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 .
Examiner’s Note(s)
The examiner has provided proposal to the attorney in a communication (at least on Nov 21, 2025). The amendments are in line with what has occurred in foreign office with additional amendments for clarity. The examiner invites the attorney to an interview to help provide any clarity.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/21/2024 & 12/2/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 6, 8, and 10 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.
Claim 6 lacks antecedent for “first end area”. Claim 6 should dependent on claim 5 since first end area lacks antecedent and first time "first end area" is mentioned in claim 5.
Claim 8 lacks antecedent “second end area”. Claim 8 dependent on claim 5 since second end area lacks antecedent and first time "second end area" is mentioned in claim 5.
Claim 10 lacks antecedent for “first end area” and “second end area”. Claim 10 dependent on claim 5 since "first end area" and "second end area" lacks antecedent and first time "first end area" and "second end area" are mentioned in claim 5.
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) 1-12, 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. KR 20190114863 (original provided in the IDS 12/2/2024 and translation provided by the office) in view of Hamburgen et al. US Pub 2018/0356859 (provided in the IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Ryu teaches,
An electronic device (figures 1-6) comprising:
a housing (figure 1-2, element 10) including a first housing (element 11) and a second housing (element 12) configured to rotate with respect to the first housing (rotate about the hinge 13/14 in respective figures 3-6);
a display (element 20) including a first display area (area of 20 corresponding to element 11) disposed on the first housing, a second display area disposed on the second housing (area of 20 corresponding to element 12), and a folding area (area of 20 corresponding to element 13/14) positioned between the first display area and the second display area; and
a display support member (element 32) comprising a composite material (paragraph 82 of translation; hereinafter any paragraphs citation will correspond to machine translation provided by the office) and configured to support the display (as seen in at least paragraph 3, 32 support display 20),
wherein the display support member comprises a pattern structure (paragraph 85) facing the folding area.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein the pattern structure comprises a wing portion and a support portion extending from the wing portion.
Hamburgen in similar field of foldable electronic device teaches a display support member (figures 16-20, such that the bend limit layer 1602/1802/are of 2002 is the support member) comprises pattern structure (paragraph as seen in figure 18-19 and the shapes of figure 20a provided in the folding area) facing the folding area, and
wherein the pattern structure comprises a wing portion (T-shape of figure 20a) and a support portion (T-shape of figure 20a) extending from the wing portion.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the teaching of specific pattern structure comprising a wing portion and a support portion extending from the wing portion facing the folding area as taught by Hamburgen as the pattern structure of Ryu, since Ryu provides suggestion various types of patterned shape and holes shape (paragraph 85) can be provided in the display support member, additionally, by providing the desired pattern structure desired stiffness vs bend radius is achieved (paragraph 107 of Hamburgen).
Regarding claim 2,
Ryu teaches the display support member comprising composite material (as described in paragraph 82) also Ryu teaches fibers can be used as material.
Ryu doesn't explicitly teach wherein the composite material comprises at least one carbon fiber reinforced plastic or glass reinforced plastic.
Hamburgen in similar field of foldable electronic device teaches material reinforced with high-strength fibers (ceramic fibers - paragraph 73).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the fibers as taught by Hamburgen with the composite material of Ryu such modification will provide the desired level strength (paragraph 73, Hamburgen) and support for the electronic device.
Regarding claim 3, Ryu as modified teaches,
wherein the display support member includes a first area supporting the first display area (figures 3-4 of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that first area of 32 corresponds to the area of element 11 and respective area 20), a second area supporting the second display area (figures 3-4 of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that second area of 32 corresponds to the area of element 12 and respective area 20), and a third area located between the first area and the second area and including the pattern structure formed therein (figures 3-4 of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that third area of 32 corresponds to the area of hinge region and respective area 20 and as modified by Hamburgen to provide in the folding area), and wherein the folding area faces at least a portion of the third area (figure 3-4 of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen).
Regarding claim 4,
Ryu teaches the display support member comprising composite material (as described in paragraph 82) also Ryu teaches fibers can be used as material.
Ryu doesn't explicitly teach wherein the composite material comprises at least one carbon fiber reinforced plastic or glass reinforced plastic.
Hamburgen in similar field of foldable electronic device teaches plurality of prepreg layers arranged along at least on different direction, respectively (high-strength fibers - ceramic fibers - paragraph 73 with composite material). The office notes the prepreg (short for pre-impregnated) is a method step thus the end product is composite material with reinforcing fibers.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the material with fibers as taught by Hamburgen with the composite material of Ryu such that the plurality of prepreg layers (i.e. plurality of fibers) arranged along at least one different direction, such modification will provide the desired level strength (paragraph 73, Hamburgen) and support for the electronic device.
Regarding claim 5, Ryu as modified teaches,
wherein the support portion comprises a first end area facing at least a portion of the display and a second end area opposite the first end area, and wherein the wing portion extends from the support portion along a first direction parallel to at least a portion of the display (figure 1-6 of Ryu modified by figure 20a of Hamburgen as described in claim 1 such that the support portion 32 of Ryu comprises the patterns as seen in figure 20a, thus the first end area facing at least a portion of the display is the top of figure 20; second end area being bottom opposite the first end area; the wing portion extends from the support portion along a first direction parallel to at least portion of the display (the T-shape such that part of the horizontal part of T is the support portion which is parallel to the display; similar to Figure 7b of present app)).
Regarding claim 6, Ryu as modified teaches,
wherein the wing portion extends from the first end area and includes a first surface supporting the display (the modified structure as described in claim 1 and 5 such that the wing portion extends from the first end area including a first surface supporting the display (portion of the flat part of the T as described in claim 5)).
Regarding claim 7,
Ryu as modified teaches the wing portion (pattern structure as described in claim 1 modified by Hamburgen), furthermore Ryu teaches the pattern structure can be various patterns.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein the wing portion comprises a third end area and a fourth end area opposite the third end area, and wherein the support portion includes a first support portion extending from the third end area in a third direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction and a second support portion extending from the fourth end area in the third direction.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the pattern structure specifically the wing portion of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that the wing portion comprises a third end area and a fourth end area opposite the third end area, and wherein the support portion includes a first support portion extending from the third end area in a third direction substantially perpendicular to the first direction and a second support portion extending from the fourth end area in the third direction (i.e., similar to figure 8b or 8c of present application), such modification is a mere change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. MPEP§2144.04(IV)(B). Especially since Ryu provides suggestion of various patterns, furthermore such modification will ensure the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Regarding claim 8,
Ryu as modified teaches the wing portion (pattern structure as described in claim 1 modified by Hamburgen), furthermore Ryu teaches the pattern structure can be various patterns.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein the wing portion extends from the second end area, and wherein the wing portion is spaced apart from the display.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the pattern structure specifically the wing portion of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such wherein the wing portion extends from the second end area, and wherein the wing portion is spaced apart from the display, such modification is a mere change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. MPEP§2144.04(IV)(B). Especially since Ryu provides suggestion of various patterns, furthermore such modification will ensure the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Regarding claim 9,
Ryu as modified teaches the wing portion (pattern structure as described in claim 1 modified by Hamburgen), furthermore Ryu teaches the pattern structure can be various patterns.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein the wing portion comprises a third end area and a fourth end area opposite the third end area, and wherein the support portion comprises a third support portion extending from the third end area and including a third surface supporting the display and a fourth support portion extending from the fourth end area and comprising a fourth surface supporting the display.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the pattern structure specifically the wing portion of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that the wing portion comprises a third end area and a fourth end area opposite the third end area, and wherein the support portion comprises a third support portion extending from the third end area and including a third surface supporting the display and a fourth support portion extending from the fourth end area and comprising a fourth surface supporting the display (i.e., similar to figure 8b or 8c of present application), such modification is a mere change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. MPEP§2144.04(IV)(B). Especially since Ryu provides suggestion of various patterns, furthermore such modification will ensure the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Regarding claim 10,
Ryu as modified teaches the wing portion (pattern structure as described in claim 1 modified by Hamburgen), furthermore Ryu teaches the pattern structure can be various patterns.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein the pattern structure comprises a first pattern structure comprising a first wing portion extending from the first end area and a second pattern structure comprising a second wing portion extending from the second end area, and wherein the first pattern structure and the second pattern structure are arranged alternately.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the pattern structure specifically the wing portion of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that the pattern structure comprises a first pattern structure comprising a first wing portion extending from the first end area and a second pattern structure comprising a second wing portion extending from the second end area, and wherein the first pattern structure and the second pattern structure are arranged alternately (i.e., similar to figure 7c of present application), such modification is a mere change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. MPEP§2144.04(IV)(B). Especially since Ryu provides suggestion of various patterns, furthermore such modification will ensure the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Regarding claim 11, Ryu as modified teaches,
Wherein the pattern structure includes an extension area (extension area is the area of the support member 32 between the hinge area figure 4 and the first housing and second housing respectively, this is coupled to the respective housing and extends from the wing portion (claim 1 as modified), additionally since they are connected a degree of thermal transfer occurs; the office notes this extension area is arbitrary thus the area highlighted above meets the limitation) connected to the wing portion and is thermally connected to the first housing and the second housing.
Regarding claim 12, Ryu as modified teaches,
further comprising a hinge module (element 13/14, figure 3-6) comprising a hinge (element 13/14 as seen in figure 3-6 of Ryu) disposed in the housing and facing at least a portion of the pattern structure.
Regarding claim 14, Ryu as modified teaches,
Wherein the display comprises a pen driving circuit (paragraph 142-143 of Ryu describes the use of touch pen 42 and the flexible display can be touched using touch pen thus at least pen driving circuit is provided).
Regarding claim 15, Ryu as modified teaches,
Ryu as modified teaches the wing portion (pattern structure as described in claim 1 modified by Hamburgen), furthermore Ryu teaches the pattern structure can be various patterns.
Ryu does not explicitly teach wherein a second thickness of the wing portion is less than a first portion of the support portion.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the pattern structure specifically the wing portion of Ryu as modified by Hamburgen such that the pattern structure is such that the wing portion and the support portion is adjusted the shape/thickness such that a second thickness of the wing portion is less than a first portion of the support portion, such modification is a mere change in shape and size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. MPEP§2144.04(IV)(B). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP§2144.04(IV)(A). Especially since Ryu provides suggestion of various patterns, furthermore such modification will ensure the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. KR 20190114863 (original provided in the IDS 12/2/2024 and translation provided by the office) in view of Hamburgen et al. US Pub 2018/0356859 (provided in the IDS) further in view of Kim US Pub 2020/0321551 (provided in the IDS).
Regarding claim 13, Ryu teaches,
wherein the pattern structure comprises at least one through-hole (paragraph 85; pattern shapes and hole shapes, thus at least both is needed. Therefore, the holes being surrounding by the patterns, which comprises the wing portion and support portion as modified in claim 1), and wherein at least a portion of the at least one through-hole is surrounded by the wing portion and the support portion.
However, in the case applicant disagrees with the interpretation above, Kim in similar field of foldable electronic device teaches support member (200, figure 7) comprises at least one through hole (202b), and at least a portion of the at least one through hole is surrounded by the pattern structure (the darken area surrounding 202b figure 7).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the pattern structure comprising at least one-through hole and wherein at least a portion of the at least one through-hole is surrounded by pattern structure as taught by Kim such that a through-hole of Ryu is provided in a similar configuration such that at least a portion of the at least one through-hole is surrounded by the wing portion and the support portion, such modification will provide the desired support and bendability is achieved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABHISHEK M RATHOD whose telephone number is (571)270-3947. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30AM-5:00PM ET.
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 L 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.
ABHISHEK M. RATHOD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2841
/ABHISHEK M RATHOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841