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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention/species 1 with colorless light in the reply filed on 1/29/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
claim 7 recites “colorless light source”. There’s no such thing as a colorless light. If applicant means white light such that it commonly includes all wavelengths of light such that no specific light color may be distinguished in the human visual spectrum, then applicant must claim the concept properly. As written claim 7 is indefinite because light cannot be colorless in a common and ordinary meaning.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Beyh US 12204292.
With regard to claim 1 Beyh discloses a display method, applied to a wrist-worn device, comprising:
emitting, via a light source, a first detection light (column 6 lines 6-13);
receiving, via a light identification unit (170 figure 1; abstract; column 6 lines 6-13), a second detection light formed by the first detection light (top and bottom constitutes two), and
identifying, via the light identification unit (170), a light parameter of the second detection light (abstract; column 6 lines 6-13),
wherein the light parameter of the second detection light carries style information of a wristband (abstract);
reading, via a controller (150 figure 2), the style information, and generating, via the controller, a screen display control signal according to the style information (column 11 lines 60-67; this citation is in no way fully encapsulating of the reference. See whole specification Citation merely gives a narrow portion thereof to consider); and
controlling, via the controller (150 figure 2), a display unit on a device body to display (104 figure 2) a corresponding display mode according to the screen display control signal (figure 6; see displays figures 6-14), wherein the wrist-worn device comprises the device body (10 figure 1) and the wristband connected to device body (figures 3-5).
With regard to claim 2 Beyh discloses the display method of claim 1, wherein before the emitting, via the light source, the first detection light, the display method further comprises: presetting a corresponding relation between different style information and different display modes (figures 8-12; the correspondence exists prior to light emission and detection because the operation and instructions are stored - column 4 lines 13-23; the operations are carried out by a processor 150 which inherently require instructions stored in a memory, such as 152; column 4 lines 1-12; column 9 lines 1-12; column 19 lines 54-63; column 20 lines 55-58).
With regard to claim 3 Beyh discloses the display method of claim 1, wherein the display mode comprises a UI theme adapted to the style information of the wristband and/or display content adapted to a usage scenario (matches band - figures 8-12)
With regard to claim 9 Beyh discloses a wrist-worn device, comprising a memory (152), a processor (150), and a display (104) program stored in the memory and executable on the processor (column 4 lines 13-23; the operations are carried out by a processor 150 which inherently require instructions stored in a memory, such as 152; column 4 lines 1-12; column 9 lines 1-12; column 19 lines 54-63; column 20 lines 55-58), wherein steps of the display method according to claim 1 are implemented when the display program is executed by the processor (column 4 lines 13-23; the operations are carried out by a processor 150 which inherently require instructions stored in a memory, such as 152; column 4 lines 1-12; column 9 lines 1-12; column 19 lines 54-63; column 20 lines 55-58; figures 8-14).
With regard to claim 10 Beyh discloses a computer-readable storage medium, wherein a display program is stored in the computer-readable storage medium (152), and when steps of the display (104) method according to claim 1 are implemented when the display program is executed by the processor (column 4 lines 13-23; the operations are carried out by a processor 150 which inherently require instructions stored in a memory, such as 152; column 4 lines 1-12; column 9 lines 1-12; column 19 lines 54-63; column 20 lines 55-58).
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beyhs US 12204292.
With regard to claim 7 Beyhs discloses the display method of claim 3, wherein: when the light source is installed on the device body (100; column 6 lines 6-13).
Beyhs teaches the light can be colored – column 6 lines 54-67. Beyhs does not teach the claimed: the light source is a colorless light source, and the first detection light is a colorless light – except as might be inferred from context.Beyhs teaches detecting other characteristics such as reflectivity and size. These are not color dependent. At the time of the earliest effective filling date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Beyhs’ system such that: when the light source is installed on the device body the light source is a colorless light source, and the first detection light is a colorless light. The reason for doing so would have been to detect presence or absence of the ban when color isn’t necessary. A reason for doing so would have been to detect the combination of colors that can overlap such as white light to detect a white band comprising all colors and thus being colorless, or to detect a black band depending on whether colorless refers to all pigment colors or all optical colors. In either even the motivation would have been to detect a normal and routine color possibility of a watch strap such as white or black. Another reason for doing so would have been to detect size or reflectivity without having a specialized light source having specific color. Another reason for doing so would have been to detect size or reflectivity using a standard all color light source which would commonly be referred to as colorless. All these possibilities fall under routine, ordinary, and most importantly obvious variations on Beyhs’ design for the essential spirit and nature of Beyhs’ disclosure and principles set forth.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4-6, 8 is/are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN KAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-8931. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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, Regis Betsch can be reached at 571-270-7101. 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.
/SEAN KAYES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2844
/REGIS J BETSCH/SPE, Art Unit 2844
Prosecution Insights