REISSUE PROCEDURAL REMINDERS
Disclosure of other proceedings. Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which the Patent Under Reissue is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Disclosure of material information. Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation.
These disclosure obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Manner of making amendments. Applicant is reminded that changes to the Instant Application must comply with 37 C.F.R. § 1.173, such that all amendments are made in respect to the Patent Under Reissue as opposed to any prior changes entered in the Instant Application. All added material must be underlined, and all omitted material must be enclosed in brackets, in accordance with Rule 173. Applicant may submit an appendix to any response in which claims are marked up to show changes with respect to a previous set of claims, however, such claims should be clearly denoted as “not for entry.”
Claim Interpretation
During examination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP § 2111 et seq.
Upon review of the original specification and prosecution history, the examiner has found no instances where applicants have included lexicographic definitions, either express or implied. Therefore, for the purposes of claim interpretation, the examiner concludes that there are no claim terms for which Applicants are acting as their own lexicographer. See MPEP § 2111.01.IV.
Additionally, upon review of the pending claims, the examiner finds no instances where the claim terms explicitly include functional language which would invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (IDS) submitted on 01/11/2024, 04/23/2024, 11/25/2024 and 02/27/2025 were filed along with the application filed on January 11th, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by MCMILLAN et al (US Publication No. 2019/0158713).
With respect to claim 1, MCMILLAN discloses an electronic device [0023] comprising: a display (Figure 7, element 720 and 600); a first member disposed on a rear surface (Figure 7, element 722) of the display (720) and including at least one opening (Figure 8, “opening” as depicted in the pic below) and an optical sensor (Figure 7, elements 610, 642 and 612 (wherein light sensor embodied as an IR camera module (“IR camera”) )) including a light emitting unit (Figure 7, element 630 “IR source”) and disposed to emit light to the outside of the display through at least a portion of the at least one opening (Figure 8, as depicted below, the light from the light source 630 passes through the opening), and a light receiving unit (Figure 7, elements 612 and 642); and a second member disposed in at least a partial region of the at least one opening (Figure 8, element “second element” as shown in the drawing below), wherein at least a part region of the second member is disposed between the light emitting unit (630) and the light receiving unit (612 and 642) to separate the light emitting unit and the light receiving unit (Figure 8, as illustrated in the Figure 8, the light originated from element 630 and received by the elements 610 and 640 is separated by the “second member” and [0041]).
PNG
media_image1.png
622
1019
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 6, MCMILLAN discloses wherein the second member includes an elastic material ([0090], wherein element 1362 corresponding to the second member indicated above in the figure 8 is a gasket).
With respect to claim 7, MCMILLAN discloses wherein the second member is positioned in a compressed state between the display and the optical sensor ([0090], wherein the second member (i.e. the gasket 1362) is positioned between the display (1370) and optical sensory (1340) as illustrated in Figure 13, and as explained in paragraph [0090] it can be compressed. Thus, the second member is in a compressed state between the display and the optical sensor).
With respect to claim 8, MCMILLAN discloses the electronic device, wherein a seating groove with a multi-stage structure is formed in at least one region inside the opening (the section of the opening all the way to the edge adjacent to the opening 702 as illustrated in Figure 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
621
838
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 9, MCMILLAN discloses the electronic device of claim 8, wherein at least a portion of the second member is seated in the seating groove (as shown in Figure 13 above, the second member (1360) is seated in the seating groove of the element 1330).
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.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCMILLAN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim at al (US Publication No. 2015/0049062), hereinafter referred to as Kim.
With respect to claim 2, MCMILLAN teaches the electronic device as taught in claim 1, however he does not explicitly teach that the second member is formed to enclose the light emitting unit.
On the other, Kim teaches motion gesture sensing module wherein the second member is formed to enclose the light emitting unit (Figure 11, light element (11), “second member” enclosing light element (82 and 83) and [0126]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to enclose a light element, as taught by Kim, in MCMILLAN’s electronic device in order to minimize the error resulting from sensing light produced by the light element.
With respect to claim 3, Kim further teaches the electronic device, wherein the second member is formed to entirely enclose the light emitting unit (Figure 18, wherein light element is by the enclosure 86 and 87 and [0197] and [0199]).
With respect to claim 4, MCMILLAN teaches the electronic device as taught in claim 1, however he does not explicitly teach wherein the second member is formed to further enclose at least a partial region of the light receiving unit.
On the other, Kim et al teaches motion gesture sensing module wherein the second member is formed to further enclose at least a partial region of the light receiving unit (Figure 11, light element (11), “second member” enclosing light element (82 and 83) and [0126]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to enclose a light element, as taught by Kim, in MCMILLAN’s electronic device in order to minimize the error resulting from sensing light produced by the light element.
With respect to claim 5, Kim further teaches the electronic device, wherein the second member is formed to entirely enclose the light receiving unit (Figure 18, wherein light element is by the enclosure 86 and 87 and [0197] and [0199]).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCMILLAN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ishimaru at al (US Patent No. 11,979,511), hereinafter referred to as Ishmaru.
With respect to claim 10, MCMILLAN teaches the electronic device as taught in claim 1, however he does not explicitly teach the electronic device further comprising a processor operatively connected to the optical sensor, wherein the processor is configured to determine whether an external object is within a predetermined distance from the electronic device in response to an output value of the optical sensor, and perform a designated operation in response to a determination.
On the other hand, Ishimaru teaches touchless interactive display system wherein the electronic device further comprising a processor operatively connected to the optical sensor, wherein the processor is configured to determine whether an external object is within a predetermined distance from the electronic device in response to an output value of the optical sensor, and perform a designated operation in response to a determination (42:52-43:5 and Figure 6, elements 1000 and 1003).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize a processor with the optical sensor, as taught by Ishimaru, in MCMILLAN’s sensor arrangement, in order to improve the functions of the display in response to received sensor input.
With respect to claim 11, Ishimaru further teaches the electronic device, wherein the processor is further configured to determine whether the external object is within a predetermined distance from the electronic device in response to the output value of the optical sensor when the display is in an on-state (Figure 15B, wherein input is received while the display is ON and 21:28-42).
With respect to claim 12, MCMILLAN teaches touch sensor The electronic device of claim 11, wherein the designated operation includes a turning on mode of the display, a turning off mode of the display, an always on display (AOD) mode of the display, or determining whether an input touch is an erroneous touch input (22:1-6 and Figure 14 wherein the face ID is approved the display is unlocked i.e. turning on mode of the display).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claim 13, the prior art of record does not anticipate nor render obvious an electronic device comprising: a display; a cover panel disposed on a rear surface of the display panel and including at least two first openings; a support member disposed on a rear surface of the cover panel and including at least one second opening corresponding to the at least two first openings; an optical sensor including a light emitting unit disposed to emit light to the outside of the display panel through at least a portion of the at least two first openings and at least a portion of the at least one second opening, and a light receiving unit; and a partition wall member disposed in at least a partial region of the at least one second opening, wherein at least a part region of the partition wall member is disposed between the light emitting unit and the light receiving unit to separate the light emitting unit and the light receiving unit.
With respect to claims 14-20, those claims are also allowed by the virtue of their dependency on claim 13.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA M LIE whose telephone number is (571)272-8445. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 5:30 am - 2:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Fischer can be reached on 571-272-6779.
All correspondence relating to this reissue proceeding should be directed:
Patent Center
Patent Center (https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center) to file and manage your applications and requests. Visit the EFS-Web and Private PAIR Retirement (https://www.uspto.gov/patents/efs-web-and-private-pair-be-retired) and Patent Center Information pages for more information.
By Mail to: Mail Stop Reissue
Central Reexamination Unit
Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-9900
Central Reexamination Unit
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Bulding
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Patent Center has 100% of the functionality of EFS-Web and Private PAIR, and is available to all users for electronic filing and management of patent applications. Attend a transition to Patent Center Training session (https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/patent-center) to learn more about filing and managing patent applications.
/ANGELA M LIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/LUKE S WASSUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/ANDREW J. FISCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992