DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the Remarks dated 13 November 2025. No claims are amended. No claims have been added or cancelled. Claims 1-17 remain pending and have been considered below.
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 § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 1-3, 6-14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karimi Eskandary et al. (US 2020/0150767 A1, hereinafter: K-E) in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2020/0264704 A1).
As for independent claim 1, K-E teaches the device comprising:
an actuator, fixed to the touch device and providing a vibration force with a vibration direction [(e.g. see K-E paragraphs 0050, 0052, 0054) ”FIGS. 4C-4E depict various ways in which the haptic actuator 320 and the touchscreen or touchpad 352 can be connected to each other. In FIG. 4C, the haptic actuator 320 may be attached to the touchpad 352 via only a layer 371 of adhesive … when the haptic actuator 220 outputs a vibration … configuration of the touchpad 352A may funnel movement of the haptic actuator 320 along only one axis”].
an elastic suspension supporting module, comprising a plurality of elastic suspension supporting members respectively provided with a first end fixed to the touch panel and a second end fixed to the housing [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0051 and Fig. 4A) ”the touchscreen or touchpad 352 may be suspended over a mounting surface 354a of the mounting component 354. In some cases, the touchpad 352 may be suspended via suspension components 356, 358, which may form an elastic suspension, such as a spring suspension, for example”].
and the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members supporting the touch panel in a symmetrical distribution [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0051 and Fig. 4A) ”the touchscreen or touchpad 352 may be suspended over a mounting surface 354a of the mounting component 354. In some cases, the touchpad 352 may be suspended via suspension components 356, 358, which may form an elastic suspension, such as a spring suspension, for example”]. Examiner notes that, as depicted by Fig. 4A, the elastic suspension components (numerals 356, 358) are positioned at the edges creating a mirrored symmetry.
K-E does not specifically teach and the plurality of suspension support members respectively provided with a buffering and resetting displacement degree of freedom with a displacement direction parallel to the vibration direction. However, in the same field of invention, Sasaki teaches:
and the plurality of suspension support members respectively provided with a buffering and resetting displacement degree of freedom with a displacement direction parallel to the vibration direction [(e.g. see Sasaki paragraphs 0037, 0038, 0060) ”The base 105 is a component to be a mount for the tactile presentation panel 100. The lateral actuator 106 and the leaf springs 107 are mounted on the base 105. The carrier 104 that vibrates with movement of the lateral actuator 106 and the leaf springs 107 is also mounted on the base 105. The carrier 104 is vibrated by the lateral actuator 106 along a specific axis with respect to the base 105. This vibration is also referred to as lateral motion. The vibration of the carrier 104 produced by the lateral actuator 106 and the leaf springs 107 is mechanical vibration. In the following description, the vibration for presenting tactile stimulus is one or more cycles of reciprocating motion … The lateral actuator 106 is a device to generate motion along a single axis that is parallel to the touch surface of the tactile presentation panel 100. The touch surface is the principal surface of the touch panel 101 to be touched by a finger and is a tactile presentation surface that presents tactile stimulus (tactile feedback) to the finger. The leaf springs 107 are used as a mechanism to generate vibration with the motion of the lateral actuator 106. The leaf springs 107 define a neutral position of the vibration of the touch surface … That is to say, the touch surface shifts in one direction from the initial state and then shifts in the opposite direction to return to the initial state in one action of tactile presentation”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of K-E and Sasaki, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the plurality of suspension support members respectively provided with a buffering and resetting displacement degree of freedom with a displacement direction parallel to the vibration direction, as taught by Sasaki, to the teachings of K-E because it allows the appropriate tactile stimulus to be provided to more users (e.g. see Sasaki paragraph 0071).
As for dependent claim 2, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the actuator is fixed to the touch panel [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0052) ”FIGS. 4C-4E depict various ways in which the haptic actuator 320 and the touchscreen or touchpad 352 can be connected to each other. In FIG. 4C, the haptic actuator 320 may be attached to the touchpad 352 via only a layer 371 of adhesive”].
As for dependent claim 3, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 2 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the tactile feedback device further comprises a first supporting member fixed to the touch panel, and the actuator is fixed to the first supporting member [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0053) ”FIGS. 4D and 4E illustrate embodiments in which one or more mechanical fasteners may also be used to clamp the haptic actuator 320 to the touchscreen or touchpad 352, so as to provide a stronger connection (e.g., more rigid connection) between the haptic actuator 320 and the touchscreen or touchpad 352 and thus reduce or eliminate audible noise. More specifically, FIG. 4D illustrates an embodiment in which the haptic actuator 320 is clamped against the touchscreen or touchpad 352 via a clamping plate 375 and one or more mechanical fasteners 373a, 373b”].
As for dependent claim 6, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the tactile feedback device further comprises a control module for controlling the actuator [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0046) ”the actuator control module 149 to generate a haptic effect”].
As for dependent claim 7, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 6 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the control module drives the actuator based on a real tactile data [(e.g. see K-E paragraphs 0046, 0067) ”in response to the clicking of a virtual button. In such an embodiment, the haptic-enabled device 100 may have an area on its surface that represents a virtual button. The control circuit 110 may be configured to detect that the virtual button of the haptic-enabled device 100 is being clicked … the actuator control module 149 to generate a haptic effect to simulate a button click”].
As for dependent claim 8, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 6
wherein the control module drives the actuator based on a sensed data [(e.g. see K-E paragraphs 0046, 0051) ”The user interface device 300 incorporates a touchscreen or touchpad 352 … The module 142 may be configured to encounter an event that triggers a haptic effect, such as a virtual button on the haptic-enabled device 100 … being touched”].
As for dependent claim 9, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 8, but K-E does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Sasaki teaches:
wherein the sensed data is generated by a sensing device disposed on the touch panel [(e.g. see Sasaki paragraph 0040) ”The touch panel 101 detects the position of the user's finger touching the touch surface that is the front face thereof. The touch panel 101 can be any type of touch panel, such as a resistive film type, a surface capacitive type, or a projected capacitive type of touch panel”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 10, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 9 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the sensing device is any one of an infrared light pressure sensor and a multi-axis accelerometer [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0036) ”the movement sensor 130 may be an acceleration sensor 130 (also referred to as an accelerometer)”].
As for dependent claim 11, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the actuator is selected from any one of an eccentric motor, a piezoelectric actuator, and a linear resonator [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0036) ”the haptic actuator 120 may be a linear resonant actuator (LRA), a linear motor, an eccentric rotating mass (ERM) actuator, a solenoid resonating actuator (SRA), a piezoelectric actuator, an electroactive polymer (EAP) actuator, or any other type of haptic actuator”].
As for dependent claim 12, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are elastic structures made of plastic, metal or foam [(e.g. see K-E paragraphs 0050, 0051) ”suspension components 356, 358, which may form an elastic suspension, such as a spring suspension … such as a plastic shell or metal”].
As for dependent claim 13, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1, but K-E does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Sasaki teaches:
wherein the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are leaf springs [(e.g. see Sasaki paragraph 0036) ”leaf springs 107”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 14, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the actuator is fixed to the housing [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0036) ”the haptic actuator 120 may be mounted to the housing”].
As for dependent claim 16, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1, but K-E does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Sasaki teaches:
wherein the touch panel comprises a normal direction, and the vibration direction is perpendicular to the normal direction [(e.g. see Sasaki paragraphs 0038, 0055, 0086) ”The lateral actuator 106 is a device to generate motion along a single axis that is parallel to the touch surface of the tactile presentation panel 100. The touch surface is the principal surface of the touch panel 101 to be touched by a finger and is a tactile presentation surface that presents tactile stimulus (tactile feedback) to the finger … The tactile controller 113 makes the touch panel 101 (tactile presentation panel 100) vibrate along one axis along its touch surface (principal surface) … to vibrate along a plurality of different axes that are parallel to the touch surface”]. Examiner notes that a direction perpendicular to the normal direction, is a direction that is parallel to the surface of the touch panel.
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 17, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the touch panel comprises a normal direction, and the vibration direction is parallel to the normal direction [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0054) ”the touchpad 352A may have a cavity that is shaped to receive the haptic actuator 320. Such a configuration of the touchpad 352A may funnel movement of the haptic actuator 320 along only one axis, such as an axis that is perpendicular to a surface of the touchpad 352A”]. Examiner notes that a direction parallel to the normal direction, is a direction that is perpendicular to the surface of the touch panel.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karimi Eskandary et al. (US 2020/0150767 A1, hereinafter: K-E) in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2020/0264704 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2019/0259362 A1).
As for dependent claim 4, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the tactile feedback device further comprises a first supporting member fixed to the touch panel [(e.g. see K-E paragraph 0053) ”FIGS. 4D and 4E illustrate embodiments in which one or more mechanical fasteners may also be used to clamp the haptic actuator 320 to the touchscreen or touchpad 352, so as to provide a stronger connection (e.g., more rigid connection) between the haptic actuator 320 and the touchscreen or touchpad 352 and thus reduce or eliminate audible noise. More specifically, FIG. 4D illustrates an embodiment in which the haptic actuator 320 is clamped against the touchscreen or touchpad 352 via a clamping plate 375 and one or more mechanical fasteners 373a, 373b”].
K-E and Sasaki do not specifically teach first ends of the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are fixed to the first supporting member. However, in the same field of invention, Kim teaches:
first ends of the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are fixed to the first supporting member [(e.g. see Kim paragraph 0034) ”an elastic member 280 for elastically supporting the vibrator may be interposed between the vibrator and the lower housing 110”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of K-E, Sasaki and Kim, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add first ends of the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are fixed to the first supporting member, as taught by Kim, to the teachings of K-E and Sasaki because it enhances the vibration of the vibrator (e.g. see Kim paragraph 0034).
As for dependent claim 5, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 1 and K-E further teaches:
wherein the tactile feedback device further comprises a second supporting member fixed to the housing [(e.g. see K-E paragraphs 0036, 0051) ”The mounting component 354 may be, e.g., part of a housing … The mounting component 354 may be, e.g., part of a housing”].
K-E and Sasaki do not specifically teach second ends of the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are fixed to the second supporting member. However, Kim teaches:
second ends of the plurality of elastic suspension supporting members are fixed to the second supporting member [(e.g. see Kim paragraph 0034) ”an elastic member 280 for elastically supporting the vibrator may be interposed between the vibrator and the lower housing 110”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 4.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karimi Eskandary et al. (US 2020/0150767 A1, hereinafter: K-E) in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2020/0264704 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakao (US 2017/0315617 A1).
As for dependent claim 15, K-E and Sasaki teach the device as described in claim 14, but do not specifically teach wherein the actuator is fixed to the housing by a hook buckle. However, in the same field of invention, Nakao teaches:
wherein the actuator is fixed to the housing by a hook buckle [(e.g. see Nakao paragraphs 0041, 0045 and Fig. 5A) ”The rotary member 61 illustrated in FIG. 5A includes the hook-shaped latch 61a and the abuts 61b and 61c, which are formed on both side surfaces of the fan shape … the fulcrum represents the fixed axle 62, with which the latch 61a of the rotary member 61 latches, the point of effort represents the abut 61b of the rotary member 61, against which the piezoelectric element 51 abuts, and the point of load represents the abut 61c, against which the panel rear surface 30b of the panel 30 abuts”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of K-E, Sasaki and Nakao, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the actuator is fixed to the housing by a hook buckle, as taught by Nakao, to the teachings of K-E and Sasaki because ease of assembly is improved (e.g. see Nakao paragraph 0044).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 13 November 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that [“Thus, Sasaki discloses that the plurality of leaf springs 107 are respectively provided with a buffering and resetting displacement degree of freedom in a displacement direction parallel to the arcs of the leaf springs 107 instead of the direction of vibration of the lateral actuator 106 depicted in Fig. 1 of Sasaki.” (Page 4).].
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Sasaki teaches the plurality of suspension support members respectively provided with a buffering and resetting displacement degree of freedom with a displacement direction parallel to the vibration direction in paragraphs 0037, 0038, 0060 and Fig. 1 of Sasaki’s disclosure [(see rejection of claim 1 above)]. Examiner thanks applicant for the Wikipedia reference on leaf springs. However, the leaf springs in Sasaki are not setup for absorbing/resisting/returning downward compression (i.e. length of the spring running parallel to the length of the base/carrier/screen). The leaf springs in Sasaki are setup to absorb/resist/return lateral forces (i.e. length of the spring perpendicular to the base/carrier/screen). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, as depicted in Fig. 1, as the actuator laterally vibrates the carrier/screen along the length of the screen (i.e. left and right) the displacement direction of the leaf springs also occurs in the same direction of the vibration (i.e. left and right [e.g. parallel]), which provides a degree of freedom of the travel distance of the leaf spring before returning the carrier/screen to the neutral equilibrium position of the spring. For example, as the carrier/screen moves laterally the right, the leaf spring screen buffers this movement to right and then returns it left to its neutral position. Thus, the combination adequately teaches applicant’s claimed limitation.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. PGPub 2018/0059794 A1 issued to Nakamura et al. on 01 March 2018. The subject matter disclosed therein is pertinent to that of claims 1-17 (e.g. springs set in-plane for touch screen vibrations).
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 CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI whose telephone number is (571)-270-3358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)-272-4088. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights