at a second distance (see fig.12, and other figures 18 showing distance being longer), from each other, said second distance (see fig.18 operated position) being smaller than said first distance First distance or release after being flat in fig.12).
PNG
media_image9.png
335
343
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
534
849
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 10, Cho as modified discloses the arrangement according to claim 1, in which:- the first permanent magnet (MA9, MA10) and the second permanent magnet (MA7,MA8) have similarly named magnetic poles (N pole for each) facing each other in the permanent magnet arrangement (see fig.10 and fig.11), and- a magnetic repulsion (N to N is repulsed) between said similarly named magnetic poles pushes (P[0103], N repulsive force exists), in the absence of any intentional counteracting force caused by the user (the bending caused by the user when opening the device, screen) , the first part (110) into a released position away (as shown in fig.12) from the second part (120, fig.3 and fig.4 show folding and unfolding of the screen see P[0090-0092).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834