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 .
Remarks
In response to applicant’s amendment, dated 12/10/2025, the examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 25, 27, and 28. Claims 1-28 are pending.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 27, the examiner has considered applicant’s arguments in light of the amended claim and withdraws the rejection.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection of claim 6, the examiner has considered applicant’s arguments in light of the amended claim and withdraws the rejection.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claim(s) 1-10, 12-22 and 25-28 as being anticipated by Aoyagi (WO 2021/187436), the applicant amended independent claims 1, 25 and 28 to include the limitation:
“wherein a length of the first shape portion in the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 2 mm or less, and a width of the first shape portion in a direction orthogonal to the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 1.2 mm or less”.
The applicant argues that the specification of the present application teach that the claimed "length of the first shape portion" and "width of the first shape portion" are result- effective variables, and the claimed ranges of the length and the width could achieve the technical effect of "appropriate grip performance is obtained". (emphasis added). The examiner notes that the addition of a result-effective variable lends itself to an obviousness rejection.
The applicant further argues that “Aoyagi does not teach the length range and the width range of the protrusion part 33c (interpreted as the claimed first shape portion by the Office). Therefore, Aoyagi fails to disclose the aforementioned features of claim 1.” The examiner has considered applicant’s arguments in light of the amended claims and withdraws the rejection. Likewise, the examiner withdraws the corresponds 35 USC 103 rejections based on Aoyagi as set forth in the Office Action mailed 09/11/2025.
Further, in applicant’s Remarks with the amendment, the applicant argues that “Rose fails to teach "a length of the first shape portion in the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 2 mm or less, and a width of the first shape portion in a direction orthogonal to the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 1.2 mm or less" as a whole”.
The examiner notes that the applicant has proposed a similar amendment during an Interview (date of Interview: Nov. 3, 2025). The examiner noted in the Interview Summary (dated 11/5/2025) that:
“The applicant proposed an amendment to claim 1 to include the limitation "wherein a length of the first shape portion in the first direction is 0.5mm or more and 2mm or less. The examiner note that the proposed amendment would overcome the current 35 USC 102 rejection set forth in the Office Action mailed 09/11/2025. However, the examiner noted that the proposed amendment would not make the claims allowable. A final obviousness rejection would likely be made in response to an amendment as proposed. The addition of a result-effective variable lends itself to an obviousness rejection. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Further, Rose (US 2007/0082750) cited as a reference but not relied upon teaches a grip pattern with a width less than 0.080" (2mm).” (emphasis added by examiner)
The examiner had noted Rose to show a grip pattern with a structure with a similar size as the current invention. Further, the examiner noted that “It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233”. Thus, a new rejection has been made as follows.
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(s) 1-10, 12-23 and 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoyagi (WO 2021/187436).
PNG
media_image1.png
338
350
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Aoyagi - Fig. 4
Regarding claim 1, Aoyagi discloses “a grip portion having a surface shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33), wherein the surface shape portion has a first shape portion extending in a first direction (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c), and a second shape portion extending in a second direction (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or a third shape portion extending in a third direction (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b).”
Regarding claim 25, Aoyagi discloses “a grip portion having a surface shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33), wherein the surface shape portion is formed in a shape that generates a component of a force in a direction intersecting a second direction or a third direction in a case where a grip force is applied to the surface shape portion in a direction intersecting a first direction.” (Fig. 4: arrow L3 is in a direction of force similar to the lines of force shown in applications Drawings Fig. 6)
Regarding claim 28, Aoyagi discloses “a grip portion having a surface shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33) wherein the surface shape portion has a first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) that extends in an intersection direction with a grip direction, which is a direction in which a grip force is applied to the surface shape portion, and a second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or a third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) that extends in a tilt direction with respect to the intersection direction and that generates a component of a force as a lifting force in a case where the grip force is applied to the surface shape portion.” (Fig. 4: arrow L3 is in a direction of force similar to the lines of force shown in applications Drawings Fig. 6)
However, Regarding claims 1, 25 and 28, Aoyagi does not teach the newly added limitation: “wherein a length of the first shape portion in the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 2 mm or less, and a width of the first shape portion in a direction orthogonal to the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 1.2 mm or less”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Aoyagi such that wherein a length of the first shape portion in the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 2 mm or less, and a width of the first shape portion in a direction orthogonal to the first direction is 0.5 mm or more and 1.2 mm or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claims are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 2, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the grip portion has a plurality of the surface shape portions.” (Fig. 4, ref.# 33)
Regarding claim 3, Aoyagi discloses “wherein a plurality of the surface shape portions form a repeating pattern.” (Fig. 4, ref.# 33)
Regarding claim 4, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the repeating pattern includes an embossed pattern.” (Fig. 4, ref.# 33; Abstract)
Regarding claim 5, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the surface shape portion is formed in a three-dimensional shape.”(Fig. 4, ref.# 33)
Regarding claim 6, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the surface shape portion has the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b).”
Regarding claim 7, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) extends from a central portion (Fig. 4, ref.# C2) of the surface shape portion, and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) extends from the central portion (Fig. 4, ref.# C2).”
Regarding claim 8, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first direction (Fig. 4, downward) is a direction of gravitational force of the apparatus, and the second direction and/or the third direction is a direction tilted with respect to the direction of gravitational force (See Fig. 4, relative tilted directions of ref.# 33a & ref.# 33b).”
Regarding claim 9, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) is positioned on an upper side of the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) in the direction of gravitational force.”
Regarding claim 10, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) extends downward from a central portion (Fig. 4, ref.# C2) of the surface shape portion in the direction of gravitational force, and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) portion extends obliquely upward from the central portion.”
Regarding claim 12, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c), and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) portion are formed in the same shape.”
Regarding claim 13, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c), and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) are connected to each other.”
Regarding claim 14, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c), and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and/or the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33B) are separated from each other.”
Regarding claim 15, Aoyagi discloses “wherein an angle formed between the first shape portion and the second shape portion or the third shape portion is an obtuse angle.” (Fig. 4: angles between the different portions are obtuse angles)
Regarding claim 16, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the angle is 120°.” (Fig. 4: angle between the different portions is 120°)
Regarding claim 17, Aoyagi discloses “wherein an end portion of the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) in the first direction is formed in an arc shape or a distal end angle shape, and an end portion of the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) in the second direction and/or an end portion of the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) in the third direction is formed in an arc shape or a distal end angle shape.”
Regarding claim 18, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the repeating pattern is a pattern in which the plurality of surface shape portions are arranged along the first direction and are arranged along the second direction and/or the third direction.” (See Fig. 4, ref.# 33)
Regarding claim 19, Aoyagi discloses “wherein each of the surface shape portions has the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) and the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b), the repeating pattern is a pattern in which the plurality of surface shape portions are arranged along the first direction, the second direction, and the third direction (See Fig. 4), and the repeating pattern is a pattern in which the first shape portion of the other surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the first direction enters a first region, which is a region between the second shape portion and the third shape portion of one surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the first direction, the second shape portion of the other surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the second direction enters a second region, which is a region between the first shape portion and the third shape portion of one surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the second direction, and the third shape portion of the other surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the third direction enters a third region, which is a region between the first shape portion and the second shape portion of one surface shape portion of the surface shape portions adjacent in the third direction.” (See Figure 4)
Regarding claim 20, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the surface shape portion has the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a), the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) and the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a) are formed in a three-dimensional shape (Fig. 4, ref.# 33), respectively, a first top portion, which is a top portion of the first shape portion, has a first ridge line that is a ridge line extending in the first direction, and a second top portion, which is a top portion of the second shape portion, has a second ridge line that is a ridge line extending in the second direction.” (See Fig. 4)
Regarding claim 21, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the surface shape portion has the third shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b), the third shape portion is formed in a three-dimensional shape, and a third top portion, which is a top portion of the third shape portion, has a third ridge line that is a ridge line extending in the third direction.” (See Fig. 4)
Regarding claim 22, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the three-dimensional shape of the first shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33c) is a three-dimensional shape in which a width expands in a direction orthogonal to the first direction from the first top portion toward a first base portion, which is a base portion of the first shape portion, and the three-dimensional shape of the second shape portion is a three-dimensional shape in which a width expands in a direction orthogonal to the second direction from the second top portion toward a second base portion, which is a base portion of the second shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33a).” (See Fig. 4; page 4 of translation, 7th paragraph)
Regarding claim 23, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the three-dimensional shape of the third shape (Fig. 4, ref.# 33b) portion is a three-dimensional shape in which a width expands in a direction orthogonal to the third direction from the third top portion toward a third base portion, which is a base portion of the third shape portion.” (See Fig. 4; page 4 of translation, 7th paragraph)
Regarding claim 26, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the component of a force is a component of a force as a lifting force.” (Fig. 4: the force against the grip component can be considered to be a lifting force during the movement of the controller)
Regarding claim 27, Aoyagi discloses “wherein the surface shape portion (Fig. 4, ref.# 33) is formed in a shape in which a grip force to the surface shape portion is strengthened in a case where the grip force is applied to the surface shape portion in the direction intersecting the first direction than in a case where the grip force is applied to the surface shape portion in a direction of gravitational force, which prevents the apparatus from falling off.” (Fig. 4: arrow L3 is in a direction of force similar to the lines of force shown in applications Drawings Fig. 6)
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoyagi (WO 2021/187436) in view of Manabe, et al. (US 5,708,897).
Regarding claim 11, the apparatus is a game controller with a joy-stick including a grip portion corresponding to claim 1. Aoyagi does not teach “wherein the apparatus is an imaging apparatus.” However, a grip portion on a camera (i.e., imaging apparatus) was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Manabe (See Fig. 1, ref.# 20). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Aoyagi to include the intended use of using the grip structure of a camera such as Manabe in order to improve the stability of holding the camera to preventing slipping of the fingers and/or hand as described in Aoyagi on page 4, paragraph 5th paragraph of the English translation.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoyagi (WO 2021/187436) in view of Rose (US 2007/0082750).
Regarding claim 24, Aoyagi discloses all the structure set forth in the claim except “wherein the surface shape portion is formed by using a mold having a laser-processed molding surface.” However, a grip with a pattern wherein the surface shape portion is formed by using a mold having a laser-processed molding surface was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Rose (See paragraph 0022). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to for the surface shape by using a mold having a laser-processed molding surface in order to create gripping structure with precise shapes and relative locations.
Conclusion
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 RODNEY FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2118. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/RODNEY E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
February 25, 2026