DETAILED ACTION
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 1-20 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Each of independent claims 1, 8, and 14, contains at least one of the following recitations which is indefinite: “each of the first sheet and the second sheet are arranged to fold inwards toward the center”, “one or more biasing members attachable to at least the outer layer”, and “the one or more biasing members are arranged to be received by…”. Each of the recitations does not provide a clear a definite structure, structures which have the capability of the actions. Since further recitations claim structural aspects such as “within the interior volume of the outer layer” are not actually structurally realized by the previous claims. The claim is drawn to an apparatus which requires a clear and definite structure, and since a method is not being claimed, these steps of arranging or attaching are drawn to a structure (e.g. single sheets of paper) which are not the 3-D display as claimed.
Similar language pervades throughout the dependent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-17, 19-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being a by Hewitt (US 2022/0157199).
In respect to claim 1, the claim is indefinite for the reasons stated above, however, Hewitt discloses an outer layer comprising two printed sheets 108 and 110 having printing images (0046; Fig. 6), wherein the first and second sheet each have a first and second edge, as the side panels 112/114 shown in Fig. 6 may be omitted and the first and second edges of the first and second printed sheets 108 and 110 may be attached directly together via a tab 120 which may extend inwards toward an interior volume of the outer layer (0052)*; one or more inner layers having printed images (0044; Fig. 4); and one or more biasing members 122a/122b which are arranged to pop open/hold the display in an open position; the biasing members 122a/122b may be attached to the outer layer and are arranged within the interior volume of the outer layer (Fig. 6) and they are arranged to connected to tabs present on the outer layer (Fig. 8). Although these are not the tabs which may attach the first and second sheets, the biasing members are arranged to be attached to these tabs as well, in any known fashion e.g. adhesive.
*Note: It is further noted that due to the functional nature of “arranged to fold inwards”, the first and second edges of the printed sheets are arranged to fold inwards i.e. they are capable of being folded inwards toward the interior volume.
In respect to claims 4 and 6, Hewitt discloses that the one or more inner layers include a first 106a and second 106b inner layer attachable to each other into an X-shape (Figs. 4 & 7).
In respect to claims 5, Hewitt discloses further “supplementary” inner layers (0038).
In respect to claim 7, Hewitt discloses providing cutouts in the one or more inner layers for accommodating the biasing members (0056).
In respect to claims 8-9, 12-17, and 19-20. Hewitt discloses the claimed invention for the reasons stated above.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-17, 19-20, are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewitt (US 2022/0157199) in view of Wilder (US 8,291,631) and Crowell et al. (US 2008/0178501).
Hewitt teaches a tab which may attach the first and second sheets, however, does not teach folding and attached the edges (not explicitly claimed). Wilder, however, teaches a similar display with a first and second sheet 2 both curved in a similar manner (Fig. 1); further, the sheets may have folded edges 8, which are attached together (Fig. 1) to form tabs 12 projecting into the interior volume (Col. 3, 36-46; Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the curved front and back sheets taught in Hewitt with a folded interior tab in view of Wilder to provide only a single seam for attachment (at each of the locations) (Col. 4, 39-40)
Claims 2-3, 10-11, and 18, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewitt (US 2022/0157199) in view of Wilder (US 8,291,631) as applied above, and further in view of Crowell et al. (US 2008/0178501).
In respect to claim 2 and 10, Hewitt in view of Wilder substantially teach the invention, however do not teach attaching the biasing members to the tab formed by the edges of the first and second sheets, with the tab further containing at least one recess, however, Crowell et al. teach a very similar two curved sheet 55/57 and interior tab 58/60 configuration for a similar display, and further providing a biasing member 63 between the tabs (Fig. 11); the tabs further comprising a biasing member 63 connected to recesses in each tab (Fig. 11). It would have been obvious to substitute the biasing members taught in Hewitt and Wilder with a biasing member attached to the interior tabs in view of Crowell et al. to provide a continuous curve in the first and second sheets (0052).
In respect to claims 3, 11, and 18, the prior art does not teach providing a top and bottom biasing member, however, the claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. The inventions of Hewitt and Wilder display large sheets, and thus one of ordinary skill would readily understand to provide at least two biasing members to provide a curved shape over more than just one location.
In respect to claims 5, 12, and 20, Hewitt discloses further “supplementary” inner layers (0038).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. McClintock (US 2,053,839), Karpiel et al. (US. 2022/0061440), and Luk et al. (US 2019/0116738).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT GRABOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3518. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Daniel Troy, can be reached at 571-270-3742. 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.
/KYLE R GRABOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637