CTNF 18/722,610 CTNF 82318 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. Response to Amendment Examiner acknowledges response to election/restriction filed 4/9/26. The arguments set for are addressed herein below. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (claims 1-6) and withdrawal of Group 2 (claims 7-13) in the reply filed on 4/9/26 is acknowledge. Claims 1-13 are pending and Claims 7-13 are withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 07-20-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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Numata (US 2007/0281787) in view of Antonio (US 2016/0151706) . Claim 1: Numata teaches an input device comprising: a supporting member (230a) having a shaft portion (232a), and configured to move about an axis defined in the shaft portion (¶ 49, 59); a sensor (resistor 224a) separated from the axis in a first direction orthogonal to the axis (¶ 56-59, 69, 70 Figs. 9-13, contact surface 233 is orthogonal to the axis of shaft 232a such that when the supporting member 230a is pressed contact surface 233 makes contact with contact 229a which contact resistor 224a; thereby indicating that contact resistor 224a is separated from the axis in a first direction orthogonal to the axis, additionally not the below screen shot), PNG media_image1.png 534 583 media_image1.png Greyscale and configured to output a signal according to movement of the supporting member (¶ 56-59); a housing configured to house the supporting member and the sensor (Figs. 7, 9-11). Numata teaches the above, but lacks explicitly suggesting an operated member extending in a second direction orthogonal to the axis and intersecting the first direction, and projecting from the housing, the operated member being attached to the supporting member so as to move together with the supporting member, and being removable from the supporting member by an operation from an outside of the housing. Numata at least teaches that various modifications can be applied without departing from the overall scope of the invention (¶ 71). Furthermore, an analogous art of Antonio teaches an operated member (100) extending in a second direction orthogonal to the axis (pivot point 17) and projecting from the housing (13), the operated member being attached to the supporting member so as to move together with the supporting member (trigger (15)), and being removable from the supporting member by an operation from an outside of the housing (¶ 6, 51-58, 61-64)(see below screenshot). PNG media_image2.png 225 348 media_image2.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the input device of Numata with the operated member of Antonio because such a modification would fix excess trigger motion by allowing for trigger attachments that modulate the trigger range of motion (Antonio - ¶ 16). Such a modification allows the user to adjust the range of motion as the user(s) prefers (Antonio - ¶ 16). In regards to the operating member extending in a second direction intersecting the first direction, the combination of Numata in view of Antonio teaches such limitations. One of ordinary skill in the art understands that if two directions originate from a common origin point (in this case the axis defined by the shaft) then such directions intersect at the origin point. Claim 2: Numata in view of Antonio teaches, wherein one of the supporting member and the operated member has a magnet, and is attached to the other member by a magnetic force of the magnet (Antonio, ¶ 24, 62-64, Fig. 9). Claim 3: Numata in view of Antonio teaches wherein the magnet is disposed on an opposite side of the sensor with respect to the axis. Figure 9 of Numata shows the contact surface of the support member being on an opposite side the sensor 224a with respect to the axis, wherein via the applied teaching of Antonio (see above with respect to claim 2) would suggest the magnet attached to the contact surface of the support member of Numata which is on an opposite side of the sensor with respect to the axis. Claim 6: Numata teaches wherein the supporting member is able to move about the axis to a first position separated from the sensor and a second position for pushing the sensor, the supporting member is biased to the first position by a spring (243a), and the spring is disposed on an opposite side from the sensor with the axis interposed between the spring and the sensor (Fig. 9, ¶ 50, 56-61, 63) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 4-5 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. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAMAR HARPER whose telephone number is (571)272-6177. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am to 5:30pm. 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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571) 270-1344. 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. /TRAMAR HARPER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/722,610 Page 2 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/722,610 Page 3 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/722,610 Page 4 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/722,610 Page 5 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/722,610 Page 6 Art Unit: 3715
Prosecution Insights