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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2024/0168569) in view of Krishnakumar (US 2016/0313816).
Regarding claim 1 Choi discloses:
A modular control device, comprising:
a plurality of electronic modules (e.g. components, 9 Fig.1), each plurality of electronic modules having a function surface (e.g. 33 Fig.1) and a retention surface (e.g. bottom of 19 Fig.1) opposite the function surface, the retention surface defining a first portion and a second portion divided along a width of the retention surface (e.g. halves of bottom of 19 Fig.1), both the first portion and the second portion equally a half surface area of the retention surface, a module base (e.g. 3 Fig.1) having a mounting surface (e.g. 13 Fig.1), the mounting surface adapted to respectively receive the retention surfaces of the plurality of electronic modules (e.g. shown Fig.1), and at least two or more retention joints (e.g. plurality of joints shown/indicated Fig.3), each of the at least two or more retention joints having a module member associated with the retention surface (e.g. shown Fig.3) and a base member associated with the mounting surface (e.g. shown Fig.3), one of the at least two or more retention joints positioned within the first portion and one other of the at least two or more retention joints positioned within the second portion (e.g. connectors and sockets above and below middle dividing line of bottom of 19 shown Fig.3), either the one or the one other of the at least two or more retention joints respectively define a module interface (e.g. indicated Fig.3, described paragraph [0076]) and the one other or the one of the at two or more retention joints respectively define a retention interface (e.g. indicated Fig.3, described paragraph [0076])
Choi does not explicitly disclose:
at least one of the plurality of electronic modules comprises a plurality of input components
Krishnakumar teaches:
at least one of the plurality of electronic modules (e.g. totem 50 FIG.29) comprises a plurality of input components (e.g. 342, 334 FIG.30D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of Krishnakumar, as pointed out above, in Choi, as one having ordinary skill in the art would have would have recognized the teaching, suggestion, and motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings (as pointed out above) to arrive at the claimed invention, and would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because such a combination and/or modification would have allowed for: “End users are able to focus on the processing tasks that the end user needs to accomplish rather than on the interactions that the end user has to make at an information handling system to perform the processing tasks.” (paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 2 Choi as modified discloses:
wherein the module base receives the retention surface of each plurality of electronic modules via the at least two or more retention joints (e.g. described paragraph [0076]).
Regarding claim 3 Choi as modified discloses:
at least one of the module interface and the retention interface comprises a snap-fit joint connection (e.g. described paragraph [0068]), wherein each plurality of electronic modules is engaged to and disengaged from the module base via the snap-fit joint connection (e.g. described paragraph [0068]).
Regarding claim 4 Choi as modified discloses:
each plurality of electronic modules further comprise a cuboid shape (e.g. shown/indicated Fig.3) and the function surface and the retention surface are both largest surface areas of each plurality of electronic modules (e.g. shown/indicated fig.16).
Regarding claim 5 Choi as modified discloses:
at least one side of each plurality of electronic modules is adjacent to one side of an other of the plurality of electronic modules (e.g. shown/indicated Fig.3), supporting engagement of each plurality of electronic modules to the module base (e.g. described paragraph [0068]).
Regarding claim 6 Choi as modified discloses:
the function surface of each plurality of electronic modules is configured for input of control information (e.g. described paragraph [0064]).
Regarding claim 7 Choi as modified discloses:
the plurality of electronic modules comprises two or more electronic modules (e.g. shown/indicated fig.16), each selected from the following group:
a button module, a rotary knob module, a slider module, a scroll bar module, and a touchscreen module, or any combination of the foregoing, each configured for providing the input of control information (e.g. plurality described paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 8 Choi as modified discloses:
at least one of the button module comprises five (e.g. five shown fig.16) buttons or fifteen buttons, the rotary knob module comprises three rotary knobs (e.g. at least three indicated Fig.16, paragraph [0066]), the slider module comprises five sliders, the scroll bar module comprises two scroll bars, and the touchscreen module comprises a 1.3 inch touchscreen, a 4.3 inch touchscreen, or a 8.5 inch touchscreen, or any combination of the foregoing.
Regarding claim 9 Choi as modified discloses:
the two or more electronic modules comprise at least one third electronic module (e.g. at least three shown fig.16), at least one fourth electronic module (e.g. at least four shown fig.16), and at least one other fifth electronic module (e.g. at least five shown fig.16), and wherein the at least one third electronic module is a slider module configured for adjusting playback volume (e.g. described paragraph [0066]), the at least one fourth electronic module is a scroll bar module configured for content scrolling (e.g. described paragraph [0066]), and the at least one other fifth electronic module is a touchscreen module configured for screen display and device input (e.g. described paragraph [0066]). (please note: “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co.v.Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)(MPEP 2114) as the prior art discloses the claimed structures it is understood (would be understood by one of ordinary skill etc.) to disclose the recited functions)
Regarding claim 10 Choi as modified discloses:
the two or more electronic modules comprise at least one first electronic module (e.g. at least one shown fig.16), at least one other first electronic module (e.g. at least two shown fig.16), at least one second electronic module (e.g. at least three shown fig.16), and at least one fifth electronic module (e.g. at least five shown fig.16), and wherein the at least one first electronic module and the at least one other first electronic module are button modules for generating physical or virtual inputs (e.g. described paragraph [0066]), the at least one second electronic module is a rotary knob module for adjusting parameters (e.g. described paragraph [0066]), and the at least one fifth electronic module is a touchscreen module configured for screen display and device input (e.g. described paragraph [0066]). (see note regarding functional limitations and MPEP 2114 above)
Regarding claim 11 Choi as modified discloses:
the two or more electronic modules comprise at least one first electronic module (e.g. at least one shown fig.16), at least one second electronic module (e.g. at least two shown fig.16), at least one other second electronic module (e.g. at least three shown fig.16), and at least one fifth electronic module (e.g. at least five shown fig.16), wherein the at least one first electronic module is a button module for generating physical or virtual inputs, the at least one second electronic module and the at least one other second electronic module are rotary knob modules for adjusting parameters, and the at least one fifth electronic module is a touchscreen module configured for screen display and device input (e.g. described paragraph [0066]). (see note regarding functional limitations and MPEP 2114 above)
Regarding claim 12 Choi as modified discloses:
the module interface comprises a module connector (e.g. 139/155 Fig.5) and a module port (e.g. 117/151/153 FIG.5), the module connector defined by one module member and the module port defined by one corresponding base member (e.g. shown Fig.4), the module connector mounted within and electrically coupled to the module port (e.g. described paragraph [0077]), and the retention interface comprises a fastener slot and a fastener prong (e.g. shown Fig.5/Fig.4), the fastener slot defined by one other module member and the fastener prong defined by one other corresponding base member (e.g. shown Fig.5/Fig.4), the fastener prong mounted within the fastener slot (e.g. described paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 13 Choi as modified discloses:
the mounting surface comprises a width and a length (e.g. shown fig.16) and the base member comprises a plurality of base members (e.g. shown fig.12), the plurality of base members disposed in at least two or more columns parallel to the length and at least two or more rows parallel to the width (e.g. shown fig.12).
Regarding claim 14 Choi as modified discloses:
the plurality of base members comprise a plurality of width edge base members (e.g. shown Fig.12), a plurality of length edge base members (e.g. shown Fig.12), and a plurality of internal base members (e.g. shown Fig.12), the plurality of width edge base members disposed parallel to one width perimeter of the mounting surface (e.g. shown Fig.12), the plurality of length edge base members disposed parallel to one length perimeter of the mounting surface (e.g. shown Fig.12), the plurality of internal base members disposed between the plurality of width edge base members and an opposite width perimeter of the one width perimeter of the mounting surface and between the plurality of length edge base members and an opposite length perimeter of the mounting surface (e.g. shown Fig.12).
Regarding claim 15 Choi as modified discloses:
each plurality of width edge base members and each plurality of length edge base members comprise the module port (e.g. shown/indicated Fig.4).
Regarding claim 16 Choi as modified discloses:
a distance between each plurality of width edge base members is the same and a distance between each plurality of length edge base members is the same (e.g. shown/indicated Fig.4).
Regarding claim 17 Choi as modified discloses:
the plurality of width edge base members comprise four width edge base members (e.g. at least four shown Fig.12), the plurality of length edge base members comprise six length edge base members (e.g. at least six shown Fig.12), and the plurality of internal base members comprise eighteen internal base members (at least 18 shown Fig.12).
Regarding claim 18 Choi as modified discloses:
the eighteen internal base members comprise six module ports and twelve fastener prongs (e.g. shown/indicated Fig.12, 115/117 forming prongs shown Fig.3).
Regarding claim 19 Choi as modified discloses:
the module interface comprises a universal bus interface (e.g. described paragraph [0065]).
Regarding claim 20 Choi as modified discloses:
The modular control device of claim 1, wherein input components are configured to perform independent functions (e.g. described paragraph [0066])
Choi does not explicitly disclose:
plurality of input components
Krishnakumar teaches:
the plurality of input components are configured to perform independent functions (e.g. at least mouse and joystick, described paragraph [0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of Krishnakumar, as pointed out above, in Choi, as one having ordinary skill in the art would have would have recognized the teaching, suggestion, and motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings (as pointed out above) to arrive at the claimed invention, and would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because such a combination and/or modification would have allowed for: “End users are able to focus on the processing tasks that the end user needs to accomplish rather than on the interactions that the end user has to make at an information handling system to perform the processing tasks.” (paragraph [0010]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claim(s) and the claim added in amendment have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any of the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Rejection of amended claim 19 withdrawn.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references cited on the PTO-892 disclose/teach similar modular housings as those disclosed in the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THERON S MILLISER whose telephone number is (571)270-1800. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
Limited examiner interviews are available.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani N. 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.
/THERON S MILLISER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights