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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
“a first folded state that one surface of the support is rotated to against a half of the back surface of the display device; and a second folded state that the other surface of the support is rotated to abut against another half of the back surface of the display device” in claim 1
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-10 and 14-20 are 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.
Claim 1 recites “a first folded state that one surface of the support is rotated to against a half of the back surface of the display device; and a second folded state that the other surface of the support is rotated to abut against another half of the back surface of the display device”. Note that Figs. 1 and 8 shows the support is hinged off-center with a surface area less than half of the back surface. It does not appear that the surfaces of the support is capable to against “a half” or “another half” of the back surface. Thus, the new limitation is considered as new matter. Do applicant meant left abutting surface and right abutting surface similar to limitation from cancelled claim 2? Further clarification is required.
Claims 3, 5-10 and 14-20 depends on claim 1.
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 1, 3, 5-6 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2005/0257341; hereinafter “Chen”) in view of Chen et al. (US 9,013,865; hereinafter “Chen ‘865”).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches an expanded screen (see note below regarding preamble), wherein the expanded screen comprises:
a display device (31, 3, Figs. 1-3; [0006]);
a rotating assembly (21, 11, Figs. 1-2); and
a support (1, Figs. 1-3) configured to support the display device on a platform (see Fig. 2; [0012]); the rotating assembly is connected to the display device and the support, and the support is in damped rotation (same as friction connection mentioned in [0018]) with the display device through the rotating assembly on a back surface (back surface of 3, Fig. 1) of the display device;
wherein the support comprises a first folded state that one surface of the support is rotated to abut against a half of the back surface of the display device (abut bottom surface of 3 as shown in Fig. 1); and a second folded state that the other surface of the support is rotated to abut against another half of the back surface of the display device (not explicitly shown, but 1 can rotate on pin 21, thus, the other surface of 1 can inherently rotate upward and abut against the top surface of 3), and the support is capable of being rotated between the first folded state and the second folded state to support the display device, so that a viewing angle can be changed (not explicit, but self-explanatory from Figs. 1-3 that angle from 0 to 180 degree can be achieve); and
wherein the support is provided with a holding port (see T-shaped structure inside 1 in Figs. 1-2), the holding port is provided with an opening (see opening above, bottom left and/or bottom right of the T-shaped structure in Figs. 1-2), and the opening is arranged on a first side surface (inner side surface of 1, Figs. 1-2) of the support.
Chen does not teach wherein one end of the first side surface of the support, beside the opening, is provided with a gap; a wiring slot is arranged on the back surface of the display device corresponding to a position below the gap, the wiring slot is provided with a shell covering the wiring slot, and the shell is arranged in the gap. However, Chen ‘865 teaches one end of a first side surface (end of 211, Figs. 1A-3) of a support (2, Figs. 1A-3), beside an opening (opening between the two 21, Figs. 2A-3), is provided with a gap (gap at where 22 occupies, see Figs. 2A-3); a wiring slot (not explicit, but wiring slot inherently must be inside 22 in order to electrically connect the connection port 23 to the electronic device E in Fig. 2B; col. 3, lns. 4-9), the wiring slot is provided with a shell (see cover shell of 22 in Figs. 2A-3) covering the wiring slot, and the shell is arranged in the gap (as shown in Figs. 2A-3); wherein the support comprises more than one interface (23, Fig. 2B; col. 3, lns. 4-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have one end of the first side surface of the support, beside the opening, is provided with a gap; a wiring slot is arranged on the back surface of the display device corresponding to a position below the gap (note this is true after modifying Chen ‘865 to Chen, since Chen’s hinge is on the back surface of the display device), the wiring slot is provided with a shell covering the wiring slot, and the shell is arranged in the gap in Chen, as taught by Chen ‘865, in order to provide electrical connection port on the support by routing wire from the display device.
Note: The recitation “An expanded screen” has not been given patentable weight because it has been held that a preamble is denied the effect of the limitation where the claim is drawn to a structure and the portion of the claim following the preamble is a self-contained description of the structure not depending for completeness upon the introductory clause. Kropa v. Robie, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951).
Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein when one surface of the support abuts against one abutting surface of the back surface of the display device, a fourth side surface (bottom surface of 1 where 13 is arranged, Figs. 1-2) of the support is arranged close to a bottom surface of the display device (close to bottom surface of 3 and 4, Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 5, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein the expanded screen further comprises a spacer (same as 2, Figs. 1-2); the spacer is arranged on a first side surface (inner side surface of 1, Figs. 1, 2) of the support; and the rotating assembly is arranged on the spacer to form a space (inherently have a small gap in order to rotate 11 unobstructed and prevent scratch against back panel 3) between the rotating assembly and the display device.
Regarding claim 6, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and the modified Chen further teaches wherein the expanded screen further comprises more than one interface; each interface is arranged on the support; the interface is electrically connected to the display device through a wire (as modified by Chen ‘865 in above claim 1; note again that 22 in Fig. 2B of Chen ‘865 must inherently have wire for electrical connection; also see col. 3, lns 4-9 of Chen ‘865).
Regarding claim 14, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 6. Chen does not teach wherein each interface is arranged on an inner side wall of the holding port. However, Chen ‘865 further teaches each interface (23, Fig. 2B) is arranged on an inner side wall of a holding port (inner side wall of 2 as shown in Fig. 2B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have each interface is arranged on an inner side wall of the holding port in Chen in view of Chen ‘865, as taught by Chen ‘865, in order to prevent external impact from damaging the interfaces.
Regarding claim 15, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein a second side surface (such as left side surface of 1 in Figs. 1-2) of the support and a third side surface (such as right side surface of 1 in Figs. 1-2) of the support are arranged on two adjacent sides of a first side surface (top or bottom side surface of 1 in Figs. 1-2) of the support; a width from the second side surface of the support to the third side surface of the support is a width of the support; the width of the support is less than a width of the display device (as shown in Figs. 1-2); and a width central axis of the support is arranged close to a width central axis of the display device (as shown in Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 16, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein a first antiskid pad (13, Fig. 1) is arranged on a fourth side surface (bottom side surface of 1 in Figs. 1-2) of the support opposite to the first side surface (top side surface of 1 in Figs. 1-2) of the support.
Regarding claim 17, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein a bottom surface of the display device is provided with more than one second antiskid pad (4, 41, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 18, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1, and Chen further teaches wherein a hand groove is arranged on a fourth side surface (curved “hand groove” along bottom side of 1 as shown in Figs. 1, 2) of the support.
Regarding claim 19, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 18, and Chen further teaches wherein the hand groove is close to a middle position of the fourth side surface of the support along a length (curved “hand groove” along middle position of bottom 1 in Figs. 12-).
Claims 7-10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Chen ‘865, and further in view of Ashcraft et al. (US 8,964,382; hereinafter “Ashcraft”).
Regarding claim 7, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 6. Chen does not teach wherein a first side surface of the support is provided with a first threading hole; the back surface of the display device is provided with a second threading hole; the second threading hole is located below the first side surface of the support; and the wire passes through the second threading hole and the first threading hole in the display device and is connected to each interface. However, Ashcraft teaches wherein a first side surface (top side surface of 504B, Fig. 5) of the support is provided with a first threading hole (512B, Fig. 5); the back surface of the display device is provided with a second threading hole (not shown, but inherent in order to electrically communicate with electronic components inside the computing device 500); the second threading hole is located below the first side surface of the support (can be considered as below depending on orientation of the computing device 500); and the wire passes through the second threading hole and the first threading hole in the display device and is connected to each interface (col. 4, lns. 50-61). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have wherein a first side surface of the support is provided with a first threading hole; the back surface of the display device is provided with a second threading hole; the second threading hole is located below the first side surface of the support; and the wire passes through the second threading hole and the first threading hole in the display device and is connected to each interface in Chen in view of Chen ‘865, as taught by Ashcraft, in order to provide electrical communication between ports in the support and the electronic components within the display device.
Regarding claims 8-10, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 and Ashcraft teaches the expanded screen according to claim 7. Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the second threading hole is arranged in the wiring slot; the first threading hole is arranged on a side surface of the gap; the shell is provided with a third threading hole; the wire passes through the second threading hole, the third threading hole, and the first threading hole; and a part of the wire is arranged in the wiring slot, wherein the first threading hole is arranged at a joint of two adjacent side surfaces of the gap, and the third threading hole is arranged on an end surface of the shell close to the first threading hole, wherein a top surface of the shell is set to be an outwards convex arc; a groove is arranged on one surface of the gap rotating around the top surface of the shell; and a top of the top surface of the shell is arranged in the groove. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have wherein the second threading hole is arranged in the wiring slot; the first threading hole is arranged on a side surface of the gap; the shell is provided with a third threading hole; the wire passes through the second threading hole, the third threading hole, and the first threading hole; and a part of the wire is arranged in the wiring slot, wherein the first threading hole is arranged at a joint of two adjacent side surfaces of the gap, and the third threading hole is arranged on an end surface of the shell close to the first threading hole, wherein a top surface of the shell is set to be an outwards convex arc; a groove is arranged on one surface of the gap rotating around the top surface of the shell; and a top of the top surface of the shell is arranged in the groove in Chen in view of Chen ‘865 and Ashcraft, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, adding a shell in order to cover up and protect the wire and provide wire routing to the display device from the stand yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 20, Chen in view of Chen ‘865 teaches the expanded screen according to claim 1. Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the expanded screen further comprises an audio port, an expanded screen on/off button, and a volume adjustment button; and the audio port, the expanded screen on/off button, and the volume adjustment button are arranged on the support. However, Ashcraft teaches the expanded screen further comprises an audio port or on/off button; and the audio port and/or the expanded screen on/off button are arranged on the support (see circular audio port or circular button on 510 in Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the expanded screen further comprises an audio port, an expanded screen on/off button, and a volume adjustment button; and the audio port, the expanded screen on/off button, and the volume adjustment button are arranged on the support in Chen in view of Chen ‘865, as taught by Ashcraft, in order to save space typically occupied by ports and buttons on the display device and move it to the support instead.
The modified Chen above does not explicitly teach an audio port, an expanded screen on/off button, and a volume adjustment button; and the audio port, the expanded screen on/off button, and the volume adjustment button are arranged on the support. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an audio port, an expanded screen on/off button, and a volume adjustment button; and the audio port, the expanded screen on/off button, and the volume adjustment button are arranged on the support in Chen in view of Ashcraft, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the concept of putting different traditional input and/or output elements from the display device to the stand was already taught by Ashcraft, and rearranging additional elements such as audio port, on/off button, and volume adjustment button would have provide additional space saving in the display device, and this yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 5-10 and 14-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Varadarajan et al. (US 9,459,664) disclose an expanded screen, wherein the expended screen comprises: a display device; a rotating assembly; and a support comprises a first folded state that one surface of the support is rotated to abut against a portion of the back surface of the display device; and a second folded state that the other surface of the support is rotated to abut against another portion of the back surface of the display device (Figs. 1-4B).
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 JAMES WU whose telephone number is (571)270-7974. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/JAMES WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841