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.
Claim 1 is 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 being able to be spaced apart linearly from the back side of the display unit (as disclosed upon examination of figs. 4-5, and ¶[0060], [0063]).
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]), the external connector being disposed on a side of the control unit (side where 48 is disposed in fig. 4) distant from the connection part (64, 62, fig. 4).
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 (18) of the display unit extends (this limitation is clearly disclosed in fig. 4, by way of the parallel arrangement between 48, 10 and 12).
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 a side of the control unit distant from an axis around which the control unit is turned.
wherein the connection part includes a bend section that is disposed on the back side of the display unit and bends upward, and a first engagement reception section that is disposed on a control-unit side and is engaged by the bend section,
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.
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 an external connector (cable outlet hole 31, ¶[0016]) is capable of being rotated with the external connector (cable outlet hole 31, ¶[0016]) being disposed on a side of the control unit distant from an axis (see annotated fig. 1 below) around which the control unit is turned (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]),
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]),
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 (Masato’s elements 25 and 29, are configured to separate the control unit 22 from the display unit 23 in a linear manner), and
during a process of causing the control unit to be detached from the back side of the display unit, moving the control unit in a direction different from a linearly spacing direction (rotation, ¶[0035) allows the connection part to form engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section (as disclosed upon examination of figs 1-2, and ¶[0035]. Therefore, rotating / pivoting the control unit allows the connection part to form engagement between the bend section and the first engagement reception section).
PNG
media_image1.png
386
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
320
421
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 a side distant from an axis around which the control unit is turned, 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, to meet the limitations of claim 1. 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).
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 1, 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 1, 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_image3.png
743
671
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's argument:
“However, Applicant respectfully contends that Yoshida neither discloses nor suggests the feature of the engagement between the engagement claim 62 and the engagement part 64 during a process of causing the controller 10 to be spaced apart linearly from the display device 12.”.
Examiner’s response:
Yoshida does not comprise any pivoting connection that would enable a movement different from a linear spacing. Furthermore, paragraph [0063] discloses “In the state where the controller 10 has been attached to the back face 18 of the display device 12, as the engagement of the engagement claws (62 and the unillustrated one) with the engagement parts 64 is released, then the housing 22 is moved away to the rear from the back face 18 of the display device 12, the fitting state between the connector 58 and the connector 60 is released so that the controller 10 can be removed from the back face 18 of the display device 12”, this action can be achieved by linearly spacing apart the controller 10 from the display device 12, and is fully supported by the front-rear coupling direction disclosed in paragraph [0060]. Therefore, the combination of Yoshida and Masato teaches the limitations of amended claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights