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 § 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 17-21 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the hardness data.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a “hardness data.”
Any remaining claim(s) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent upon one or more rejected base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakayama (JP 2011048651 A).
Please note: This Office action relies upon the translation of the Nakayama (JP 2011048651 A) document provided with the 8 May 2024 IDS.
Regarding claim 9, Nakayama discloses a tactile sense presentation device, comprising:
a storage device [e.g., Fig. 3: 220] configured to store image data [e.g., Paragraph 41: information stored in the gripping object information storage unit 220] indicating an object [e.g., Paragraph 41: virtual object];
a screen display circuit [e.g., Fig. 3: 240] configured to display the object on a screen [e.g., Fig. 3: 400] on a basis of the image data [e.g., Paragraph 41: The virtual image generation unit 240 displays an image of the virtual object on the display 400 based on the information stored in the gripping object information storage unit 220];
a tactile sense presentation circuit [e.g., Fig. 3: 100] configured to present a tactile sense [e.g., Paragraph 29: force] corresponding to hardness of the object [e.g., Paragraphs 40, 120: hardness of the virtual object] to a person [e.g., Paragraph 29: user];
a pressing force detection circuit [e.g., Fig. 3: 202, 210; Paragraph 38: force/pressure sensors] configured to detect a pressing force [e.g., Paragraph 38: force/pressure] generated when a person [e.g., Paragraph 29: user] touches the tactile sense presentation circuit; and
a control circuit [e.g., Fig. 3: 230, 300] configured to change the tactile sense to be presented by the tactile sense presentation circuit on a basis of the hardness of the object and the pressing force detected by the pressing force detection circuit [e.g., Paragraph 120: the gripping sense presentation device 100 can present the hardness of the virtual object anywhere where the arm can be moved; Paragraph 30: a change in the force (reaction force) applied to the user by the virtual object according to the magnitude of displacement when the user presses the virtual object with a finger] (e.g., see Paragraphs 27-122).
Regarding claim 14, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 of this title, 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 10-13 and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakayama (JP 2011048651 A) in view of Hayashi et al (JP 2007026297 A).
Please note: This Office action relies upon the translation of the Hayashi et al (JP 2007026297 A) document provided with the 8 May 2024 IDS.
Regarding claim 10, Nakayama doesn’t appear to expressly disclose a pointer operation, as instantly claimed.
However, Hayashi discloses an operation circuit [e.g., Fig. 3: 211] configured to detect a pointer operation [e.g., Paragraph 31: elastic member 222 tilt] for moving a position [e.g., Figs. 4, 5: x, y] of a pointer [e.g., Fig. 4: 102A] displayed on the screen [e.g., Figs. 1, 2: 102; Paragraph 31: When the strain detector 211 detects the tilt direction of the elastic member 222, the mobile communication terminal 1 moves the cursor 102A toward the detected tilt direction],
wherein the control circuit [e.g., Fig. 2: 106; Fig. 3: 213] changes a display position [e.g., Figs. 4, 5: x, y] of the pointer on the screen to a new position [e.g., see Figs. 20abc] according to the pointer operation detected by the operation circuit, and changes the tactile sense to be presented by the tactile sense presentation circuit on the basis of the hardness at the new position of the object and the pressing force detected by the pressing force detection circuit [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: When the cloth A and the cloth B are pressed with the same force F1, the movement control unit 414 is smaller than the displacement amount Xb of the image of the cloth B than the displacement amount Xa of the image of the cloth A. By changing the amount of displacement of the position of the top 421 according to the object image, the hardness of the object image can be transmitted to the operator via the top 421] (e.g., see Paragraphs 23-137).
Regarding claim 11, Hayashi discloses the storage device [e.g., Fig. 2: 107, 108] further stores the hardness at each position of the object [e.g., Figs. 4, 5: x, y; Paragraphs 34-37: the surface characteristic information stored in the information storage unit 212; surface state information indicating the surface state of the actual position on the actual object], and
the control circuit acquires the hardness at the new position of the object from the storage device, and changes the tactile sense to be presented by the tactile sense presentation circuit on the basis of the hardness and the pressing force [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: When the cloth A and the cloth B are pressed with the same force F1, the movement control unit 414 is smaller than the displacement amount Xb of the image of the cloth B than the displacement amount Xa of the image of the cloth A. By changing the amount of displacement of the position of the top 421 according to the object image, the hardness of the object image can be transmitted to the operator via the top 421].
Nakayama and Hayashi are analogous art, because they are from the shared inventive field of tactile sense presentation devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine Hayashi’s pointer operation and object with Nakayama’s device, so as to appropriately transmit a tactile sensation of an object displayed on a screen.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined Hayashi’s pointer operation and object with Nakayama’s device as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., et al., Docket No. 04-1350 (U.S. 30 April 2007).
Regarding claim 12, Hayashi discloses the control circuit switches an operation [e.g., see Fig. 20abc] of changing the display position of the pointer on the screen to the new position according to the pointer operation detected by the operation circuit [e.g., Paragraph 31: When the strain detector 211 detects the tilt direction of the elastic member 222, the mobile communication terminal 1 moves the cursor 102A toward the detected tilt direction] and an operation of displaying the hardness at the new position of the object on the screen by a switching operation [e.g., see Figs. 20abc: as cursor 102A position is switched from off the hard cloth 102B to on the cloth, hardness is changed] detected by the operation circuit (e.g., see Paragraphs 23-137).
Regarding claim 13, Hayashi discloses the tactile sense presentation circuit includes a contact portion [e.g., Fig. 3: 220; Fig. 14: 421] having a pushing position displaced [e.g., Figs. 3a to 3b] according to pressing by a person [e.g., Figs. 3ab: illustrated person’s finger], and
the control circuit calculates a displacement amount [e.g., Fig. 14: X] of the contact portion on the basis of the hardness and the pressing force, and presents the tactile sense corresponding to the hardness of the object by displacing the pushing position of the contact portion by the displacement amount [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth A, the movement control unit 414 determines the displacement amount of the top 421. Determine as Xa. Similarly, when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth B, the movement control unit 414 determines the amount of displacement of the top 421 as Xb].
Regarding claim 15, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 10.
Regarding claim 16, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 13.
Regarding claim 17, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claims 9, 10, 12 and 14; furthermore, Hayashi discloses the tactile sense corresponds to a visual representation of the object's hardness as displayed on the screen [e.g., see Figs. 20abc: as cursor 102A position is switched from off the hard cloth 102B to on the cloth, hardness is changed and visually represented]; and
a feedback mechanism [e.g., Fig. 3: 211-214] configured to provide a variable resistance to the person's touch [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth A, the movement control unit 414 determines the displacement amount of the top 421. Determine as Xa. Similarly, when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth B, the movement control unit 414 determines the amount of displacement of the top 421 as Xb],
wherein the variable resistance is adjusted by the control circuit in response to the detected pressing force and the hardness data of the object at the position where the touch occurs [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: When the cloth A and the cloth B are pressed with the same force F1, the movement control unit 414 is smaller than the displacement amount Xb of the image of the cloth B than the displacement amount Xa of the image of the cloth A. By changing the amount of displacement of the position of the top 421 according to the object image, the hardness of the object image can be transmitted to the operator via the top 421] (e.g., see Paragraphs 23-137).
Regarding claim 18, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 13.
Regarding claim 19, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 13.
Regarding claim 20, Hayashi discloses the control circuit is further configured to adjust the displacement amount using an adjustment coefficient [e.g., Fig. 14: displacement amount along x-axis adjusts with adjusted/varying force along y-axis] having the pressing force as a variable [e.g., see Fig. 14: pressing force varies along y-axis; Paragraphs 84-87: when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth A, the movement control unit 414 determines the displacement amount of the top 421. Determine as Xa. Similarly, when the force pressed against the top 421 is F1 and the object image is an image of the cloth B, the movement control unit 414 determines the amount of displacement of the top 421 as Xb].
Regarding claim 21, this claim is rejected by the reasoning applied in rejecting claim 11; furthermore, Hayashi discloses a storage device [e.g., Fig. 2: 107, 108] configured to store hardness data at each position of the object [e.g., Figs. 4, 5: x, y; Paragraphs 34-37: the surface characteristic information stored in the information storage unit 212; surface state information indicating the surface state of the actual position on the actual object],
wherein the control circuit is configured to acquire the hardness at a new position [e.g., Figs. 4, 5: x, y; Figs. 20abc] of the object from the hardness data in the storage device [e.g., Paragraphs 84-87: When the cloth A and the cloth B are pressed with the same force F1, the movement control unit 414 is smaller than the displacement amount Xb of the image of the cloth B than the displacement amount Xa of the image of the cloth A. By changing the amount of displacement of the position of the top 421 according to the object image, the hardness of the object image can be transmitted to the operator via the top 421].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The documents listed on the attached 'Notice of References Cited' are cited to further evidence the state of the art pertaining to tactile sensing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Piziali whose telephone number is (571)272-7678. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (7:30AM - 4PM). The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jeff Piziali/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
23 January 2026