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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 07/07/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US 11839810, US 11826642, US 11389721 and App. No. 18/945830 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 includes the introduction of new matter that was not adequately described in the specification as filed. Specifically, the limitation of claim 11 reciting “wherein the game controller is configured such that the bridge and the magnetic connector island are free to move together relative to the first and second handles when the first and second handles are stationary” is not supported by the specification. The specification discloses the magnetic connector island 610 (see Fig. 14) capable of moving while the first and second handles are stationary but lacks a teaching of the bridge moving with the magnetic connector island when the handles are stationary. In essence, if the handles are not moving toward each other or apart from each other, then the bridge also cannot move (though the island can). As such, the new claim limitation is not supported and is considered new matter. Claims 12-15 are rejected based on their dependency upon claim 11.
It is noted that claims 1 and 16 do not suffer from this deficiency and it appears Applicant intended to have claim 11 recite substantially similar features as the other independent claims. This is also consistent with the topic as discussed during the interview of 7/6/2026 (see Interview Summary mailed 7/7/2026). Therefore, for examination purposes, the instant limitation has been construed to mean “wherein the game controller is configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move together relative to the first and second handles when the first and second handles are stationary.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-11, and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0182011 to Vroom et al. (hereinafter Vroom), in view of US 2020/0044482 to Partovi et al. (hereinafter Partovi).
Regarding claim 1, Vroom teaches a game controller (e.g., ¶ 95 and Fig. 5) comprising:
a first handle (e.g., first controller module 505);
a second handle (e.g., second controller module 510);
a bridge coupling the first and second handles (e.g., rails 565 and 570 and/or adjustable bridge structure 555); and
a magnetic connector configured to provide a magnetic connection (e.g., a magnetic alignment feature such as a MagSafe inductive charger including orientation magnetics 590 in ¶ 98) with an external device (e.g., mobile device in ¶ 98), wherein the magnetic connector is coupled with the bridge and positioned between the first and second handles (see at least Fig. 5), and wherein the game controller is configured such that the magnetic connector is free to move relative to the first and second handles (e.g., the adjustable bridge structure 555 can expand and contract from the center or middle of the mobile device controller 500 (or approximately therefrom) so that the inductive charging array 585 of the mobile device controller 500 can be maintained substantially centered in the mobile device controller 500 in ¶ 98; see also ¶ 95 explaining an embodiment of the adjustable bridge structure 555 being elastic).
However, Vroom lacks in explicitly teaching that the magnetic connector is free to move relative to the first and second handles when the first and second handles are stationary. In a related disclosure, Partovi teaches a flexible inductive charger for a mobile device having a movable wireless charging coil. The mobile device may be a mobile phone (e.g., ¶ 103). Partovi teaches a nearest coil 342 that moves to better orient itself with a mobile device (e.g., ¶ 206 and Fig. 16). Partovi additionally explains that when the mobile device is placed on or adjacent to the charger or power supply, magnets attract and pull the two parts into alignment with the centers of the two coils or wires (¶ 137). Partovi teaches that the coil or wires and the magnet in the charger may be mechanically attached to the body of the charger such that the coil can move to align itself appropriately with the mobile device when it is brought into close proximity to the charger such that an automatic alignment of coils or wire patterns can be achieved (¶ 138). Partovi illustrates the movement of such alignment magnets in Fig. 71, which is described as magnets placed at the center of a moving, floating charger and/or power supply coil in order to achieve alignment of the respective coils (¶¶ 84, 539). The effect is that the mobile device may be magnetically attached to the charger in a variety of locations relative to the surface of the charging device (see Fig. 71). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the invention of Vroom to include a magnetic connector that is free to move relative to the stationary portions of the controller (e.g., the first and second handles), as taught or suggested by Partovi, in order to provide automatic alignment of the charging elements as is beneficially taught by Partovi.
Regarding claim 2, Vroom teaches wherein the magnetic connector is free to move along one or both of (i) an axis between the first and second handles or (ii) an axis substantially perpendicular to the axis between the first and second handles (see Fig. 5 and ¶¶ 95 and 98 discussed above).
Regarding claim 3, Vroom teaches further comprising a magnetic connector island for carrying the magnetic connector (e.g., adjustable bridge structure 555, inductive charging array 585, or other structure supporting orientation magnetics 590), wherein the magnetic connector island is coupled with the bridge (e.g., rails 565 and 570 and/or adjustable bridge structure 555) and positioned between the first and second handles (e.g., Fig. 5), and wherein the magnetic connector is coupled to the bridge via the magnetic connector island (e.g., the adjustable bridge structure 555, inductive charging array 585, or other structure that supports the orientation magnetics 590).
Regarding claim 5, Vroom teaches wherein the bridge (e.g., first and second anchors 575 and 580 in ¶ 95) is fixed relative to the first and second handles (e.g., a first anchor 575, which can form a structural component of the first controller module 505 and/or a second anchor 580, which can form a structural component of the second controller module 510), and wherein the game controller being configured such that the magnetic connector is free to move relative to the first and second handles comprises the game controller being configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge (e.g., the elastic structure within the adjustable bridge structure 555 can allow the first and second controller modules 505 and 510 to be pulled apart or extended laterally, wrapped around the backside of the mobile device, and then contracted to engage with and firmly hold opposing sides of the mobile device in a form-fitting configuration in ¶ 95).
Regarding claim 6, Vroom teaches wherein the game controller being configured such that the magnetic connector is free to move relative to the first and second handles comprises the game controller being configured such that the bridge and the magnetic connector island are free to move relative to the first and second handles (e.g., the adjustable bridge structure 555 can expand and contract from the center or middle of the mobile device controller 500 (or approximately therefrom) so that the inductive charging array 585 of the mobile device controller 500 can be maintained substantially centered in the mobile device controller 500 in ¶ 98; see also ¶ 95 explaining an embodiment of the adjustable bridge structure 555 being elastic).
Regarding claim 7, Vroom teaches wherein: the magnetic connector island is positioned between the first and second handles such that, when the bridge is in a retracted position, the magnetic connector is off-center between the first and second handles (e.g., the leftmost- or rightmost orientation magnet 590 is offset relative to the center between the handles; see Fig. 5); and the first and second handles are configured to move in a non-synchronized and non-equidistant manner away from the magnetic connector island such that the magnetic connector is centered between the first and second handles when the bridge is in an extended position (e.g., the handles may slide independently along guide rails 565 and 570 in ¶ 97; see also ¶ 98 discussing that the inductive charging array 585 may be substantially or approximately centered, which indicates that it need not be precisely centered; see also ¶¶ 78 and 95 explaining that the guide rails may be flexible, which also allows for the claimed movement).
Regarding claim 9, Vroom teaches wherein: the bridge is configured to move between the retracted position and the extended position in first and second stages; in the first stage, only one of the first and second handles moves until the magnetic connector is centered; and in the second stage, both the first and second handles move while the magnetic connector stays centered (e.g., ¶¶ 78 and 95 explain that the guide rails may be flexible, which allows for the claimed movement).
Regarding claim 10, Vroom teaches wherein the magnetic connector is configured to rotate upon movement of the first and second handles (e.g., when a player rotates the handles, the magnetic connector also rotates).
Regarding claim 16, Vroom teaches a game controller (e.g., ¶ 95 and Fig. 5) comprising:
a first handle (e.g., first controller module 505);
a second handle (e.g., second controller module 510);
a bridge coupling the first and second handles (e.g., guide rails 565 and 570);
a magnetic connector configured to provide a magnetic connection (e.g., a magnetic alignment feature such as a MagSafe inductive charger including orientation magnetics 590 in ¶ 98) with an external device (e.g., mobile device in ¶ 98); and
a magnetic connector island (e.g., the adjustable bridge structure 555, inductive charging array 585, or other structure that supports the orientation magnetics 590) for carrying the magnetic connector that is coupled with the bridge and positioned between the first and second handles, wherein the game controller is configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge (e.g., using guide rails 565 and 570).
Vroom lacks in teaching a game controller configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge when the first and second handles are stationary. However, the modification according to Partovi, discussed above and as applied to claim 1, results in a game controller configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge when the first and second handles are stationary (e.g., movable mechanism in the magnetic connector, as taught by Partovi).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Vroom and Partovi and teaches the invention substantially as described above, but lacks in explicitly teaching wherein the game controller is configured such that a force required to move the magnetic connector island relative to the bridge is less than a shear force between the magnetic connector and a computing device that is magnetically coupled with the magnetic connector. Regardless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the combination of Vroom and Partovi to include such features in order to ensure the mobile device does not unexpectedly disconnect from the magnetic connector while in use.
Regarding claims 4 and 18-20, the combination of Vroom and Partovi teaches the invention substantially as described above, but lacks in explicitly teaching wherein one of the magnetic connector island or the bridge comprises a protrusion and the other of the magnetic connector island or the bridge comprises a slot and wherein the game controller being configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge comprises the game controller being configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge via movement of the protrusion in the slot, wherein the slot is oriented in one or both of (i) an axis between the first and second handles or (ii) an axis that is substantially perpendicular to the axis between the first and second handles, and/or the slot is square diamond shaped. Regardless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the combination of Vroom and Partovi to include such features in order to allow the user to adjust the tilt, rotation, and/or orientation of the mobile device while it is connected to the magnetic connector taught by Vroom.
Regarding claim 21, Vroom teaches wherein the magnetic connector island has an internal tunnel, wherein the bridge is positioned within the internal tunnel of the magnetic connector island, and wherein the internal tunnel is sized to allow the magnetic connector island to move along an axis that is substantially parallel to an axis between the first and second handles (e.g., guide rails 565 and 570, which indicate a tunnel is present in order to slide along or otherwise form the rails themselves).
Regarding claim 11, as interpreted in light of the 35 USC 112(a) issue identified above, Vroom teaches a game controller (e.g., ¶ 95 and Fig. 5) comprising:
a first handle (e.g., first controller module 505);
a second handle (e.g., second controller module 510);
a bridge coupling the first and second handles (e.g., rails 565 and 570 and/or adjustable bridge structure 555);
a magnetic connector configured to provide a magnetic connection (e.g., a magnetic alignment feature such as a MagSafe inductive charger including orientation magnetics 590 in ¶ 98) with an external device (e.g., mobile device in ¶ 98); and
a magnetic connector island (e.g., adjustable bridge structure 555, inductive charging array 585, or other structure supporting orientation magnetics 590) for carrying the magnetic connector that is coupled with the bridge and positioned between the first and second handles, wherein the game controller is configured such that the bridge and the magnetic connector island are free to move together relative to the first and second handles (e.g., using guide rails 565 and 570).
Vroom lacks in explicitly teaching that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the first and second handles when the first and second handles are stationary. However, as discussed above and as applied to claim 1, the combination of Vroom and Partovi teaches wherein the magnetic connector is free to move relative to the first and second handles when the first and second handles are stationary. It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combination of Vroom and Partovi so that the magnetic connector island is also capable of moving. The added movement capability would allow the magnetic connector to attach to devices whose inductive receiving coils are farther from their vertical centerline, such as when devices are oriented in a portrait orientation.
Regarding claim 14, Vroom teaches wherein the bridge and the magnetic connector island are free to move together along an axis between the first and second handles (e.g., using guide rails 565 and 570; see also ¶¶ 78 and 95 explaining that the guide rails may be flexible, which also allows for the claimed movement).
Regarding claim 15, Vroom teaches wherein the game controller is further configured such that the magnetic connector island is free to move relative to the bridge along an axis that is substantially perpendicular to the axis between the first and second handles (e.g., ¶¶ 78 and 95 explain that the guide rails may be flexible, which allows for the claimed movement)
Claims 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vroom, in view of Partovi, and further in view of US 2021/0275907 to Khaira et al. (hereinafter Khaira).
Regarding claims 8 and 12, the combination of Vroom and Partovi teaches the game controller substantially as described above, including movement of first and second handles in non-synchronized and non-equidistant manners and wherein the game controller being configured such that the bridge and the magnetic connector island are free to move together relative to the first and second handles comprises the game controller being configured such that the bridge and magnetic connector island are free to move together relative to the first and second handles via a movable shaft. However, Vroom and Partovi lack in explicitly teaching a rack-and-pinion system or pinion gear to accomplish said movements. In a similar disclosure, Khaira teaches a game controller for a mobile device having handles, a bridge, and a device to hold a mobile device (see abstract). More particularly, Khaira teaches a first linear rack 111, a second liner rack 112, and a pinion 124 (e.g., ¶¶ 33 and 40, and Figs. 5-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the combination of Vroom and Partovi to include the pinion gear coupling the bridge and the first and second handles, as taught or suggested by Khaira, in order to allow easier actuation of the handle device to accept a mobile device. Similarly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the combination of Vroom, Partovi, and Khaira to include a dual rack-and-pinion system with different gear ratios in order to preserve the non-synchronized and non-equidistant manner of motion taught by Vroom.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vroom in view of Partovi, and further in view of US 2018/0217662 to Smoot et al. (hereinafter Smoot).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Vroom and Partovi teaches the invention substantially as described above but lacks in explicitly teaching a movable gear belt coupling the bridge and the first and second handles. In a related disclosure, Smoot teaches a variety of mechanical systems to drive various parts of a gaming system, including a toothed belt connected to a disk angle motor and a second or lower disk angle pully connected to the toothed belt and disk angle motor (e.g., ¶ 105). The term “toothed belt” is construed as a “gear belt,” as claimed. Smoot further teaches that such toothed belts and other ganged mechanisms allow driving of multiple elements using a single driving source (e.g., ¶ 120). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date to modify the combination of Vroom and Partovi to include the gear belt of Smoot to couple the bridge and first and second handles, as claimed, in order to allow either or both of the user’s hands to actuate the controller handles toward or away from each other.
Examiner’s Note
Note that while the above discussions of claims focus on Figure 5 of Vroom, other figures are also applicable to the instant claims. For instance, Figures 1-3 and 12-14 contain similar features to Figure 5, such as rails and magnetic alignment features. For this reason, at least Figures 1-3 and 12-14 are also applicable to the instant claims. The Examiner expressly indicates that these and any figures of the cited prior art references are applicable to the instant claims. Similarly, while certain features of the cited prior art references are mapped to the claim language (e.g., bridge, island, etc.), the Examiner expressly indicates that these are merely exemplary and that other disclosed features of the cited prior art are equally applicable to the claimed elements.
Response to Arguments
As an initial matter, the previous double patenting rejections are withdrawn in light of the instant terminal disclaimers.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 11, and 16 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. The combination of Vroom and Partovi teaches or suggests the game controller as discussed in the grounds of rejection above.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH whose telephone number is (571)272-2818. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571-270-7625. 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.
/WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights