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
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.
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, 3-5, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0161369 A1 to Weksler et al. (Weksler) and US 2014/0370938 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee).
As to claim 1, Weksler discloses A handheld interaction device (100) comprising:
- a housing (110), wherein the housing provides shape and structure to the handheld interaction device (100) (Figs. 1-2, Par. 13);
- at least one user-interface element (since the device is a smart handheld device such as a smart phone or smart watch or other handheld electronic device; it must have at least one user interface so that a user can get the information from it) arranged on an outer surface of the housing (110) (Fig. 1, Par. 11);
- a plurality of detection sensors (115, 125) arranged on the housing (110) and configured to collect detection sensor data (Figs. 1-2, Pars. 14-15); and
- a processor (402) communicably coupled to a memory (403) (Fig. 4, Par. 22), wherein the processor (402) is configured to:
- determine, using the collected detection sensor data, an area on the outer surface of the housing, which a user is in contact with, when in use (Figs. 1-2, Pars. 14-15); and
- configure at least one of the plurality of detection sensors (115, 125), that is located outside of the determined area, as an input sensor (115, 125) to receive interaction from the user when in use (Figs. 1-2, Pars. 14-15).
Weksler does not expressly disclose a battery configured to power the handheld interaction device;
Lee discloses a battery configured to power the handheld interaction device (100) (Fig. 1, Par. 100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler’s device with the battery teaching of Lee in order to power the device as suggested by Lee (Par. 100).
As to claims 14-16, these claims substantially are recited similar limitations to claim 1. Thus, they are analyzed as same as claim 1 as set forth in the rejection above.
As to claim 3, Weksler as modified discloses at least one accelerometer (Lee’s Par. 73) arranged inside of the housing and configured to detect the rotation and alignment of the handheld interaction device (Lee’s Par. 73). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Lee to provide a better control operations of the device as suggested by Lee (Par. 73).
As to claim 4, Weksler as modified discloses the processor is configured to activate the at least one user-interface element which is located outside of the determined area (Lee’s Fig. 9, Par. 151, see also Figs. 10-11, Pars. 153-154). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Lee to provide a detail event/user interface as suggested by Lee (Par. 151).
As to claim 5, Weksler as modified discloses a gyroscope (gyro sensor) configured to measure rotation (orientation) of the handheld interaction device (Lee’s Par. 73). See claim 3 motivation above.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0161369 A1 to Weksler et al. (Weksler) and US 2014/0370938 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee); in view of US 2020/0371622 A1 to Heath.
As to claim 2, Weksler does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to employ trained machine learning algorithm for operation thereof.
Heath discloses the processor is configured to employ trained machine learning algorithm for operation thereof (Par. 100).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Heath to calibrate detected data allowing inference and generalizations thereby provide an improved understanding of complex sets of user input data as suggested by Heath (Par. 100).
Claim(s) 6-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0161369 A1 to Weksler et al. (Weksler) and US 2014/0370938 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee); in view of US 2019/0317607 A1 to Lin et al. (Lin).
As to claim 6, Weksler as modified does not expressly disclose the housing of the handheld interaction device is made from a flexible material.
Lin discloses the housing (631) of the handheld interaction device is made from a flexible material (Figs. 6A-6B, Par. 39).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Lin to provide a required operation feeling as suggested by Lin (Par. 39).
As to claim 7, Weksler as modified discloses the handheld interaction device comprises at least one magnetic sensor (620) arranged inside of the housing (621) and at least one magnet (630) arranged on the outer surface of the housing (620) (Lee’s Figs. 6A-6B, Par. 40) and the processor (110, 1010) is further configured to measure change of magnetic field of the at least one magnet to detect if the handheld interaction device is squeezed (Lee’s Figs. 6A-6B, Par. 40). See claim 6 motivation above.
As to claim 8, Weksler discloses the handheld interaction device comprises at least one force sensitive resistor arranged on the inner surface of the housing (Par. 11) and the processor (402) is further configured to measure change of resistance from the at least one force sensitive resistor to detect if the handheld interaction device is squeezed (Par. 11).
As to claim 9, Weksler as modified discloses the handheld interaction device comprises an electromechanical film (631) arranged on the outer surface of the housing (Lee’s Figs. 6A-6B, Par. 40) and the processor (110, 1010) is further configured to measure change of charge from the electromechanical film to detect if the handheld interaction device is squeezed (Lee’s Figs. 6A-6B, Par. 40).
As to claim 11, Weksler as modified does not expressly disclose at least one of: a loudspeaker (152), a vibrator (154) (Lee’s Pars. 5, 87, 89)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Lin to provide various effects for the user as suggested by Lin (Par. 89).
Claim(s) 10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0161369 A1 to Weksler et al. (Weksler) and US 2014/0370938 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee); in view of US 2019/0317607 A1 to Lin et al. (Lin); further in view of US 2013/0027299 A1 to Tsukahara et al. (Tsukahara).
As to claim 10, Weksler as modified does not expressly disclose an air pressure sensor, wherein the air pressure sensor is configured to measure the change in height of the handheld interaction device.
Tsukahara discloses an air pressure sensor (Par. 121), wherein the air pressure sensor is configured to measure the change in height of the handheld interaction device (Par. 121).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Tsukahara to enable height change detection every several centimeters thereby provide an improved inputting device as suggested by Tsukahara (Par. 121).
As to claim 12, Weksler as modified discloses a wireless communication network (Lee’s Abstract, Lin’s Par. 49).
Weksler does not expressly disclose the wireless communication network is configured to provide communication for the handheld interaction device with an external device.
Tsukahara discloses the wireless communication network (9) is configured to provide communication for the handheld interaction device (10) with an external device (50)(Figs. 1-3, 6-7, Par. 78).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Tsukahara to provide a better user experience thereby provide an improved inputting device as suggested by Tsukahara (Par. 121).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0161369 A1 to Weksler et al. (Weksler) and US 2014/0370938 A1 to Lee et al. (Lee); in view of US 2019/0317607 A1 to Lin et al. (Lin); further in view of US 2023/0119256 A1 to Kumar Agrawal et al. (Kumar).
As to claim 13, Weksler does not expressly disclose an ultrawide band sensor, wherein the ultrawide band sensor is configured to measure distances between the handheld interaction device and another device.
Kumar discloses an ultrawide band sensor (Par. 30), wherein the ultrawide band sensor is configured to measure distances between the handheld interaction device (e.g. electronic device) and another device (e.g. companion device) (Par. 30).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Weksler with the teaching of Kumar to adjust input elements as suggested by Kumar (Par. 30).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 9,898,130 to Chin et al. teaches a handheld device with a grip management system to determine a squeeze on the device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA whose telephone number is (571)270-7361. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, 8:00AM to 4:00PM, EST.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7772. 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.
/JARURAT SUTEERAWONGSA/Examiner, Art Unit 2623
/CHANH D NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2623