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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
1. This office action is in response to the amendments/arguments submitted by the Applicant(s) on 11/05/2025.
Response to Arguments
I. Status of the Claims
2. Claims 1-20 are still pending.
3. Applicant's amendments to claims are accepted because do not introduce new matter pursuant to MPEP 2163.
II. Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103
4. Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 as being unpatentable have been fully considered and found not persuasive. Therefore, the rejections are maintained.
5. Page-6, the Applicant(s) argues that “According to the disclosure of Fullerton, it is clear that the technical solution of Fullerton is very different from the technical solution recited in the currently amended claim 1 of the present application. Fullerton merely discloses one magnet 126 included in the second device 120a and thus fails to disclose the plurality of components to be mounted to a first device in a preset layout and generate a magnetic field. Because there is only one magnet, it is impossible to have a preset layout, and it is further impossible to determine the position of the second device based on the preset layout of the plurality of the components … Furthermore, even if Fig. 10 of Fullerton shows two magnets 126a, 126b, the two magnets 126a, 126b are also included in the second device (e.g. mouse 802 or joystick 902), which obviously cannot be considered as equivalent to the plurality of components mounted to the first device in a preset layout as recited in the currently amended claim 1 of the present application. Thus the Applicant submits that Fullerton fails to disclose or teach at least the following distinguishing features in the currently amended claim 1 of the present application… Further, it is apparent that both Ma and Bhat also fail to disclose or teach the above distinguishing features in the currently amended claim 1 of the present application”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees because Fullerton discloses each and every limitation of the claims pursuant to the MPEP 2111.01 Plain Meaning (I) and IMPROPER TO IMPORT CLAIM LIMITATIONS (II).
5.1. FIRST Argument in support to response to number 5 above.
2111.01 Plain Meaning, I. THE WORDS OF A CLAIM MUST BE GIVEN THEIR "PLAIN MEANING" UNLESS SUCH MEANING IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE SPECIFICATION
“Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention … the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms. The presumption that a term is given its ordinary and customary meaning may be rebutted by the applicant by clearly setting forth a different definition of the term in the specification … During examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow … This means that the words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the specification.” … “In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (discussed below); Chef America, Inc. v. Lamb-Weston, Inc., 358 F.3d 1371, 1372, 69 USPQ2d 1857 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (Ordinary, simple English words whose meaning is clear and unquestionable, absent any indication that their use in a particular context changes their meaning, are construed to mean exactly what they say””.
In a summary, according to the above sections of the MPEP and the case law, ordinary English words/terms must be given their plain meaning, unless the specification provide definitions for said words/terms in the form of glossary.
In the instant case, the claim limitation at issue broadly and ambiguously recites “plurality of components” but does not explain the type of components the type of components being claimed.
Furthermore, the term “components” is an ordinary English word and could be reasonably interpreted by one ordinary skill in the art using any of its ordinary English meanings because the specifications do not provide any special definition for the aforesaid terms, which makes said terms consistent with the specifications of the Applicant(s).
Furthermore, the term “components” is so broad and ambiguous that have many different definitions (see, https://www.thefreedictionary.com/component) and/or synonyms (see, https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/component), thus, could be reasonably used and/or interpreted to describe any element in the system of Fullerton (e.g. “first twisted rotor loop” and “rotor core”) as described in the prior rejection and the rejection below. Additionally, the claim limitation “plurality of components” is way broader than any of the embodiments of the instant application. Moreover, the claim terms “plurality of components” have very little patentable weight. Consequently, the Examiner’s interpretation of the limitation regarding “plurality of components” is reasonable and consistent with the specifications of the Applicant(s).
Furthermore, the claim language is so broad and ambiguous that do not exclude Fullerton’s teachings.
In light of the foregoing, the Fullerton properly and obviously teaches all the limitations of claim(s).
Examiner’s Note
6. All the words in the language of the claims of which the specifications do not provide a definition in the form stated in the MPEP, the examiner has interpreted them by their plain meanings, pursuant to the MPEP 2111.01 “Plain Meaning” and MPEP 2173.01.
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 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.
7. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 10-13, 15-17 and 20 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fullerton et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0184505 hereinafter mentioned as “Fullerton”).
As per claim 1, Fullerton, in the embodiment of Fig. 7A, discloses:
A system (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use) comprising:
a component to be mounted to a first device in a preset layout and generates a magnetic field (Fig. 7A, see the component/magnet 126 mounted on a stylus 120a. Also see [0054]);
a magnetometer integrated with a second device (Fig. 7A, see magnetic sensors 110 integrated with the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]) to detect the magnetic field to generate reading data associated with the magnetic field at the second device (see [0054]); and
a processor (see [0022]) configured to determine a position of the second device relative to the first device based on the reading data (see [0054]) and the preset layout of the component (Fig. 7A, see the component/magnet 126 mounted on a stylus 120a. Also see [0054]).
The embodiment of Fig. 7A discloses a components to be mounted to the first device in a preset layout and generate a magnetic field as described above but does not explicitly disclose the plurality of components.
However, Fullerton, in any of the embodiments of Figs. 10, further discloses:
a plurality of components to be mounted to a first device in a preset layout and generate a magnetic field (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]), the preset layout comprising positions of the plurality of components relative to the first device (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]) and vector directions of magnetic fields to be generated by the plurality of components (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Furthermore, once the plurality of components is added to the embodiment of Fig. 10, each one of the plurality of components generates a distortion in the magnetic field that could be represented by a vector (magnitude and direction of the distortion caused) relative to the first device according to the magnetic field. Also see [0061]-[0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “plurality of components” disclosed by any of the embodiments of Figs. 10 into the embodiment of Fig. 7A of Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by producing a plurality of magnetic fields to determine an 'at rest' absolute location and orientation of the device and then use it to determine the real time absolute location and orientation of said device during operation (Fullerton, Paragraph [0062]).
Furthermore, Fullerton states that “While particular embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be understood, however, that the invention is not limited thereto, since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teachings” (Fullerton, Paragraph [0095]).
As per claim 2, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 1 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses that
the plurality of components are magnetic coils and configured to be powered on or off in sequence according to a predefined power-on-off pattern (see [0054]. The electromagnets are made of coils around a core);
the reading data comprises a changing pattern of intensity peaks of the magnetic field (see [0054]. Variation on magnetic field strength is a variation in intensity) at the second device (Fig. 7A, see magnetic sensors 110 integrated with the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]); and
the preset layout of the plurality of components comprises the predefined power-on-off pattern (see [0054]. The switching on and off of the electromagnets made of coils around a core).
As per claim 3, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 2 with the magnetic coils wound in an unspecified direction as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said magnetic coils have a same winding direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the magnetic coils of Fullerton having the “same winding direction” with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by adding the magnetic fields generated by said magnetic coils of the electromagnets, thus, generating a stronger magnetic field that facilitates the measurements in order to determine an 'at rest' absolute location and orientation of the device and then use it to determine the real time absolute location and orientation of said device during operation (Fullerton, Paragraph [0062]).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the direction of the winding of a coil with respect to the other coils and/or the components does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). Furthermore, if the aforesaid arrangements modify the sensor in an unpredictable manner, it should be added language claiming the aforesaid unpredictable manner in order to add patentability weight to the claim.
As per claim 5, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 2 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the plurality of components (see [0054]. The electromagnets are made of coils around a core) are integrated with the first device or mounted to the first device as peripherals (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126, which could be electromagnets, integrated or mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]).
As per claim 6, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 1 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses that
the plurality of components are permanent magnets (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 integrated or mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]); and
the reading data comprises a magnetic field vector direction of the magnetic field at the second device (Fig. 7A, the vector data provided by the one or more magnetic sensors 110 to the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]).
As per claim 7, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 1 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the first device comprises a display monitor (see [0053]).
As per claim 10, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 1 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the second device comprises a laptop installed with the processor (see [0053] and/or [0022]).
As per claim 11, Fullerton, in the embodiment of Fig. 7A, discloses:
A first device (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use) comprising:
a component to be mounted to the first device in a preset layout and generates a magnetic field (Fig. 7A, see the component/magnet 126 mounted on a stylus 120a. Also see [0054]) detectable at a second device (Fig. 7A, see magnetic sensors 110 integrated with the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]) to be connected to the first device (Fig. 7A, see the stylus 120a. Also see [0054]),
wherein the preset layout of component is provided for the second device to determine a position of the second device relative to the first device based on the preset layout of the component and reading data associated with the magnetic field (see [0054]) generated by a magnetometer integrated with the second device (Fig. 7A, see magnetic sensors 110 integrated with the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]).
The embodiment of Fig. 7A discloses a components to be mounted to the first device in a preset layout and generate a magnetic field as described above but does not explicitly disclose the plurality of components.
However, Fullerton, in any of the embodiments of Figs. 9-10, further discloses:
a plurality of components to be mounted to the first device in a preset layout and generate a magnetic field (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]) detectable at a second device (Figs. 10A-10F, see the magnetic sensors of three first devices 100a-100c. Also see [0059]-[0060]) to be connected to the first device (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]), the preset layout comprising positions of the plurality of components relative to the first device (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]) and vector directions of magnetic fields to be generated by the plurality of components (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Furthermore, once the plurality of components is added to the embodiment of Fig. 10, each one of the plurality of components generates a distortion in the magnetic field that could be represented by a vector (magnitude and direction of the distortion caused) relative to the first device according to the magnetic field. Also see [0061]-[0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “plurality of components” disclosed by any of the embodiments of Figs. 9-10 into the embodiment of Fig. 7A of Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by producing a plurality of magnetic fields to determine an 'at rest' absolute location and orientation of the device and then use it to determine the real time absolute location and orientation of said device during operation (Fullerton, Paragraph [0062]).
As per claim 12, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 11 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses that
the plurality of components are magnetic coils and configured to be powered on or off in sequence according to a predefined power-on-off pattern (see [0054]. The electromagnets are made of coils around a core);
the reading data comprises a changing pattern of intensity peaks of the magnetic field (see [0054]. Variation on magnetic field strength is a variation in intensity) at the second device (Fig. 7A, see magnetic sensors 110 integrated with the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]); and
the preset layout of the plurality of components comprises the predefined power-on-off pattern (see [0054]. The switching on and off of the electromagnets made of coils around a core).
As per claim 13, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 12 with the magnetic coils wound in an unspecified direction as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said magnetic coils have a same winding direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the magnetic coils of Fullerton having the “same winding direction” with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by adding the magnetic fields generated by said magnetic coils of the electromagnets, thus, generating a stronger magnetic field that facilitates the measurements in order to determine an 'at rest' absolute location and orientation of the device and then use it to determine the real time absolute location and orientation of said device during operation (Fullerton, Paragraph [0062]).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the direction of the winding of a coil with respect to the other coils and/or the components does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)). Furthermore, if the aforesaid arrangements modify the sensor in an unpredictable manner, it should be added language claiming the aforesaid unpredictable manner in order to add patentability weight to the claim.
As per claim 15, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 12 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the plurality of components (see [0054]. The electromagnets are made of coils around a core) are integrated with the first device or mounted to the first device as peripherals (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126, which could be electromagnets, integrated or mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]).
As per claim 16, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 11 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses that
the plurality of components are permanent magnets (Figs. 10A-10F, see the plurality of magnets 126 integrated or mounted to a mouse 802 or joystick 902. Also see [0061]-[0063]); and
the reading data comprises a magnetic field vector direction of the magnetic field at the second device (Fig. 7A, the vector data provided by the one or more magnetic sensors 110 to the mobile-phone 100. Also see [0054]).
As per claim 17, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 11 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the first device comprises a display monitor (see [0053]).
As per claim 20, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 11 as described above.
Fullerton further discloses:
wherein the second device comprises a laptop installed with the processor (see [0053] and/or [0022]).
3. Claim(s) 4 and 14 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fullerton in view of MA et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0076051 hereinafter mentioned as “Ma”).
As per claim 4, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 2 as described above but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil.
However, Ma further discloses:
wherein a magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil (Fig. 1A, see the pair of magnets 104a, 104b and respective coils 106a, 106b. Also see [0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil” disclosed by Ma into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by using the orientation and/or acceleration information to improve user interaction as well as provide data to a wide variety of applications (Ma, Paragraph [0003]).
Furthermore, Fullerton states that “While particular embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be understood, however, that the invention is not limited thereto, since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teachings” (Fullerton, Paragraph [0095]).
As per claim 14, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 12 as described above but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil.
However, Ma further discloses:
wherein a magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil (Fig. 1A, see the pair of magnets 104a, 104b and respective coils 106a, 106b. Also see [0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “magnet is disposed at a center of each magnetic coil to increase the magnetic field generated by the magnetic coil” disclosed by Ma into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by using the orientation and/or acceleration information to improve user interaction as well as provide data to a wide variety of applications (Ma, Paragraph [0003]).
Furthermore, Fullerton states that “While particular embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be understood, however, that the invention is not limited thereto, since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teachings” (Fullerton, Paragraph [0095]).
8. Claim(s) 8, 9, 18 and 19 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fullerton in view of Bhat et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0011520 hereinafter mentioned as “Bhat”).
As per claim 8, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 7 with the plurality of components mounted to a of the display monitor at unspecified locations as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said plurality of components are mounted to a bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel.
However, Bhat further discloses:
wherein the plurality of components (Fig. 1, see the first-lid-magnet 114 and the second-lid-magnet 116. Also see [0022]-[0023]) are mounted to a bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel (Fig. 1, see the bezel area 112 of the lid member 110 of the display screen of the laptop 100 and where the first-lid-magnet 114 and the second-lid-magnet 116 are mounted. Also see [0022]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel” disclosed by Bhat into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by helping to magnetically lock the lid member to the base member as the lid magnet engages a base magnet contained in the base member when the lid member is closed (Bhat, Paragraph [0022]), also by triggering a sensor contained in base member to detect whether the device is in an open or closed position (Bhat, Paragraph [0023]), and further by accommodating a certain number of desired computer components in electronic devices while enabling the trend to reduce the size of such devices (Bhat, Paragraph [0002]).
Furthermore, Fullerton states that “While particular embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be understood, however, that the invention is not limited thereto, since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teachings” (Fullerton, Paragraph [0095]).
As per claim 9, Fullerton discloses the system of claim 7 with the one or more of the plurality of components as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said one or more plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor.
However, Bhat further discloses:
wherein one or more of the plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor (Fig. 1, see base magnet 124 contained in the base member 120 of the display screen of the 100. Also see [0022]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “one or more plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor” disclosed by Bhat into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by helping to magnetically lock the lid member to the base member as the lid magnet engages a base magnet contained in the base member when the lid member is closed (Bhat, Paragraph [0022]), also by triggering a sensor contained in base member to detect whether the device is in an open or closed position (Bhat, Paragraph [0023]), and further by accommodating a certain number of desired computer components in electronic devices while enabling the trend to reduce the size of such devices (Bhat, Paragraph [0002]).
As per claim 18, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 17 with the plurality of components mounted to a of the display monitor at unspecified locations as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said plurality of components are mounted to a bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel.
However, Bhat further discloses:
wherein the plurality of components (Fig. 1, see the first-lid-magnet 114 and the second-lid-magnet 116. Also see [0022]-[0023]) are mounted to a bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel (Fig. 1, see the bezel area 112 of the lid member 110 of the display screen of the laptop 100 and where the first-lid-magnet 114 and the second-lid-magnet 116 are mounted. Also see [0022]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “bezel of a display panel of the display monitor at a plurality of corners of the display panel” disclosed by Bhat into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by helping to magnetically lock the lid member to the base member as the lid magnet engages a base magnet contained in the base member when the lid member is closed (Bhat, Paragraph [0022]), also by triggering a sensor contained in base member to detect whether the device is in an open or closed position (Bhat, Paragraph [0023]), and further by accommodating a certain number of desired computer components in electronic devices while enabling the trend to reduce the size of such devices (Bhat, Paragraph [0002]).
Furthermore, Fullerton states that “While particular embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be understood, however, that the invention is not limited thereto, since modifications may be made by those skilled in the art, particularly in light of the foregoing teachings” (Fullerton, Paragraph [0095]).
As per claim 19, Fullerton discloses the first device of claim 17 with the one or more of the plurality of components as described above but does not explicitly disclose that said one or more plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor.
However, Bhat further discloses:
wherein one or more of the plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor (Fig. 1, see base magnet 124 contained in the base member 120 of the display screen of the 100. Also see [0022]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “one or more plurality of components are mounted to a stand of the display monitor” disclosed by Bhat into Fullerton, with the motivation and expected benefit with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by helping to magnetically lock the lid member to the base member as the lid magnet engages a base magnet contained in the base member when the lid member is closed (Bhat, Paragraph [0022]), also by triggering a sensor contained in base member to detect whether the device is in an open or closed position (Bhat, Paragraph [0023]), and further by accommodating a certain number of desired computer components in electronic devices while enabling the trend to reduce the size of such devices (Bhat, Paragraph [0002]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALVARO E. FORTICH whose telephone number is (571) 272-0944. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon thru Fri from 8:00am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Huy Phan, can be reached on (571)272-7924. 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.
/ALVARO E FORTICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858