DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claims 3 and 16-17 are 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.
In Reference to Claim 3
Claim 3 recites the limitation "optionally to track F0" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “a resonant frequency F0” is recited in Claim 2, however, Claim 3 depends on Claim 1 rather than Claim 2. As best understood, Claim 3 should depend on Claim 2.
In Reference to Claims 16-17
The term “substantially” in claims 16 and is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine whether the frequencies where “substantially” the same or not or the phases “substantially” in phase or out of phase with one another.
The remainder of this office action is considered as best understood.
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.
(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 1-10 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Konyo et al., US 2025/0091088.
In Reference to Claim 1
Konyo et al. teaches a gaming controller, comprising a haptic actuator; and a haptic driver (Par. 110 “game controller,” Fig. 1 and Par. 49), wherein the haptic driver is configured to drive the haptic actuator with a drive signal (Par. 52) having a dominant frequency F2, and to control how the drive signal is applied to the haptic actuator to generate a haptic effect that at least partly emulates a desired haptic effect having a dominant frequency F1, where F2>F1 (Abstract, Fig. 2a and 2b. Par. 45-49 which where the system analyzes a signal to produce a drive signal for a haptic actuator to reproduce a vibration in a desired frequency band. And teaches an actuator which operates at a high frequency somewhere in the range of 50 to 350 Hz and is controlled to present a simulated vibration in a low frequency in the range of 10-50 Hz in a manner that is sensed by humans. See also Par. 54-59 which teaches generating high frequency pulses to reproduce the sensation of a low frequency waveform).
In Reference to Claim 2
Konyo et al. teaches where F2 is at or near a resonant frequency F0 of the haptic actuator; and/or F2 is above 100 Hz, further preferably above 150 Hz; and/or F1 is below 100 Hz, further preferably in the range 20-80 Hz; and/or F1 and F2 are set such that a gain from driving signal to haptic actuator response at F1 is A times lower than at F2, where A>2, optionally where A>5, optionally where A>10 (Par. 49-50 “resonance frequency of the resonance system of the actuator,” “reproduces the high-frequency band by using the actuator 31 of 200 Hz±150 Hz” and “presents a simulated vibration in the low-frequency band (first frequency band) of 100 Hz or less (10 Hz to 100 Hz, in particular, 10 Hz to 50 Hz)”).
In Reference to Claim 3
Konyo e al. teaches where the control comprises at least one of: controlling when the drive signal is and is not applied to the haptic actuator; controlling a magnitude of the applied drive signal; controlling a phase of the applied drive signal; controlling a polarity of the applied drive signal; controlling a value of F2, optionally to track F0; modifying the drive signal such that a leading end of a discrete pulse of the applied drive signal has a steepened attack profile and/or such that a trailing end of a discrete pulse of the applied drive signal has a steepened braking profile; and modifying the drive signal such that the haptic actuator behaves as if an impedance of the haptic actuator and/or the haptic driver had been modified (Fig. 2a and 2b Par. 56-58 which teaches generating distinct pulses and Par. 85 which teaches controlling vibration magnitude).
In Reference to Claim 4
Konyo et al. wherein the haptic actuator is or comprises at least
one of: a linear resonant actuator, LRA; and a voice coil motor, VCM (Par. 50-51 “voice coil actuator” and “linear resonance actuator”).
In Reference to Claim 5
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the control comprises controlling the drive
signal such that the applied drive signal at least partly emulates a desired drive signal,
the desired drive signal having the dominant frequency F1 and configured to generate the desired haptic effect (Fig. 2a-2b and Par. 49, 58. See also Fig. 3A-3E and Par. 61-70).
In Reference to Claim 6
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the desired drive signal and/or the desired
haptic effect having the dominant frequency F1 has at least one of: a periodic waveform; a sinusoidal, triangle, square, rectangular, positive-ramp sawtooth, or negative-ramp sawtooth waveform; a modified sinusoidal waveform, having a slow rise and fast fall; an irregular waveform; and a customized waveform, optionally defined by one or more custom parameters (Fig. 2a-2b, Par. 46, and 56).
In Reference to Claim 7
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the control comprises applying the drive
signal as a series of discrete pulses, optionally wherein each discrete pulse comprises
one or more oscillations of the drive signal (Fig. 2a-2b, Par. 46, and 56).
In Reference to Claim 8
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the control comprises modifying the drive
signal such that: a leading end of each discrete pulse has a steepened attack profile and/or such that a trailing end of each discrete pulse has a steepened braking profile; and/or the haptic actuator behaves as if an impedance of the haptic actuator and/or the haptic driver had been modified (See Fig. 2a which examiner considers each pulse to have “a leading end of each discrete pulse has a steepened attack profile and/or such that a trailing end of each discrete pulse has a steepened braking profile”).
In Reference to Claim 9
Konyo et al. teaches a timing, magnitude and/or polarity of the pulses is configured so that the pulses correspond in timing, magnitude and/or polarity to samples of the desired drive signal; and/or the timing and magnitude of the pulses are selected such that the maximum magnitude values of the pulses recreate a sampled version the desired drive signal (Fig. 2a and Par. 56 “A short-time pulse signal is generated as an input waveform by controlling the actuator 31 in accordance with the peak timing of the low-frequency signal of the continuous target signal.” See also Par. 85 which teach adjusting the magnitude of the pulse correspond to the desired output magnitude).
In Reference to Claim 10
Konyo et al. teaches the pulses correspond in timing to samples of the desired drive signal at its positive and negative peaks; and/or the timing and magnitude of the pulses are selected such that the maximum magnitude values of the pulses correspond with the local maxima and/or local minima of the desired drive signal (Fig. 2a and Par. 56. See also Fig. 4a-4b, Fig. 5 and Par. 71-94 which teaches a system for determining the timing of driving the actuator for more complex signal which teaches determining local maxima and/or local minima in order to decide when to produce drive signal pulses to reproduce the low frequency sensation of vibration).
In Reference to Claim 12
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the control comprises modulating an amplitude of the drive signal so that an envelope of the applied drive signal comprises at least a portion of the desired drive signal (Par. 84-85).
In Reference to Claim 13
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the portion of the desired drive signal comprises at least 30%, 40% or 50% of a period or oscillation of the desired drive signal (Fig. 84-85 and Fig. 2a and Fig. 2b. See also 80 which teaches that the timing of the drive signal can be shifted so that the generated output better matched the desired signal).
In Reference to Claim 14
Konyo et al. teaches comprising receiving a command signal indicative
of the desired haptic effect and/or the dominant frequency F1 and/or the waveform of the desired haptic effect, and controlling how the drive signal is applied to the haptic actuator based on the command signal (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2a and 2b Par. 36, 38 and 46).
In Reference to Claim 15
Konyo et al. teaches wherein the haptic actuator is a first haptic actuator
and the drive signal is a first drive signal, and wherein: the gaming controller comprises a second haptic actuator; and the haptic driver is configured to drive the second haptic actuator with a second drive signal having a dominant frequency F2b, and to control how the second drive signal is applied to the second haptic actuator to generate a haptic effect that at least partly emulates a desired haptic effect having a dominant frequency F1b, where F2b>F1b (Par. 119 “The vibration generation system 100 illustrated in FIG. 1 is provided with one actuator 31, but is not limited thereto. The number of actuators 31 included in the vibration generation system 100 can be changed variously” as well as the haptic driver described above in reference to Claim 1).
In Reference to Claim 16
Konyo et al. teaches F2b is substantially the same as F2 or is different from F2; and/or F1b is substantially the same as F1 or is different from F1 (Par. 119 where the frequencies of multiple actuators would have to be either the same or different. The claim is reciting all possibilities in the alternative).
In Reference to Claim 17
Konyo et al. teaches where the applied first drive signal and the applied second drive signal be synchronized with one another; or be substantially out of phase with one another, preferably substantially 180° out of phase with one another, and/or to be mutually complementary signals; or be substantially in phase with one another, and preferably substantially the same as one another; or have a target phase difference between one another, optionally wherein the target phase difference is controllable (Par. 119 where Konyo et al. teaches multiple actuators and where the limitations of the claims reciting in the alternative “substantially in phase” “substantially out of phase” or “have a target phase difference between one another” recites all possible phase relationships of the signals in the alternative).
In Reference to Claim 18
Konyo et al. teaches where wherein the first haptic actuator and the second
haptic actuator are mounted such that their axes of vibration are, in two or three
dimensions: colinear; or parallel with one another; or perpendicular to one another; or
neither colinear, nor parallel with one another, nor perpendicular with one another (Par. 119 and where the options claimed in the alternative recite all possible orientations in the alternative. So the multiple actuators of Konyo et al. must be in one of the recited mounting arrangements).
In Reference to Claim 19 and 20
Konyo et al. teaches the gaming controller comprises N haptic actuators HAx, where X = 1 to N, and where N≥2; and the haptic driver is configured to drive each of the N haptic actuators HAx with a corresponding drive signal DSx having a corresponding dominant frequency F2x; and the haptic driver is configured to control, for each of the N haptic actuators HAx, how its drive signal DSx is applied to its haptic actuator HAx to generate, with the N haptic actuators, a haptic effect that at least partly emulates a desired haptic effect having a dominant frequency F1, where each dominant frequency F2x is greater than F1 (Par. 119 and as referenced above in Claim 1).
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Konyo et al., US 2025/0091088, in view of Bajaj et al., US 2020/0356173.
In Reference to Claim 11
Konyo et al. teaches a device as described above in reference to Claim 7 including generating discrete pulses with actuators to emulate a since wave and an output signal with a dominant frequency (Fig. 2a). Further Konyo et al. teaches where the system can use multiple actuators (Par. 119). However, Konyo et al. does not explicitly teach where the pulses are generated at a rate corresponding to the Nyquist rate for the dominant frequency of the desired drive signal.
Bajaj et al. teaches a haptic system for gaming controllers (Par. 5 and Fig. 16) which include LRA actuators and which teaches using high frequency LRAs to generate low frequency vibration sensations (Par. 920 “Psuedo-Rumble”), and where the signal peaks which correspond to the pulses of Konyo et al. are generated at a rate corresponding to the Nyquist rate for the dominant frequency of the desired drive signal (See Fig. 43-44 and Par. 414-425 which teaches using a pair of LRA actuators to generate a haptic sensation and where the second actuator is driven with “twice the frequency” of the dominant frequency of the combined output waveform. Thus driving the actuator at a rate corresponding to the Nyquist rate).
It would be desirable to modify the device of Konyo et al. to include driving actuators as the Nyquist rate of the dominant frequency of a desired drive signal as taught by Bajaj et al. in order to allow the system to use multiple actuators to create more complex vibration sensation waveforms by combining actuators driven at different rates as taught by Bajaj et al.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to include driving actuators as the Nyquist rate of the dominant frequency of a desired drive signal as taught by Bajaj et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL V LARSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 10:00 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/CARL V LARSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights