CTNF 18/639,964 CTNF 73594 7,DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 Claim 18 is 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. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 18 recites the limitation " the motor " in line 15 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1,9-11,19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al. (KR 20220079370 A) . The claimed invention reads on Park et al. as follows: Regarding claim 1, Park et al. discloses an electronic device (fig. 1 number 101, abstract) comprising: a housing including a first housing part and a second housing part movably coupled to the first housing part relatively movable with respect to the first housing part (abstract); a driving mechanism (motor) configured to provide a driving force for moving the second housing part (abstract); memory (fig. 1 number 130) comprising one or more storage mediums which stores instructions (page 2, 6 th and 7 th paragraph); and a processor (fig. 1 number 120) comprising processing circuitry (page 2, 6th and 7th paragraph) , wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor (page 2, 6th and 7th paragraph), cause the electronic device to: identify an external force (fingerprint recognition operation 901)(fig. 4E), which causes a relative movement of the second housing part (fig. 4 E number 213) with respect to the first housing part (fig. 4E number 211 and page 14, 4 th -6 th paragraph), in a stationary state in which the first housing part and the second housing part are stationary (i.e. second housing stationary to the first housing)(fig. 4E); and control the driving mechanism (motor 270), based on the identified external force, in a way such that the first housing part and the second housing part remain the stationary state (i.e. The motor 270 may be controlled to move the second housing 213 in the first direction D1 to have the maximum size A3)(fig. 4E and page 13, 7 th paragraph). Park et al. further teaches processor 250 and a sensor module 240 (i.e. According to various embodiments, the sensor module 240 may include a distance sensor capable of measuring a distance between the first housing 211 and the second housing 213 In the sensor module 240 including the distance sensor, as the second housing 213 slides with respect to the first housing 211 (fig. 2a, and page 6, 5 th paragraph). Regarding claims 9 and 19, Park et al. discloses the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to control the driving mechanism, based on at least one of a user input (finger input) (fig. 4E, page 14, 4th-6th paragraph and fig. 6b number 903) or an application (specified application or App) running while identifying the external force (fig, 6a-6c and page 16, 6 th paragraph through page 17, 5 th paragraph). Regarding claims 10 and 20, Park et al. discloses a display (fig. 6 number 221), wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to: control the display to display a first visual object (App1) and a second visual object (App2) for the user input (fig. 6b); control the driving mechanism to cause the relative movement of the second housing part with respect to the first housing part, based on identifying the user input for the first visual object (i.e. When a set one-hand operation command is executed, it may include commands, settings, and user input related to the split screen, such as in the case where it is set to display in a split screen when a specified application is executed) (fig. 6b and Page 16, 7 th paragraph -page 17, 5 th paragraph) ; and control the driving mechanism so that the first housing part and the second housing part remain the stationary state, based on identifying the user input for the second visual object (i.e. When a set one-hand operation command is executed, it may include commands, settings, and user input related to the split screen, such as in the case where it is set to display in a split screen when a specified application is executed) (fig. 6b and Page 16, 7th paragraph -page 17, 5th paragraph). Regarding claim 11, Park et al. discloses a method (title, fig. 6a) of operating an electronic device (title, fig. 6a) comprising: identify an external force (fingerprint recognition operation 901)(fig. 4E), which causes a relative movement of the second housing part (fig. 4 E number 213) with respect to the first housing part (fig. 4E number 211 and page 14, 4th-6th paragraph), in a stationary state in which the first housing part and the second housing part are stationary (i.e. second housing stationary to the first housing)(fig. 4E); and control the driving mechanism (motor 270), based on the identified external force, in a way such that the first housing part and the second housing part remain the stationary state (i.e. The motor 270 may be controlled to move the second housing 213 in the first direction D1 to have the maximum size A3)(fig. 4E and page 13, 7th paragraph) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 5. 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA 6. Claim (s) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (KR 20220079370 A) in view of Mitsunaga et al. (US 2010/0255862) . Regarding claims 2 and 12, Park et al. discloses an electronic device/method as discussed supra in claims 1 and 11 above. Park et al. differs from claim 2 of the present invention in that it does not explicit disclose the electronic device to identify that the first housing part and the second housing part are in the stationary state when the signal provided from the first sensor is less than a reference value for more than a first reference time, or when a power provided to the driving mechanism is less than a reference value for more than the first reference time. Mitsunaga et al. teaches when the display housing 120 and the operation housing 150 are slid to a relative position, the application deciding unit 158 measures the time for which both of the housings keep a stationary state at the relative position. If the unit 158 senses that both of the housings keep the stationary state for a predetermined time or more , it activates an application corresponding to the relative position (fig. 3a-3e and P:0050). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Park et al. with the electronic device to identify that the first housing part and the second housing part are in the stationary state when the signal provided from the first sensor is less than a reference value for more than a first reference time, or when a power provided to the driving mechanism is less than a reference value for more than the first reference time in order for the electronic device to manage the display stationary state based upon the finger print pressure on the display to provide the display in the retracted state or the expand state based upon the application selected, as taught by Mitsunaga et al .. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 7. Claim s 3-8 and 13-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA 8. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 3 and 13, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest alone, or in combination identifying the relative movement based on the identified external force; and fixing the second housing part, by controlling a motor of the driving mechanism to have a holding torque having a second magnitude greater than or equal to a first magnitude of the external force identified based on the identified relative movement . Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest alone, or in combination a second sensor configured to obtain data related to a temperature of at least a part of the electronic device, wherein the driving mechanism includes a motor, and wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to identify a second magnitude of holding torque of the motor for fixing the second housing part, based on at least a part of the data related to the temperature. Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest alone, or in combination a third sensor configured to obtain data related to a posture of the electronic device, wherein the driving mechanism includes a motor, and wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to identify a second magnitude of holding torque of the motor for fixing the second housing part, based on at least a part of the data related to a posture of the electronic device. Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest alone, or in combination identifying a second magnitude of holding torque of a motor for fixing the second housing part, based on at least a part of data related to temperature of at least a part of the electronic device identified through a second sensor of the electronic device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7865. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am -3 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, Wesley L 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. /KEITH FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 2 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 3 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 4 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 5 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 6 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 7 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/639,964 Page 8 Art Unit: 2648
Prosecution Insights