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 .
This office action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 11/21/2023. Claims 1 – 20 are pending in this application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “110” in FIG 2A and “1007” in FIG 9. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “S103” in par. 0058 and 0059; “S303” and “S304” in par. 0065, 0066 and 0069; “907” in par. 0119 and 0121, all of the specification as filed. 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. 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 Objections
Claims 3, 9 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: each of the claims contains the following limitation “the if the extendable screen is in extended state, controlling the extendable screen to retract specifically comprises”. The first “the” in this limitation appears to be unnecessary. Appropriate correction is required.
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 13 – 18 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.
Claims 13 – 18 each recites the limitation “the extendable screen” multiple times. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in each of the claims.
Claims 15 – 17 each recites the limitation “the electronic device” multiple times. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in each of the claims.
Claims 14 – 18 are also rejected as being dependent from the corresponding base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 13 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 13 – 18 each recites “A readable storage medium storing a program or an instruction”. Support for this limitation appears to be in paragraph 0133 of the specification as filed. However, the listing of possible readable storage medium uses transitional term “includes”, which is open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. See, e.g., Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Therefore, with the concept of broadest reasonable interpretation, the examiner considers such “readable storage medium” as signals and waves are within the scope of these claims and thus represent non-patentable subject matter. To overcome the rejection, the examiner recommends adding the term “non-transitory” to exclude signals and waves.
Claims 14 – 18 are also rejected as being dependent from the rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1, 3 – 5, 7, 9 – 11, 13, 15 – 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20100167791 (Lim) (of record).
Regarding claims 1, 7, 13 and 20, Lim teaches “A control method applied to an electronic device, wherein the electronic device has an extendable screen (par. 0176 and FIGS. 12 and 13: views showing examples to restore the extended flexible LCD to the initial state when an incoming call is received.), and the method comprises:
in a case that a call request is received, if the extendable screen is in extended state (par. 0177: As shown in FIG. 12, the flexible LCD 51 may be automatically or manually extended), controlling the extendable screen to retract; and in a case that the extendable screen retracts to a first target size (par. 0178: When an incoming call is received in a state that the flexible LCD 51 is in an extended state, the controller 180 restores the extended flexible LCD 51 to the initial state), outputting prompt information corresponding to the call request (par. 0179: If the received incoming call is a voice call, the flexible LCD 51 is restored to the initial state, and, the message is displayed on the main LCD 50 of the portable terminal.).”
Regarding claims 3, 9 and 15, Lim teaches “wherein before the controlling the extendable screen to retract, the method further comprises: in the case that a call request is received, obtaining a running state of the electronic device (par. 0179: If the received incoming call is a voice call, the controller 180 checks whether an external headset such as a Bluetooth headset is in a connected state to the portable terminal (representing claimed “a running state of the electronic device”).); and the if the extendable screen is in extended state, controlling the extendable screen to retract specifically comprises: if the extendable screen is in extended state and the running state of the electronic device does not satisfy a first preset condition, controlling the extendable screen to retract (par. 0179: if the external headset is not in a connected state to the portable terminal (“the running state of the electronic device does not satisfy a first preset condition”), the flexible LCD 51 is restored to the initial state.).”
Regarding claims 4, 10 and 16, Lim teaches “wherein before the controlling the extendable screen to retract, the method further comprises: if the extendable screen is in extended state and a running state of the electronic device satisfies a first preset condition (par. 0179: If the received incoming call is a voice call, the controller 180 checks whether an external headset such as a Bluetooth headset is in a connected state to the portable terminal), keeping a screen size of the extendable screen unchanged and outputting the prompt information corresponding to the call request (par. 0179: If an external Bluetooth headset is in a connected state to the portable terminal (“a running state of the electronic device satisfies a first preset condition”), the controller 180 controls the user to perform a voice calling by using the headset. There is no disclosure that the flexible LCD 51 is restored to the initial state which means that it stays in the in the extended state. Similarly paragraph 0152: When an incoming call is received in a state that the flexible LCD is in an extended state (slid state), the controller 180 checks whether the interface unit 170 is in a connected state to an external Bluetooth Headset. If the interface unit 170 is in a connected state to an external Bluetooth Headset, the slid state of the flexible LCD (extended state) is maintained.).”
Regarding claims 5, 11 and 17, Lim teaches “wherein the first preset condition comprises at least one of the following: the electronic device is connected to an external device (these claims depend from claims 3, 9 and 15, correspondingly. The parent claims require that if the running state does not satisfy “the first preset condition”, the screen retracts upon reception of the phone call. Thus, this specific limitation of the current claims require that when the electronic device is not connected to an external device, the screen retracts upon reception of the phone call. In view of this, paragraph 0179: If the received incoming call is a voice call, the controller 180 checks whether an external Bluetooth headset is in a connected state to the portable terminal. If the external headset is not in a connected state to the portable terminal, the flexible LCD 51 is restored to the initial state.); and
the extendable screen displays a running interface of a preset application, wherein the preset application comprises a video application and a game application (in view of the requirements of the parent claims, this specific limitation of the current claims require that when the electronic device does not display a running interface of a video application and/or a game application, the screen retracts upon reception of the phone call. However, neither these claims, nor their parent claims specify a course of the action when the running state of the electronic device does satisfy the first preset condition, or in this case does display a video application and/or a game application. Therefore, within the concept of broadest reasonable interpretation, the wording of the claims does not forbid performing exactly same action regardless of whether a video application and/or a game application is displayed or not. In other words, the claims do not forbid retracting the display from its extended state regardless of the specific application being presented on the display of the electronic device, including presenting a video application and/or a game application. This is shown in Lim’s FIG 12. In Lim, the retraction is performed regardless of a specific application being presented on the display of the electronic device, thus meeting the limitation of instant claims.).”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 8, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20100167791 (Lim).
Regarding claims 2, 8 and 14, Lim teaches “wherein in a case that a call request is received, if the extendable screen is in extended state, controlling the extendable screen to retract comprises: in the case that a call request is received, if the extendable screen is in extended state, controlling the extendable screen to retract (please see explanation in the rejection of claim 1 above)…”
Lim does not teach that the retraction is “at a first preset speed, wherein the first preset speed is greater than a retraction speed at which the extendable screen retracts when manually triggered.”
However, Lim in paragraphs 0158 and 0171 – 0174 teaches the capability of manually controlling extension of the flexible display, and in paragraph 0175, Lim teaches the capability of automatic extension and contraction. Further, paragraph 0151 teaches that an LCD sliding motor is driven by the driving control signal and may be rotated in a forward or backward direction. And, the LCD sliding motor may have a speed controlled step by step (highest speed (“a first preset speed”) at an emergency mode).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application that upon receiving an incoming call, although may not be considered as an emergency mode, it would be better if the disclosed contraction of the flexible display were performed as fast as possible (“at a first preset speed”), so that the user would be able to answer the phone call sooner upon the display becoming fully contracted, as shown in FIG 12, bottom part. Otherwise, if the contraction of the display is performed slowly (such as at the speed disclosed in paragraphs 0158 and 0171 – 0174, being “a retraction speed at which the extendable screen retracts when manually triggered”), there may be a risk that by the time the display is fully contracted and the phone is ready to be used for answering the call, the call may stop ringing and the user would not be able to answer the call in time.
Regarding claim 19, Lim teaches “a processor (controller 180 in FIG 1) and a communications interface, the communications interface is coupled to the processor (wireless communication unit 110 in FIG 1 coupled to the controller), and the processor is configured to execute a program or an instruction to implement the steps of the control method applied to an electronic device according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).”
Lim does not teach “A chip, wherein the chip comprises” all above mentioned components. However, it is either implicit in Lim, or it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to use an integrated circuit encompassing controller and wireless communication unit, in the device of Lim. Doing so would have allowed to miniaturize the device, reduce its cost and ensure repeatability of parameters from device to device.
Claims 6, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20100167791 (Lim) as applied to claims 1, 7 and 13 above, and further in view of US 20210392224 (Noh).
Regarding claims 6, 12 and 18, Lim does not explicitly teach “wherein after the outputting prompt information corresponding to the call request, the method further comprises: receiving a response input for the call request from a user; and in a case that the response input is to reject a call corresponding to the call request, extending the extendable screen from the first target size to a second target size; or
in a case that the response input is to answer a call corresponding to the call request, extending the extendable screen from the first target size to a second target size after the call ends; wherein the second target size is a screen size of the extendable screen before the call request is received.”
Noh teaches a similar arrangement in which the mobile terminal may receive a phone call in the enlarged display mode, switch to the reduced display mode in response to the phone call, and output a phone call application on the display (see paragraph 0269). Additionally, Noh teaches “wherein after the outputting prompt information corresponding to the call request, the method further comprises: receiving a response input for the call request from a user; … in a case that the response input is to answer a call corresponding to the call request, extending the extendable screen from the first target size to a second target size after the call ends; wherein the second target size is a screen size of the extendable screen before the call request is received (paragraphs 0270 – 0271: When the phone call is ended, the mobile terminal may terminate the phone call application and switch to the enlarged display mode. Accordingly, when the event ends, the mobile terminal may switch to the enlarged display mode, output the first content 1410 that has originally been executed in the enlarged display mode (“the second target size is a screen size of the extendable screen before the call request is received”)).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to utilize disclosed by Noh restoration of the original extended state of the display upon termination of the call, in the system of Lim. Doing so would have increased convenience to the user by automatically going back to the content the user was consuming prior to the answering of the call.
With respect to the limitation “in a case that the response input is to reject a call corresponding to the call request, extending the extendable screen from the first target size to a second target size”, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to utilize the same approach as disclosed by Noh by restoring the display to its original extended state upon the user rejecting the call. Doing so would have increased convenience to the user by automatically going back to the content the user was consuming prior to receiving notification of the incoming call.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GENNADIY TSVEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3198. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5:30.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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.
/GENNADIY TSVEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648