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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al (US 20190132998; “Yoshida” hereinafter), in view of applicant provided prior art Masato et al (JP 09-034374; “Masato” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshida teaches: a display device comprising:
a display unit (12, fig. 4);
a control unit (10 and 28, fig. 4) that controls the display unit (¶[0038]); and
a connection part (64, 62, fig. 4) that connects the display unit and the control unit (¶[0059]-[0060]), wherein
the connection part is capable of detachably connecting a back side of the display unit to the control unit (¶[0059]-[0061]),
the control unit is capable of having connected thereto an external connector (48, fig. 4) for connecting to an element external to the control unit (¶[0050]),
when the control unit has been fixed to the back side of the display unit (¶[0061]), an insertion/removal direction of the external connector is a direction in which a back surface of the display unit extends (this limitation is clearly disclosed in fig. 4).
Yoshida does not explicitly teach:
the connection part establishes a connection such that the control unit is capable of being turned so as to be spaced apart from or approach the back side of the display unit and such that the external connector is capable of being rotated with the external connector being disposed on an outside in a radial direction.
However, Masato teaches:
a connection part (25, 29, figs. 1-2) establishes a connection such that a control unit (22. Figs. 1-2) is capable of being turned so as to be spaced apart from or approach the back side of a display unit (23, figs. 1-2) and such that the external connector is capable of being rotated with the external connector (cable outlet hole 31, ¶[0016]) being disposed on an outside in a radial direction (25 engages with 29, and connecting display unit 23 to control unit 22, such that 22 is pivotable so as to move away or come close to the back surface side of 23, ¶[0009], [0016]-[0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to replace Yoshida’s elements 62, 64 and 66, and include Masato’s connecting parts 25 and 29, in place Yoshida’s of element 66, such that the connection part establishes a connection such that the control unit is capable of being turned so as to be spaced apart from or approach the back side of the display unit and such that the external connector is capable of being rotated with the external connector being disposed on an outside in a radial direction. The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (housing connecting means) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Masato. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 2, Yoshida in view of Masato teaches the limitation of claim 1, and Masato further teaches: wherein the connection part includes a bend section (see annotated fig. 2 below) that is disposed on the back side of the display unit and bends upward, and a first engagement reception section (29, fig. 1) that is disposed on a control-unit side and is engaged by the bend section (¶[0016]).
PNG
media_image1.png
386
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Yoshida in view of Masato teaches the limitation of claim 2, and the combination further teaches:
wherein causing the control unit to be spaced apart linearly from the back side of the display unit allows, by way of the connection part, the control unit to detach from the display unit, and
during a process of causing the control unit to be spaced apart linearly from the back side of the display unit, moving the control unit in a direction different from a linearly spacing direction allows the connection part to form engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section (this limitation is taught by the combination of Yoshida and Masato. Specifically, Masato’s elements 25 and 29, are configured to separate the control unit 22 from the display unit 23 in a linear manner. Moreover, moving the control unit in a radial direction, which is different from a linearly spacing direction, allows the connection part to form engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al (US 20190132998; “Yoshida” hereinafter), in view of Masato et al (JP 09-034374; “Masato” hereinafter) as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Kim et al (US 20030058380; “Kim” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshida in view of Masato teaches the limitation of claim 2, but does not explicitly teach: wherein the connection part further includes an engagement retaining section that retains engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section.
However, Kim teaches:
a connection part (100, 422, figs. 9-11) further includes an engagement retaining section (422b) that retains engagement between a protuberance (122, i.e. Bend section) and a first engagement reception section (422a, ¶[0083]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Yoshida in view of Masato, with Kim’s teaching, such that the connection part further includes an engagement retaining section that retains engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section, in order to detachably fix the bend section to the first engagement reception section (¶[0083]). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (housing connecting means) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Kim. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshida in view of Masato and Kim teaches the limitation of claim 4, and the combination further teaches: wherein moving the control unit in a direction different from a movement direction for forming engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section causes the engagement retaining section to retain the engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section (the combination of Yoshida in view of Masato and Kim teaches the limitation, due to the L-shaped configuration of Kim’s elements 422a and 422b, which require a first moving direction to engage the bend section and the first engagement reception, followed by a different direction which is perpendicular to the first moving direction, causes the engagement retaining section to retain the engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section, Figs. 9-11, Kim).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al (US 20190132998; “Yoshida” hereinafter), in view of Masato et al (JP 09-034374; “Masato” hereinafter) as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Gerst et al (US 20120187812; “Gerst” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshida in view of Masato and Gerst teaches the limitation of claim 2, but does not explicitly teach: wherein
the connection part includes a first abutment section that is disposed on the back side of the display unit, and a second abutment section that abuts the first abutment section and that is disposed on the control-unit side at a position that does not cause interference between the second abutment section and the bend section.
However, Gerst teaches:
a connection part (38 and 70 fig. 4) includes a first abutment section (slant side faces of the hook portion 74, annotated as ‘SF’ in annotated fig. 4 below) that is disposed on a release tool (70, i.e. back side of the display unit), and a second abutment section (54, fig. 4) that abuts the first abutment section (figs. 4-6, ¶[0037]) and that is disposed on an upper housing (12, fig. 4, i.e. the control-unit side) at a position that does not cause interference between the second abutment section and a bend section (74, figs. 4-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Yoshida in view of Masato, with Gerst’s teaching, such that the connection part includes a first abutment section that is disposed on the back side of the display unit, and a second abutment section that abuts the first abutment section and that is disposed on the control-unit side at a position that does not cause interference between the second abutment section and the bend section, in order to detachably fix the display unit with the control unit (¶[0037]). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (housing connecting means) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Gerst. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
PNG
media_image2.png
743
671
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al (US 20190132998; “Yoshida” hereinafter), in view of Masato et al (JP 09-034374; “Masato” hereinafter) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kawamura et al (JP 3105188; “Kawamura” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 7, Yoshida in view of Masato teaches the limitation of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein
the connection part includes a hinge section that is disposed on the back side of the display unit and has a fixed piece and a movable piece, and a slide engagement section that is disposed on a control-unit side and is capable of sliding along the movable piece,
the movable piece of the hinge section includes a second engagement reception section, and
the slide engagement section includes a projection section that projects downward and is engaged by the second engagement reception section.
However, Kawamura teaches:
a connection part (20, fig. 10) includes a hinge section (21, fig. 10) that is disposed on the back side of a sink (2, fig. 10, i.e. the display unit) and has a fixed piece (22, fig. 10) and a movable piece (23, fig. 10), and a slide engagement section (32, fig. 11-12) that is disposed on a lid (10, i.e. control-unit side) and is capable of sliding along the movable piece (figs. 11-12),
the movable piece of the hinge section includes a second engagement reception section (24, fig. 10), and
the slide engagement section includes a projection section (33, fig. 10) that projects downward and is engaged by the second engagement reception section (figs. 11-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Yoshida in view of Masato, with Kawamura’s teaching, such that the connection part includes a hinge section that is disposed on the back side of the display unit and has a fixed piece and a movable piece, and a slide engagement section that is disposed on a control-unit side and is capable of sliding along the movable piece, the movable piece of the hinge section includes a second engagement reception section, and the slide engagement section includes a projection section that projects downward and is engaged by the second engagement reception section, for the advantage of easily assemble and remove the control unit (¶[0005]). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique (housing connecting means) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Kawamura. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida et al (US 20190132998; “Yoshida” hereinafter), in view of Masato et al (JP 09-034374; “Masato” hereinafter), Kawamura et al (JP 3105188; “Kawamura” hereinafter) as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Atom et al (US 20230119798; “Atom” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 8, Yoshida in view of Masato and Kawamura teaches the limitation of claim 7, and Kawamura suggests (see fig. 12, where the angle formed between the fixed piece and the movable piece of the hinge is predetermined set to 270 degree) but does not explicitly disclose wherein an angle formed between the fixed piece and the movable piece of the hinge section can be set to a predetermined angle.
However, Atom teaches:
PNG
media_image3.png
326
749
media_image3.png
Greyscale
an angle formed between a fixed piece of a hinge (see annotated fig. 3 below) relative to a movable piece of a hinge section (see annotated fig. 3 below) connected to segment 106a (fig. 3, i.e. i.e. control-unit side) can be set to a predetermined angle (¶[0047]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Yoshida in view of Masato, Kawamura, with Atom’s teaching, such that an angle formed between the fixed piece and the movable piece of the hinge section can be set to a predetermined angle, for the advantage of limiting the range of the hinge section relative to the control-unit and the display unit (¶[0047]-[0048]). The claim would have been obvious because the particular known technique ( hinges with predetermined angle ) was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as evidenced by Atom. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity (MPEP 2143).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is:
US 20220071034 A1 Connection Device. This invention relates generally to a connection device includes an engaging claw extending in a first direction from a first member, and a receiving portion provided in a second member.
US 8172282 B2 Computing Device Latching Assembly. This invention generally relates to a computing device latching assembly comprises a latching member configured to releasably secure an accessory to a computing device, and a release mechanism actuatable to move the latching member from a locking position to an unlocked position and to cause the latching member to urge the accessory away from the computing device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER KRIM whose telephone number is (703)756-1246. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00am -4:30pm.
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, 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.
/P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/SAGAR SHRESTHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841