The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of election of species in the reply filed on 9/16/25 is acknowledged. Therefore, Examiner will exam elected embodiment and associated claims.
In addition, Examiner further determined the following claims belong to non-elected embodiments: (Therefore, these claims are withdrawn from consideration)
Claims 14, 21-26: limitations in claim 14 only found in fig 2 or fig 3. Claims 21-26 drawn to a computer system with processor, communications, protocol, trigger time interval, and threshold frequency which only belongs to fig 1 with a big system comprising computer (100), multiple wearable devices (11, 13, 15).
Claim 31: Belongs to other embodiments such as Figure 14.
Examiner’s note: Examiner suggest Applicant to review all other dependent claims and withdraw the claims which are based on the non-elected claims (see the following unclear limitations discussed in objections).
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 5 and dependent claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 4, “the second sensor is configured to detect signals from an environment of the user” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner respectively require applicant to clarify what the environment of the user is? Is that user’s cloth, glasses, or any wearable items on user’s body. If Applicant tried to claim any environment where the user may go, a further amendment for the limitations is required.
In claim 5, “the first surface and the second surface being co-planar when in an unfolded configuration and stacked one above each other when in a folded configuration” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required. Examiner respectively request Applicant to specify what are the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd substrate, as the SPEC also failed to determine these important limitations. In addition, there is no way for “the first surface and the second surface being co-planar and stacked one above each other when in a folded configuration”. If Applicant can’t clearly determine the claimed limitations on the drawing, a 112 rejection may be applied in the next office action.
The Examiner respectfully requests that the Applicant(s) review all claims for any such similar issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, and/or discussed in the above claim objections must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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.
(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, 4-6, 11-12, 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20200366770).
With regard claim 1, Kim discloses A foldable sensor device (abstract, see also fig 1-8) comprising: a first substrate having a first sensor (at least fig 1, fig 2, fig 6, any one of 210/220/230 are substrates and any sensors for any input information such as optical, sound, fingerprint, pressure etc.); a second substrate having a second sensor (at least fig 1, fig 2, fig 6, any one of 210/220/230 are substrates and any sensors for any input information such as optical, sound, fingerprint, pressure etc., see also fig 1); and a first join member connecting (at least fig 1, fig 2, fig 6, joint members for 210/220/230; or hinges) the first substrate and the second substrate such that the first substrate and the second substrate are foldable relative to each other to form a folded configuration having multiple layers with the first substrate stacked relative to the second substrate (see fig 5).
With regard claim 4, Kim further discloses the first sensor is configured to detect signals from a user of the foldable sensor device (as discussed above: optical, sound, fingerprint, pressure etc., see also fig 1) and the second sensor is configured to detect signals from an environment of the user (as discussed above: optical, sound, fingerprint, pressure etc., see also fig 1), and wherein the first sensor faces away from the second sensor (see all the sensors shown in fig 1; paragraph [33]-[35], [39-41]).
With regard claim 5, Kim further discloses the first sensor is positioned on a first surface of the first substrate and the second sensor is positioned on a second surface of the second substrate, the first surface and the second surface being co-planar when in an unfolded configuration and stacked one above each other when in a folded configuration, with the first surface facing away from the second surface.
With regard claim 6, Kim further discloses at least a portion of one or both of the first sensor and the second sensor are formed within a first body of the first substrate or a second body of the second substrate (at least paragraph [33]-[35], [39-41], see also fig 5, fig 6, the whole device comprising at least 3 substrates and all the sensors are formed within the body, at least partially).
With regard claim 11, Kim further discloses the first sensor comprises one or more of a vibroacoustic sensor, a PPG/SpO2 sensor, and an electric potential sensor (at least fig 1, paragraph [71]-[74], more than one sensor is qualified; all the sensors output electric potential or receive electric potential due to the outside signals such as voice, optical, pressure etc.).
With regard claim 12, Kim further discloses the second sensor comprises one or more of a pressure sensor, a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, a light sensor, and an IMU (at least fig 1, paragraph [71]-[74], more than one sensor is qualified; all the sensors output electric potential or receive electric potential due to the outside signals such as voice, optical, pressure etc.).
With regard claim 27, Kim further discloses one or both of the first substrate and the second substrate comprises at least one connector for connecting at least one additional substrate thereto (paragraph [71]-[75]).
With regard claim 28, Kim further discloses a third substrate connected to the first substrate or to the second substrate by a second join member such that the second join member permits stacking of the first substrate, the second substrate and the third substrate (at least fig 5, 3 stacking of substrates with join member or hinge, 261/262).
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.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20200366770)
With regard claim 31, the primary art and/or the modified structure discussed in the preceding claim disclosed all the subject matter except for a height of the foldable sensor device is less than about 15 mm high.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time and/or before the effective filing date the invention was made to have a height of the foldable sensor device is less than about 15 mm high, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. The motivation to modify the previous discussed structure with the current feature (size/high) is to provide a smaller form factor of the modified device and/or enhance the looking of the device.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20200366770) in view of further in view of Examiner’s Official Notice (EON) .
Regarding claim 29 The primary art and/or the modified structure discussed in the preceding claim disclosed all the subject matter except for the first substrate, the second substrate and the third substrate are foldable so that the third substrate is sandwiched between the first substrate and the second substrate.
However, Examiner take official notice (EON) that the above limitations (the first substrate, the second substrate and the third substrate are foldable so that the third substrate is sandwiched between the first substrate and the second substrate) are well known.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to include this feature (the first substrate, the second substrate and the third substrate are foldable so that the third substrate is sandwiched between the first substrate and the second substrate) and modify to previous discussed structure. The motivation to modify the previous discussed structure with EON feature is to further provide more display positions for the modified structure.
Examiner’s note: the above modification only require a wider range of the hinge rotations (more than 180 degree) which is well known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5420. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP: M-Th: 8:30-12:30; 2:30-8:30pm.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571.270.5528. 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.
/JERRY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841