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 .
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.
Claim 24 is 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.
Regarding claim 24, there does not appear to be written support in the specification that sufficiently describes the capability of the gyroscopic sensor to detect an angular velocity of rotation of the casing about the first reference axis. Specifically, paragraph [0160] states that the inclination sensor may be a gyroscopic sensor, “so long as the attitude of the handle can be detected”. It appears that the attitude of the handle is the only variable the gyroscopic sensor is recited as being capable of detecting.
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.
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, 3, 5, 15-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoji (US 20180369865) in view of Iwasaki (JP 2001008726), as evidenced by Skorina (see previously attached NPL titled A Soft Robotic Wearable Wrist Device for Kinesthetic Haptic Feedback).
Regarding claim 1, Shoji discloses a device (sense generation apparatus 1; see fig. 1) including a handle (sense generation apparatus 1 is configured to be held by a user; see paragraph [0034]), the device comprising: a casing that is grippable with a hand and fingers of a user (base 11 is formed as a chassis or case which can be gripped by a user; see paragraphs [0030, 0034]), wherein an axis passing through a center of gravity of the casing is a first reference axis (the first axis passes through center of gravity G; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below) and an axis orthogonal to the first reference axis is a second reference axis (the second reference axis is orthogonal to the first axis and extends out from the page; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below), and a size of the casing in a direction along the first reference axis is larger than a size of the casing in a direction along the second reference axis (sense generation apparatus 1 is longer along the first reference axis than the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below); a first vibrating body in the casing (vibrator 12-1 is located within sense generation apparatus 1; see fig. 1); a second vibrating body in the casing (vibrator 12-2 is located within sense generation apparatus 2; see fig. 1), wherein the first vibrating body and the second vibrating body are on opposite sides of the second reference axis (vibrators 12-1 and 12-2 are located on opposite sides of the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below) and are along the first reference axis when viewed from the center of gravity (vibrators 12-1, 12-2 are located at least partially along the first reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below); a controller configured to generate a first sense of force in a first direction by controlling a vibration pattern of the first vibrating body, and to generate a second sense of force in a second direction by controlling a vibration pattern of the second vibrating body (electronic device unit 14 can control vibrators 12-1, 12-2 to generate rotational forces R1, R2; see paragraphs [0033-0034]), wherein the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal to the first reference axis (R1, R2 are orthogonal to the first reference axis which extends along the length of the device; see annotated portion of fig. 1 below), and the controller is configured to control the vibration pattern of the first vibrating body and the vibration pattern of the second vibrating body so that the first direction and the second direction are different (R1 and R2 are opposite directions; see paragraph [0034] and fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
799
629
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shoji does not explicitly disclose a head coupled to an end of the casing on the first reference axis.
Iwasaki discloses a head coupled to an end of the casing on the first reference axis (hair removal block 2 is located on an end of housing 10 which as modified, is at least partially along the first reference axis; see fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Shoji in view of Iwasaki to include a head coupled to an end of the casing. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the device of Shoji can be reasonably configured as part of a larger device (see paragraph [0030], where the housing of an electronic device can be used as base 11). In the instant case, forming it as part of a shaver as taught by Iwasaki would be beneficial as vibratory movements could be generated within the shaver. As evidenced by Skorina, it is known to use haptic feedback to convey information to users (see introduction). As modified to be part of a shaver, rotational movement could be generated to urge a user to rotate the device in order to more effectively shave hair at awkward angles, such as around the jawline. Therefore, in order to help guide a user in shaving efficiently, it would be obvious to include the device of Shoji in a shaver as taught by Iwasaki.
Regarding claim 3, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the casing comprises a grip portion including the center of gravity (base 11 has center of gravity G and is configured to be gripped by a user; see paragraph [0034] and fig. 1), a first end portion adjacent to a first end of the grip portion (the first end portion is located at a first end of the grip portion; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), and a second end portion adjacent to a second end of the grip portion (the second end portion is located at a second end of the grip portion; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), wherein the first vibrating body is in the first end portion (vibrator 12-1 is located in the first end portion; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), and wherein the second vibrating body is in the second end portion (vibrator 12-2 is located in the second end portion; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 5, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein a distance from the center of gravity to the first vibrating body is equal to a distance from the center of gravity to the second vibrating body (vibrator 12-1 and vibrator 12-2 are equidistant from center of gravity G: see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Shoji discloses a device (sense generation apparatus 1; see fig. 1) including a handle (sense generation apparatus 1 is configured to be held by a user; see paragraph [0034]), the device comprising: a casing that is grippable by a hand and fingers of a user (base 11 is formed as a chassis or case which can be gripped by a user; see paragraphs [0030, 0034]), wherein an axis passing through a center of gravity of the casing is a first reference axis (the first axis passes through center of gravity G; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above) and an axis orthogonal to the first reference axis is a second reference axis (the second reference axis is orthogonal to the first axis and extends out from the page; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), and a size of the casing in a direction along the first reference axis is larger than a size of the casing in a direction along the second reference axis (sense generation apparatus 1 is longer along the first reference axis than the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above); a first vibrating body in the casing (vibrator 12-1 is located within sense generation apparatus 1; see fig. 1); a second vibrating body in the casing (vibrator 12-2 is located within sense generation apparatus 2; see fig. 1), and a controller configured to generate a first sense of force in a first direction by controlling a vibration pattern of the first vibrating body, and configured to generate a second sense of force in a second direction by controlling a vibration pattern of the second vibrating body (electronic device unit 14 can control vibrators 12-1, 12-2 to generate rotational forces R1, R2; see paragraphs [0033-0034]) so as to give the user gripping the casing a sense of force that feels as if the casing is rotating about the first reference axis (rotational forces R1, R2 provide a rotational force about the first reference axis; see paragraph [0034] and annotated portion of fig. 1 above), wherein the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal to the second reference axis (the first direction and second direction are orthogonal to the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above).
Shoji does not explicitly disclose wherein the first vibrating body and the second vibrating body are on opposite sides of the first reference and are along the second reference axis when viewed from the center of gravity; a head coupled to an end of the casing on the first reference axis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Shoji to locate the first and second vibrating bodies on opposite sides of the first reference axis since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70). As shown in fig. 8A of an alternative embodiment of Shoji, the vibrating bodies can be located on opposite sides of both the first reference axis and the second reference axis without changing the overall function of the device. Therefore, moving vibrators 12-1, 12-2 to the positions of vibrators 52-2, 52-4 would be obvious as an alternative way to position elements.
As modified, Shoji discloses wherein the first vibrating body and the second vibrating body are on opposite sides of the first reference axis (vibrators 12-1, 12-2 can be relocated to the positions of vibrators 52-2, 52-4 respectively as shown in an alternative embodiment; see fig. 8A) and are along the second reference axis when viewed from the center of gravity (as modified, vibrators 12-1, 12-2 are located at least partially along the second reference axis; see fig. 8A and annotated portion of fig. 1 above).
Iwasaki discloses a head coupled to an end of the casing on the first reference axis (hair removal block 2 is located on an end of housing 10 which as modified, is at least partially along the first reference axis; see fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji in view of Iwasaki to include a head coupled to an end of the casing. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the device of Shoji can be reasonably configured as part of a larger device (see paragraph [0030], where the housing of an electronic device can be used as base 11). In the instant case, forming it as part of a shaver as taught by Iwasaki would be beneficial as vibratory movements could be generated within the shaver. As evidenced by Skorina, it is known to use haptic feedback to convey information to users (see introduction). As modified to be part of a shaver, rotational movement could be generated to urge a user to rotate the device in order to more effectively shave hair at awkward angles, such as around the jawline. Therefore, in order to help guide a user in shaving efficiently, it would be obvious to include the device of Shoji in a shaver as taught by Iwasaki.
Regarding claim 16, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the first vibrating body and the second vibrating body each include at least one of a voice coil motor with a weight disposed in a housing (vibrator 12-1 includes coil 124-1 around motion member 125-1, housed within grip portion 126-1; see paragraphs [0056-0057] and figs. 4A-4B), and a piezoelectric element that generates vibration.
Regarding claim 19, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 15 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the first direction and the second direction are angularly offset from each other along the second reference axis (the first and second directions are offset from one another relative to the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above).
Claims 7-8, 17-18, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoji (US 20180369865) in view of Iwasaki (JP 2001008726), and further in view of Robinson (US 20190224870), as evidenced by Skorina (see previously attached NPL titled A Soft Robotic Wearable Wrist Device for Kinesthetic Haptic Feedback).
Regarding claim 7, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified does not explicitly disclose a shaver comprising: an inclination sensor configured to detect an attitude of the handle, wherein the head coupled to the casing includes blades configured to cut hair.
Iwasaki further discloses a shaver (hair removal device; see fig. 1) wherein the head coupled to the casing includes blades configured to cut hair (hair removal block 2 includes hair removal claw 3; see paragraph [0029]).
Robinson discloses an inclination sensor configured to detect an attitude of the handle (gyroscope 113 senses an angle of at least the shaving head or the handle; see paragraphs [0015, 0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji in view of Robinson to include an inclination sensor. Robinson discloses that the inclination sensor (gyroscope 113) is capable of measuring an angle of the handle, which among other data, is provided to a user (see paragraph [0015]). As modified to include this inclination sensor, the controller of Shoji (electronic device unit 14) can be modified based on programming to perform specific vibrations depending on the detected information. As discussed above, rotational vibration can be used as means to provide information to a user – thus, further modifying Shoji would be obvious in order to provide additional information to a user.
As modified, Shoji further discloses the device according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); the controller is configured to control the vibration patterns when the detected attitude of the handle is within a predetermined range (as modified, electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control vibration of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 based on data received from the inclination sensor).
Regarding claim 8, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 7 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the controller is configured to control the vibration patterns such that a difference between a rate of change of the first vibration pattern and a rate of change of the second vibration pattern exceeds a predetermined threshold (electronic device unit 14 includes a control circuit for controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 – thus, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control the vibration patterns of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 as a result of the programming of the control circuit; see paragraphs [0032, 0077]).
Regarding claim 17, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 7 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the casing comprises a grip portion that includes a center of gravity of the casing (base 11 has center of gravity G; see fig. 1), and is grippable by the hand and fingers of the user (base 11 is formed as a chassis or case which can be gripped by a user; see paragraphs [0030, 0034]), and the controller controls the vibration patterns such that the first vibrating body and the second vibrating body cause the hand and fingers gripping the casing a sense of rotation (electronic device unit 14 can control vibrators 12-1, 12-2 to generate rotational forces R1, R2; see paragraphs [0033-0034]).
Regarding claim 18, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 7 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein an axis passing through a center of gravity of the casing is a first reference axis (the first axis passes through center of gravity G; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above) and an axis orthogonal to the first reference axis is a second reference axis (the second reference axis is orthogonal to the first axis and extends out from the page; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), wherein a size of the casing in a direction along the first reference axis is larger than a size of the casing in a direction along the second reference axis (sense generation apparatus 1 is longer along the first reference axis than the second reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above).
Shoji as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined range is an inclination angle of the first reference axis being 10 degrees or smaller.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji to make the predetermined range 10 degrees or smaller. In the instant case, the device of Shoji as modified would still be capable of controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 based on the angle, even if the predetermined range of the angle is 10 degrees or smaller. The predetermined angle is dependent on the programming of the controller and thus can be configured to be any value or combination or values, including 10 degrees or less. Further, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 is capable of controlling vibration based on detection of the angle being 10 degrees or below, since electronic device unit 14 is programmable to perform a desired function (see paragraph [0077]).
Regarding claim 21, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified does not explicitly disclose a pressure sensor that detects a pressure toward the casing from the head.
Robinson discloses a pressure sensor that detects a pressure toward the casing from the head (cartridge displacement sensor 114 can detect pressure exerted on cartridge 106; see paragraph [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji in view of Robinson to include a pressure sensor. Robinson discloses that the pressure sensor (cartridge displacement sensor 114) is capable of calculating pressure exerted on the cartridge, which among other data, is provided to a user (see paragraph [0015]). As modified to include this pressure sensor, the controller of Shoji (electronic device unit 14) can be modified based on programming to perform specific vibrations depending on the detected information – for example, the rotational vibration may stop to indicate to a user that they are applying excessive pressure. As discussed above, rotational vibration can be used as means to provide information to a user – thus, further modifying Shoji would be obvious in order to provide additional information to a user.
As modified, Shoji further discloses wherein the controller controls the vibration pattern of the first vibrating body and the vibration pattern of the second vibrating body when the detected pressure is higher than a specified pressure for a predetermined time or longer (electronic device unit 14 includes a control circuit for controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 – thus, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control the vibration patterns of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 as a result of the programming of the control circuit, including based on detected information; see paragraphs [0032, 0077]).
Regarding claim 22, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified does not explicitly disclose a pressure sensor that detects a pressure toward the casing from the head; and an inclination sensor that detects an attitude of the casing.
Robinson discloses a pressure sensor that detects a pressure toward the casing from the head (cartridge displacement sensor 114 can detect pressure exerted on cartridge 106; see paragraph [0075]); and an inclination sensor that detects an attitude of the casing (gyroscope 113 senses an angle of at least the shaving head or the handle; see paragraphs [0015, 0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji in view of Robinson to include a pressure sensor. Robinson discloses that the pressure sensor (cartridge displacement sensor 114) is capable of calculating pressure exerted on the cartridge, which among other data, is provided to a user (see paragraph [0015]). As modified to include this pressure sensor, the controller of Shoji (electronic device unit 14) can be modified based on programming to perform specific vibrations depending on the detected information – for example, the rotational vibration may stop to indicate to a user that they are applying excessive pressure. As discussed above, rotational vibration can be used as means to provide information to a user – thus, further modifying Shoji would be obvious in order to provide additional information to a user.
As modified, Shoji further discloses wherein the controller executes rotation promotion control or rotation curbing control based on the detected attitude and the detected pressure (electronic device unit 14 includes a control circuit for controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 – thus, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control the vibration patterns of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 as a result of the programming of the control circuit, including based on detected information; see paragraphs [0032, 0077]).
Regarding claim 23, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 22 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified further discloses wherein the detected attitude corresponds to an inclination angle of the first reference axis (as modified to include pressure and inclination sensors, the detected angle corresponds to an angle relative to the first reference axis; see annotated portion of fig. 1 above), and the controller executes the rotation curbing control when the detected attitude or a rate of change in the detected attitude exceeds a predetermined threshold, and the detected pressure is lower than a specified pressure (electronic device unit 14 includes a control circuit for controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 – thus, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control the vibration patterns of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 as a result of the programming of the control circuit, including based on detected information; see paragraphs [0032, 0077]).
Regarding claim 24, Shoji as modified discloses the limitations of claim 15 as described in the rejection above.
Shoji as modified does not explicitly disclose a gyroscopic sensor that detects an angular velocity of rotation of the casing about the first reference axis.
Robinson discloses a gyroscopic sensor that detects an angular velocity of rotation of the casing about the first reference axis (gyroscope 113 forms an angular velocity sensor 112 that measures rotation or angular velocity of handle 102; see paragraph [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify Shoji in view of Robinson to include an inclination sensor. Robinson discloses that the inclination sensor (gyroscope 113) is capable of measuring an angle of the handle, which among other data, is provided to a user (see paragraph [0015]). As modified to include this inclination sensor, the controller of Shoji (electronic device unit 14) can be modified based on programming to perform specific vibrations depending on the detected information. As discussed above, rotational vibration can be used as means to provide information to a user – thus, further modifying Shoji would be obvious in order to provide additional information to a user.
As modified, Shoji further discloses wherein the controller executes rotation curbing control by controlling the vibration pattern of the first vibrating body and the vibration pattern of the second vibrating body so as to generate a sense of force of rotation in a direction opposite the rotation of the casing (electronic device unit 14 includes a control circuit for controlling vibrators 12-1, 12-2 – thus, it is understood that electronic device unit 14 can be configured to control the vibration patterns of vibrators 12-1, 12-2 as a result of the programming of the control circuit, including based on detected information; see paragraphs [0032, 0077]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, 7-8, 15-19, and 21-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding claim 18, a programmable controller would reasonably be capable of controlling a vibration pattern depending on a detected attitude of the handle (see rejection of claim 18 above). That is, the predetermined angle can be programmed to be any value/range without impacting the overall function of the controller (controlling a vibration pattern in response to a predetermined attitude of the handle). Further, Examiner notes that limitations drawn to what the controller is “configured” to do are intended use, and a controller capable of being programmed would be able to perform the recited functions.
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 HALEIGH N WATSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3818. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 530AM-330PM EST.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/HALEIGH N WATSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights