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 § 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)(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.
Claims 1-4, 8-10 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Yun et al. (US Patent No. 11729932 B2 and Yun hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 1, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13 and annotated fig below) an electronic device comprising: a chassis (including 101 and 102), wherein the chassis includes a first chassis portion (101) and a second chassis portion (102); a flexible display (130) supported by the chassis; and a hinge (170), wherein the hinge includes: a first chassis attachment housing (111) coupled to the first chassis portion; a first chassis portion lift arm (115) coupled to the first chassis attachment housing; a first hinge pivot (151) coupled to the first chassis portion lift arm; a second chassis attachment housing (112) coupled to the second chassis portion; a second chassis portion lift arm (116) coupled to the second chassis attachment housing; and a second hinge pivot (152) coupled to the second chassis portion lift arm, wherein the first chassis portion lift arm extends (gear-rack) to increase a first distance (D1) between the first chassis attachment housing and the first hinge pivot and the second chassis portion lift arm extends (gear-rack) to increase a second distance (D2) between the second chassis attachment housing and the second hinge pivot as the flexible display is bent (fig.11).
PNG
media_image1.png
419
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the first hinge pivot includes a splined shaft that meshes with teeth in the first chassis portion lift arm (fig.11).
Regarding Claim 3, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 1, wherein the hinge further includes: synchronizing gears (153-154) to couple the first hinge pivot to the second hinge pivot.
Regarding Claim 4, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 1, wherein the hinge further includes: a flexible display sink (140).
Regarding Claim 8, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) a hinge (170) that couples a first chassis portion (101) to a second chassis portion (102), the hinge comprising: a first chassis attachment housing (111) coupled to the first chassis portion; a second chassis attachment housing (112) coupled to the second chassis portion; a first chassis portion lift arm (115) coupled to the first chassis attachment housing; a second chassis portion lift arm (116) coupled to the second chassis attachment housing; a first hinge pivot (151) coupled to the first chassis portion lift arm; and a second hinge pivot (152) coupled to the second chassis portion lift arm, wherein, as a flexible display (130) that is supported by the first chassis portion and the second chassis portion is bent, the first chassis attachment housing moves away (distance D1) from the first hinge pivot and the second chassis attachment housing moves away (distance D2) from the second hinge pivot (see annotated fig above).
Regarding Claim 9, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the hinge of Claim 8, wherein at least a portion of the first hinge pivot includes a splined shaft that meshes with teeth in the first chassis portion lift arm.
Regarding Claim 10, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the hinge of Claim 8, wherein the hinge further includes: a flexible display sink.
Regarding Claim 15, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) an electronic device comprising: a flexible display (130); a chassis (including 101 and 102), wherein the chassis has a first chassis portion (101) and a second chassis portion (102); and a hinge (170), wherein the hinge includes: a first chassis attachment housing (111) coupled to the first chassis portion; a second chassis attachment housing (112) coupled to the second chassis portion; a first chassis portion lift arm (115) coupled to the first chassis attachment housing, wherein at least a portion of the first chassis portion lift arm includes teeth; a second chassis portion lift arm coupled to the second chassis attachment housing, wherein at least a portion of the second chassis portion lift arm includes teeth (teeth of 115); and a flexible display sink (140) located between the first chassis portion lift arm and the second chassis portion lift arm.
Regarding Claim 16, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 15, wherein the hinge further includes: a first hinge pivot (151) coupled to the first chassis portion lift arm, wherein at least a portion of the first hinge pivot includes a splined shaft that meshes with the teeth in the first chassis portion lift arm (fig.11); and a second hinge pivot (152) coupled to the second chassis portion lift arm, wherein at least a portion of the second hinge pivot includes a splined shaft that meshes with the teeth in the second chassis portion lift arm (fig.11).
Regarding Claim 17, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 16, wherein the hinge further includes: synchronizing gears (153-154) between the first hinge pivot and the second hinge pivot.
Regarding Claim 18, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 15, wherein the hinge further includes: a flexible display sink (140).
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.
Claims 5-7, 11-12 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al in view of Torres et al (US Pub No. 2021/0034117 A1 and Torres hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 5, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 4, but fails to disclose wherein a gap is located between the flexible display and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration. However, Torres teaches (figs.
PNG
media_image2.png
270
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
1-8) wherein a gap is located between the flexible display (38) and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration (fig.6A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a gap as claimed of Torres to device of Yun in order to increase the size of fold region by withdrawal of display flexible sink ([0047] and Torres).
Regarding Claim 6, Yun/Torres discloses the electronic device of Claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters when the electronic device is in the flat configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimized the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters to reduce stress during folding and improve impact resistance. ([0040] and Torres).
MPEP §2144.05-II (A) states "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%.).
Furthermore, MPEP §2144.05-II (B) describes that it is considered to be prima facie obvious when there is a motivation to optimize result-effective variables, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result.
Regarding Claim 7, Yun/Torres discloses the electronic device of Claim 5. Torres further teaches wherein the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is reduced as the electronic device is bent from the flat configuration to a closed configuration.
PNG
media_image3.png
400
392
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a gap as claimed of Torres to device of Yun in order to increase the size of fold region by withdrawal of display flexible sink ([0047] and Torres).
Regarding Claim 11, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the hinge of Claim 10, but fails to disclose wherein a gap is located between the flexible display and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration. However, Torres teaches (figs.
PNG
media_image2.png
270
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
1-8) wherein a gap is located between the flexible display (38) and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration (fig.6A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a gap as claimed of Torres to device of Yun in order to increase the size of fold region by withdrawal of display flexible sink ([0047] and Torres).
Regarding Claim 12, Yun/Torres discloses the hinge of Claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters when the electronic device is in the flat configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimized the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters to reduce stress during folding and improve impact resistance. ([0040] and Torres).
MPEP §2144.05-II (A) states "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%.).
Furthermore, MPEP §2144.05-II (B) describes that it is considered to be prima facie obvious when there is a motivation to optimize result-effective variables, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result.
Regarding Claim 19, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the electronic device of Claim 18, but fails to disclose wherein a gap is located between the flexible display and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration. However, Torres teaches (figs.
PNG
media_image2.png
270
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
1-8) wherein a gap is located between the flexible display (38) and the flexible display sink when the electronic device is in a flat configuration (fig.6A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a gap as claimed of Torres to device of Yun in order to increase the size of fold region by withdrawal of display flexible sink ([0047] and Torres).
Regarding Claim 20, Yun/Torres discloses the electronic device of Claim 19, but fails to disclose wherein the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters when the electronic device is in the flat configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimized the gap between the flexible display and the flexible display sink is greater than two (2) millimeters to reduce stress during folding and improve impact resistance. ([0040] and Torres).
MPEP §2144.05-II (A) states "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%.).
Furthermore, MPEP §2144.05-II (B) describes that it is considered to be prima facie obvious when there is a motivation to optimize result-effective variables, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al in view of Chen et al (US Pub No. 2019/0346889 A1 and Chen hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 13, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the hinge of Claim 8, but fails to disclose wherein the first chassis attachment housing includes one or more elastic mechanisms that push against the first chassis portion lift arm. However, Chen teaches (figs. 1-2) wherein the first chassis attachment housing includes one or more elastic mechanisms (204-1) that push against the first chassis portion lift arm (202-1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine one or more elastic mechanisms as claimed of Chen to device of Yun in order to provide a resilient member can pull the sliding member along the chassis based on movement of the set of rolling members about the curvature (Chen, [0016])
Regarding Claim 14, Yun discloses (figs. 1-13) the hinge of Claim 8, but fails to disclose wherein the first chassis attachment housing includes at least one spring. However, Chen teaches (figs. 1-2) wherein the first chassis attachment housing includes at least one spring (204-1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine one or more springs as claimed of Chen to device of Yun in order to provide a resilient member can pull the sliding member along the chassis based on movement of the set of rolling members about the curvature (Chen, [0016])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 AM - 4:30 PM 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.
/ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841