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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 6/16/2023, 9/09/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are directed towards newly amended claim language, and furthermore, are not persuasive.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
Applicant contends that the cited prior art fails to disclose newly amended limitations of independent claim 1, including: “that fixes the display to an inner wall of a first open section of a fixing target”.
See the rejection below for how the cited art in light of new/existing references reads on the newly amended language as well as the examiner’s interpretation of the cited art in view of the presented claim set.
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 (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 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, 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 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(s) 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nemeth (US9979923B1) (hereinafter Nemeth) in view of Tuccinardi et al. (US 7597393 B1) (hereinafter Tuccinardi) in view of Larry et al. (US 20160368379 A1) (hereinafter Larry).
Regarding claim 1, Nemeth discloses:
A display device, comprising:
a display including a display surface; and [See Nemeth, Fig. 1a illustrates a display with display surface (130).]
in a state in which the display device is fixed to the fixing target, when an impactor moves on a center line that passes through a center of a display region of the display and that is perpendicular to the display region, and impacts the display surface on a center line, a rigidity to impact of the display device is asymmetrical, and [See Nemeth, Figs. 5a and 5b as well as col. 3 line 61 – col. 4 line 37 illustrate aspects of the energy absorbing member. When subjected to impact force 150, energy absorbing support members 140 can absorb a portion of impact force 152 such that the remainder 154 of impact force 150 is less than the shatter threshold of display screen 130; See Nemeth, 3a-3b and col. 3 lines 27-60 discloses one or more of the support members (140) which make up “the display device” may be configured to deform/compress/collapse in response to a given impact force vector. Since each support may be selectively configured to absorb a given amount of impact force, one of ordinary skill would understand an “asymmetric” distribution of an impact force load (as corresponding with a “rigidity to impact”) as being associated with the given deformation/compression/collapse degrees of each support member.]
Nemeth does not appear to explicitly disclose:
wherein the holder includes a second open section,
when viewed from above, a position of the center of the display region is offset from a position of a center of an opening, on a side of the display, of the second open section, and a minimum width in one direction of the second open section is less than a maximum width in the one direction of the impactor.
However, Tuccinardi discloses:
wherein the holder includes a second open section, [See Tuccinardi, Figs. 15a-b and 16a-b illustrate opening (550) or “recess”, wherein the opening defines an offset between the display region and the center of the recess.]
when viewed from above, a position of the center of the display region is offset from a position of a center of an opening, on a side of the display, of the second open section, and a minimum width in one direction of the second open section is less than a maximum width in the one direction of the impactor. [See Tuccinardi, Fig. 15a, 15b element 550 illustrates an opening, and Figs. 16a, 16b illustrate an opening with respect to the dimensions of “impactor” and display regions.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Nemeth to add the teachings of Tuccinardi in order to provide a dedicated open space into which a deforming force may be absorbed by one or more energy dissipating members.
Nemeth in view of Tuccinardi does not appear to explicitly disclose:
a holder that is provided on a surface of a side opposite the display surface of the display, and that fixes the display to an inner wall of a first open section of a fixing target,
However, Larry discloses:
a holder that is provided on a surface of a side opposite the display surface of the display, and [See Larry, Fig. 2 illustrates a “holder” provided on a surface of a side opposite of a display surface (32).] that fixes the display to an inner wall of a first open section of a fixing target, [See Larry, Fig.s 2 illustrates said “holder” (elements 20/44) which fixes the display to an inner side of a “fixing target” 60; See Larry, ¶ 0025 discloses that the base 44 and/or the attachment portion 22 may be configured to deform during impact, e.g., during a vehicle 12 collision, to absorb energy from an occupant of the vehicle 12 that impacts the display unit 10 during the vehicle 12 collision. The base 44 and/or the attachment portion 22 may deform at a bend between the base 44 and the attachment portion 22.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Nemeth in view of Tuccinardi to add the teachings of Larry in order to enable attachment of a display at a plurality of attachment portions (Larry, para. 0022.)
Regarding claim 3, Nemeth discloses:
A display device, comprising:
a display including a display surface; and [See Nemeth, Fig. 1a illustrates a display with display surface (130).]
in a state in which the display device is fixed to the fixing target, when an impactor moves on a center line that passes through a center of a display region of the display and that is perpendicular to the display region, and impacts the display surface on the center line, a rigidity to impact of the display device is asymmetrical, and [See Nemeth, Figs. 5a and 5b as well as col. 3 line 61 – col. 4 line 37 illustrate aspects of the energy absorbing member. When subjected to impact force 150, energy absorbing support members 140 can absorb a portion of impact force 152 such that the remainder 154 of impact force 150 is less than the shatter threshold of display screen 130; See Nemeth, 3a-3b and col. 3 lines 27-60 discloses one or more of the support members (140) which make up “the display device” may be configured to deform/compress/collapse in response to a given impact force vector. Since each support may be selectively configured to absorb a given amount of impact force, one of ordinary skill would understand an “asymmetric” distribution of an impact force load (as corresponding with a “rigidity to impact”) as being associated with the given deformation/compression/collapse degrees of each support member.]
Tuccinardi discloses:
wherein the holder includes a recess on a surface opposing the display, [See Tuccinardi, Figs. 15a-b and 16a-b illustrate opening (550) or “recess”, wherein the opening defines an offset between the display region and the center of the recess.]
when viewed from above, a position of the center of the display region is offset from a position of a center of an opening of the recess, and a minimum width in one direction of the recess is less than a maximum width in the one direction of the impactor. [See Tuccinardi, Fig. 15a, 15b element 550 illustrates an opening, and Figs. 16a, 16b illustrate an opening with respect to the dimensions of “impactor” and display regions.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 1.
Larry discloses:
a holder that is provided on a surface of a side opposite the display surface of the display, [See Larry, Fig. 2 illustrates a “holder” provided on a surface of a side opposite of a display surface (32).] and that fixes the display to an inner wall of a first open section of a fixing target, [See Larry, Fig.s 2 illustrates said “holder” (elements 20/44) which fixes the display to an inner side of a “fixing target” 60; See Larry, ¶ 0025 discloses that the base 44 and/or the attachment portion 22 may be configured to deform during impact, e.g., during a vehicle 12 collision, to absorb energy from an occupant of the vehicle 12 that impacts the display unit 10 during the vehicle 12 collision. The base 44 and/or the attachment portion 22 may deform at a bend between the base 44 and the attachment portion 22.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Nemeth in view of Tuccinardi in view of Larry discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Tuccinardi discloses:
when viewed from above, the holder includes a first portion and a second portion that oppose each other with the second open section therebetween and that are formed from materials having mutually different rigidities. [See Tuccinardi, Figs. 16a, 16b illustrate a first portion 542 and second portion 544 separated by an open section 550; See Tuccinardi, col. 6 lines 37 – 50 discloses that a variety of materials may be used to form a screen cover.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 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 reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 EST.
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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights