Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/580,187

WRISTBAND DEVICE WITH SWITCHABLE SCREEN

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 18, 2024
Examiner
HAUGHTON, ANTHONY MICHAEL
Art Unit
2841
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Goertek Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
816 granted / 1018 resolved
+12.2% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1053
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.0%
+8.0% vs TC avg
§102
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§112
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1018 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Ely (2019/0278232). Regarding Claim 1: Ely teaches a wristband device with switchable screen comprising a screen (fig. 1), wherein the wristband device with switchable screen further comprises: a middle frame (114) provided with a roller (110) which is rotatable and a through hole (172) configured to facilitate the roller (fig. 3) to be rotated from an outside of the middle frame (fig. 3); a window frame body (paragraph [0050]) provided with a light transmitting window, wherein one side of the light transmitting window is provided with a light sensor assembly (210a-210d) configured to detect a rotation of the roller (paragraph [0054], [0057]) and connected to a controller (paragraph [0057] and [0096]), and the other side of the light transmitting window is fixed to the middle frame (fig. 3), and the roller is located between the middle frame and the window frame body (portions of the shaft of the roller are shown between in fig. 3); and a sealing member (144) sealed between the window frame body and the middle frame (fig. 3), wherein the sealing member has an annular shape (paragraph [0058]) and surrounds a periphery of the through hole (paragraph [0058] and fig. 3), to implement waterproof sealing between the through hole and an inside of the middle frame (paragraph [0058]). Regarding Claim 2: Ely teaches the light sensor assembly comprises a light emitting device configured to emit light to the roller (paragraph [0096]), a sensor (paragraph [0096]) configured to sense a light reflected from the roller (paragraph [0096]) and a flexible circuit board (166) connected to the controller and the sensor (paragraph [0096]). Regarding Claim 6: Ely teaches wherein the window frame body is provided with an annular groove (152), the sealing member (154) is provided in the annular groove (fig. 3), and the sealing member partially extends out of the annular groove before installing the middle frame (fig. 3). 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. Claim(s) 3-5, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ely (2019/0278232) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Harms (10,840,041). Regarding Claim 3: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the window frame body is provided with a stopper snap-fitted to the sensor to limit movement of the sensor. Harms teaches the window frame body is provided with a stopper (col 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3) snap-fitted to the sensor (17) to limit movement of the sensor (col 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the window frame body is provided with a stopper snap-fitted to the sensor to limit movement of the sensor as disclosed by Harms in order to allow for a better and stronger connection between the components of the apparatus which decreases the chance of damage to the components of the device. Regarding Claim 4: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the middle frame is fastened to the window frame body by a screw. Harms teaches the middle frame is fastened to the window frame body by a screw (19a and 19b). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the middle frame is fastened to the window frame body by a screw as disclosed by Harms in order to allow for a better and stronger connection between the components of the apparatus which decreases the chance of damage to the components of the device. Regarding Claim 5: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the window frame body is connected to a cover plate by the screw, and the light emitting device or the sensor is pressed by the cover plate to contact with the window frame body. Harms teaches the window frame body (fig. 7) is connected to a cover plate (10) by the screw (19a and 19b), and the light emitting device or the sensor (17) is pressed by the cover plate to contact with the window frame body (fig. 7). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the window frame body is connected to a cover plate by the screw, and the light emitting device or the sensor is pressed by the cover plate to contact with the window frame body as disclosed by Harms in order to allow for a better and stronger connection between the components of the apparatus which decreases the chance of damage to the components of the device. Regarding Claim 9: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the window frame body is provided with a protruding member elastically protruding toward and contracting away from the roller, and the roller is provided with a groove, when the roller is rotated to a position where the protruding member is snap-fitted to the groove, the roller is rotated to a preset angle is detected by the light sensor assembly (8), and the light sensor assembly transmits a detection signal to the controller. Harms teaches the window frame body is provided with a protruding member elastically protruding (21a and 21b) toward and contracting away from the roller (rotary knobs), and the roller is provided with a groove (fig. 7), when the roller is rotated to a position where the protruding member is snap-fitted to the groove (col. 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3 and col. 7 lines 20-27), the roller is rotated to a preset angle is detected by the light sensor assembly (col. 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3 and col. 7 lines 20-27), and the light sensor assembly (8) transmits a detection signal to the controller (col. 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3 and col. 7 lines 20-27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the window frame body is provided with a protruding member elastically protruding toward and contracting away from the roller, and the roller is provided with a groove, when the roller is rotated to a position where the protruding member is snap-fitted to the groove, the roller is rotated to a preset angle is detected by the light sensor assembly (8), and the light sensor assembly transmits a detection signal to the controller as disclosed by Harms in order to allow for a better and stronger connection between the components of the apparatus which decreases the chance of damage to the components of the device. Regarding Claim 10: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the roller is provided with at least three grooves respectively configured to be snap-fitted to the same protruding member when rotated to different angles. Harms teaches the roller (rotary knobs) is provided with at least three grooves respectively configured to be snap-fitted to the same protruding member when rotated to different angles (col. 5 line 50 – col. 6 line 3 and col. 7 lines 20-27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the roller is provided with at least three grooves respectively configured to be snap-fitted to the same protruding member when rotated to different angles as disclosed by Harms in order to allow for a better and stronger connection between the components of the apparatus which decreases the chance of damage to the components of the device. Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ely (2019/0278232). Regarding Claim 7: Ely lacks a specific teaching of the sealing member is a silica gel sealing ring. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the sealing member is a silica gel sealing ring in order to allow for a better more efficient sealing of the internal electronic components and decrease the chances of external water or other contaminants getting into the device which could damage the components. This would be accomplished merely by choosing the best material in the art and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Regarding Claim 8: Ely teaches the sealing ring is fixed to the annular groove (fig. 3) by backed adhesive (col. 8 liens 50-54), but lacks a teaching of the sealing ring being silica gel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the apparatus of Ely by having the sealing ring being silica gel in order to allow for a better more efficient sealing of the internal electronic components and decrease the chances of external water or other contaminants getting into the device which could damage the components. This would be accomplished merely by choosing the best material in the art and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious engineering choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY MICHAEL HAUGHTON whose telephone number is (571)272-9087. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p. 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, Imani Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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. /ANTHONY M HAUGHTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604423
ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING CAMERA MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602074
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575031
CONNECTING BOARD AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557229
JIG FOR GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNIT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12537459
SERVER POWER SUPPLY UNIT WITH HOT-SWAPPABLE RECTIFIER MODULES AND DUAL INPUT SOURCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.4%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1018 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month