DET,AILED 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 Objections
Claim 5, 11, and 12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 recites the phrasing “configured to prodess”. The claim should be amended to read “configured to process”.
Claim 11 recites the phrasing “the first body mvoes relative to the first sub-body”. The claim should be amended to read “the first body moves relative to the first sub-body”.
Claim 12 recites the phrasing “is in the first attitude to, and to”. The claim should be amended to read “the first body moves is in the first attitude, and to”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230171902 A1) in view of Bohn (US 20120314399 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Kim teaches:
An electronic device comprising: a body assembly (Kim: panel support 200 [0092]) including a processing device configured to at least process image data; and a display assembly configured to display the image data and including a first part (Kim: first non-folding area NFA1_2 [0153]) and a second part (Kim: second non-folding area NFA2_2 [0152]), the display assembly (Kim: display area [0066]) is configured such that when the first part faces a first direction, the second part is capable of facing a second direction (see Note 1A).
Note 1A: In Fig. 12, Kim showcases the first and second non-folding areas facing a first direction. In Fig. 13, Kim showcases that the second non-folding area may be folded to face a second direction, opposite the first direction.
Kim fails to explicitly teach:
An electronic device comprising: a body assembly including a processing device configured to at least process image data; and a display assembly configured to display the image data
Bohn teaches:
An electronic device comprising: a body assembly including a processing device (Bohn: The device 800 includes one or more processors 810 [0048]) configured to at least process image data (Bohn: The device 800 also includes an audio and/or video processing system 820 that […] generates display data for a display system 824 [0053]); and a display assembly configured to display the image data (Bohn: the display system may include any devices that process, display, and/or otherwise render audio, video, display, and/or image data [0053])
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Bohn with Kim. Including a processing device configured to at least process image data and a display assembly configured to display the image data, as in Bohn, would benefit the Kim teachings by enabling flexible display on common devices such as monitors or phones.
Regarding claim 2:
Kim in view of Bohn teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 1 (as shown above), wherein:
the body assembly includes:
a first body (Kim: third flat plate 250 [0093]); and
a second body including:
a first sub-body (Kim: first flat plate 210 [0092]) movably connected to the first body; and
a second sub-body (Kim: second flat plate 230 [0093]) rotationally connected to the first sub-body (see Note 2A);
the first part and the second part of the display assembly are adjacent to each other (Kim: Fig. 12; see Note 2B);
the first part is disposed at the first body and is configured to move to face the first direction or the second direction as the first body moves relative to the first sub-body (Kim: Fig. 2, see Note 2B); and
the second part includes:
a first region disposed at the first sub-body (see Note 2C); and
a second region disposed at the second sub-body and configured to move to be opposite to the first region as the second sub-body rotates relative to the first sub-body (see Note 2C).
Note 2A: Fig. 11 of Kim shows that the second flat plate 230 is rotationally connected by a first lattice pattern 221 to first flat plate 210.
Note 2B: The embodiment of Kim shown in Fig. 12 (previously used in the mapping of claim 1) showcases that the first non-folding area NFA1_2 is adjacent to the second non-folding area NFA1_2.
Compared to Fig. 1, the only difference is the addition of a “third non-folding area NFA3 and the second folding area FA2” [0152]. Furthermore, due to the similarity of the figures, one can see that the previously discussed first part (understood to be analogous to NFA1_2 in Fig. 12) may be composed of a first and second sub-body (understood to be analogous to NFA3 and NFA1 respectively in Fig. 1). See also the annotated figure below.
PNG
media_image1.png
516
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 of Kim annotated to showcase which elements of Figure 1 correspond to the claim terms.
In the annotated figure above, NFA3 faces a first direction. In Figure 2 of Kim, NFA3 is shown as foldable such that it faces a second direction.
Note 2C: In the annotated figure in Note 2B, all three areas are covered by a display area DA1. DA1 is split into regions corresponding to the non-folding areas (NFA) by dotted lines, as seen in the figure.
Figure 2 showcases that the region corresponding to the second sub-body (in the annotated figure, NFA2) may be rotated relative to the first sub body (NFA1) to a direction opposite of the orientation in Figure 1.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the embodiment of Fig. 1 of Kim with the embodiment of Fig. 12 of Kim in view of Bohn, because Kim teaches that “Compared to the display device 1 according to the embodiment of FIG. 1, a display device 1_2 according to the present [Fig. 12] embodiment has substantially the same configuration” [0152]. Including a first and second sub-body, as in the embodiment of Fig. 1 of Kim, would enhance the teachings of Kim and Bohn by enabling further flexibility of the foldable display.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230171902 A1) in view of Bohn (US 20120314399 A1) and Batio (US 20080062625 A1).
Kim in view of Bohn teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 2 (as shown above), wherein:
Kim in view of Bohn fails to teach:
the body assembly further includes a third body movably connected to the second sub-body; the display assembly further includes a third part disposed at the third body; the third part and the first part are located on opposite sides of the second part; and the third part is configured to move to face the first direction or face the second direction as the third body moves relative to the second sub-body.
Batio teaches:
the body assembly further includes a third body movably connected to the second sub-body (Batio: Four Users on One PC: The Xentex design has the ability to extend the two dual displays in the system to have additionally 2 additional remote screens, which could reside anywhere in relation to the system [0071-0072]; see Note 3A);
the display assembly further includes a third part disposed at the third body (see Note 3B);
the third part and the first part are located on opposite sides of the second part (see Note 3A); and
the third part is configured to move to face the first direction or face the second direction as the third body moves relative to the second sub-body (Batio: The unit can be configured to provide for both displays to rotate 180-degrees and then be folded back upon itself [0080]).
Note 3A: Figure 5 of Batio showcases a device with dual screens in a linear layout. In Note 2B, it was shown that Kim reference previously cited teaches that 2 display regions may be extended to 3 in a linear layout (i.e., Fig. 12 of Kim compared to Fig. 1 of Kim). Batio teaches that up to four display regions may be utilized in [0072], which necessitates a third body and part.
Note 3B: Batio showcases in Figure 3A-3C that each screen has an LCD panel used for displaying image content: “The unit features the highest resolution LCD screen known to the PC market and as such is the first portable self-contained gaming entertainment system that can display the high-resolution imagery made possible by today and tomorrows future technologies.” [0103]. Akin to the mapping of claim 1, the screen hardware (non-display area) is considered to be the “body”, and the LCD panel itself is considered the “part”.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Batio with Kim in view of Bohn. Including a third body and part, as in Batio, would enhance the Kim in view of Bohn teachings by expanding screen real estate while also allowing the user to choose how to manage the expanded screen space: “The Flip-Pad™ provides the screen real estate solution in a portable form factor, whilst also utilizing the screen resolution far better than currently available LCD technology as is described below” [0026].
Claims 4, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230171902 A1) in view of Bohn (US 20120314399 A1), Gadget Fight (NPL: Xiaomi Dual Flex or Xiaomi Mix Flex) and The Verge (NPL: Unfolding the first trifold phone).
Regarding claim 4:
Kim in view of Bohn teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 2 (as shown above), wherein:
when the first part faces the second direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part meet a coplanar condition, the electronic device is in a first usage mode (Kim: Fig. 1; see Note 2B);
Kim in view of Bohn fails to explicitly teach:
when the first part faces the second direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a first included angle, the electronic device is in a second usage mode;
when the first part faces the first direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part meet the coplanarity condition, the electronic device is in a third usage mode; and
when the first part faces the first direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a second included angle, the electronic device is in a fourth usage mode.
Gadget Fight teaches:
when the first part faces the second direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part meet a coplanar condition, the electronic device is in a first usage mode (see Note 4A);
when the first part faces the first direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part meet the coplanarity condition, the electronic device is in a third usage mode (see Note 4A);
Note 4A: At 0:07 in the online video by Gadget Fight, a user is shown using a foldable phone in the first usage mode described by the claims. Note that the phone is slightly bent at the ends, indicating where the first part 210, second part 220, and third part 230 may be located. The third part is not mentioned in claim 4 of the present application, but is labelled because the modes shown by Gadget Fight are analogous to the modes showcased in Fig. 23 of the present application.
PNG
media_image2.png
697
1228
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Gadget Fight showcases a first mode of the Xiaomi device. Annotations added.
PNG
media_image3.png
687
1224
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Changing from the first mode to the third mode.
At 0:24 in the video, the user is shown folding the phone such that the phone folds akin to the third mode shown in Fig. 23 of the present application.
PNG
media_image4.png
404
711
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
403
712
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The phone is in the third mode at 0:27 in the video (left). At 0:36, the back of the phone is shown to also be displaying imagery different than that of the front (right).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Gadget Fight with Kim in view of Bohn. Including various usage modes of the foldable device, as in Gadget Fight, enhances the Kim in view of Bohn teachings by enabling the user to freely save and/or increase the amount of screen and physical space used by the device.
Kim in view of Bohn and Gadget Fight still fails to teach:
when the first part faces the second direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a first included angle, the electronic device is in a second usage mode;
when the first part faces the first direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a second included angle, the electronic device is in a fourth usage mode.
The Verge (NPL: Unfolding the first trifold phone) teaches:
when the first part faces the second direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a first included angle, the electronic device is in a second usage mode (see Note 4B)
and when the first part faces the first direction, and the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a second included angle, the electronic device is in a fourth usage mode (see Note 4B).
Note 4B: Above, it was noted that the third part 230 is not claimed in claim 4. Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed second and fourth mode is slightly larger than what is depicted in Fig. 23, which is most notable in the fourth mode as it does not necessitate a display device with four segments:
PNG
media_image6.png
347
1243
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
355
1043
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. 23 of the present application, edited to showcase the second and fourth mode without the third part.
With this scope in mind, The Verge showcases a device that teaches the second and fourth mode:
PNG
media_image8.png
514
908
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The Verge showcases a user with a phone in the second mode at 0:32.
PNG
media_image9.png
515
902
media_image9.png
Greyscale
The Verge showcases a user with a phone in the fourth mode at 0:34.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of The Verge with Kim in view of Bohn and Gadget Fight, as the four modes claimed are inherently achievable at least by modifying the locations of the hinges of the phone showcased in Gadget Fight, and at most by modifying the phone showcased in Gadget Fight with an additional hinge in the middle of the second part, in order to obtain a four-fold phone. Doing so would benefit the Kim in view of Bohn and Gadget Fight teachings by allowing the user more flexibility with how the device may be used.
Regarding claim 5:
Kim in view of Bohn, Gadget Fight, and The Verge teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 4 (as shown above), wherein
the electronic device is configured to:
switch between the first usage mode and the second usage mode or switch between the third usage mode and the fourth usage mode (see Note 5B), when the first sub-body rotates relative to the second sub-body;
switch between the first usage mode and the third usage mode when the first body mvoes relative to the first sub-body (see Note 4A);
switch between the first usage mode and the fourth usage mode (see Note 5A) or switch between the second usage mode and the fourth usage mode, when the first sub-body rotates relative to the second sub-body and the first body moves relative to the first sub-body.
Note 5A: The Verge showcases from 0:33 to 0:40 switching from the fourth usage mode to the first usage mode. In Note 4B, it was shown that the user has the phone in the fourth mode at 0:34. The user unfolds the phone completely, mimicking the first usage mode claimed and depicted in Fig. 23 of the present application.
PNG
media_image10.png
359
631
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
362
633
media_image11.png
Greyscale
On the left (0:34), The Verge showcases the fourth mode. On the right (0:38), The Verge showcases the first mode.
Note 5B: Similar to what was discussed in Note 4B, the third mode is different when third part 230 is not present.
PNG
media_image12.png
293
1370
media_image12.png
Greyscale
At 0:35, while changing from the fourth mode to the first, The Verge also showcases the third mode, albeit briefly. Therefore, The Verge at least showcases that the device may change between the first, third, and fourth modes.
PNG
media_image13.png
361
634
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
362
633
media_image11.png
Greyscale
On the left (0:35), The Verge showcases the third mode. On the right (0:38), The Verge showcases the first mode.
Regarding claim 6:
Kim in view of Bohn, Gadget Fight, and The Verge teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 4 (as shown above), wherein the first included angle is different from the second included angle (see Note 6A).
Note 6A: An included angle is known in the art to be the smaller angle between two sides of a polygon (that is, rather than having a 270 degree included angle, two sides would have a 90 degree included angle).
In Fig. 23 of the present application, the second and fourth usage modes depict an included angle between the first region and second region of 0 degrees.
In Note 5A, it was shown that The Verge teaches a device that can perform the first usage mode. In the first usage mode (as shown in Fig. 23 of the specification of the current application), the first region of the second part and the second region of the second part form a first included angle of 180 degrees (i.e., they are coplanar). In this sense, the first usage mode is effectively the second usage mode with an included angle greater than 0 degrees.
Therefore, in showcasing a device that can perform the fourth usage mode and first usage mode, The Verge has also effectively demonstrated a device that can perform the second usage mode with an included angle different from the fourth usage mode.
Claim 8, 9, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20230171902 A1) in view of Bohn (US 20120314399 A1) and Gadget Fight (NPL: Xiaomi Dual Flex or Xiaomi Mix Flex).
Regarding claim 8:
Kim in view of Bohn teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 1 (as shown above), wherein:
the first part, the first region, and the second region are adjacent to one another; the first part faces the first direction, the first region faces the second direction, and the second region faces the first direction; the first direction and the second direction satisfy an opposite condition; and the first part and the second region satisfy an adjacent condition (Kim: Fig. 3, see Note 8A).
Note 8A: The examiner notes that the claimed structure is similar to what is depicted in Figure 3 of the Kim reference, in that when the a) previously mapped (see annotated figure in Note 2B) first-sub body is considered to be the second part and the b) previously mapped second sub-body is considered to be the third part.
Although this mapping is inconsistent with the mapping of Kim in claim 2, the examiner submits that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to create the device claimed in claim 8 for at least three reasons:
1) Claim 8 is not based on claim 2, which teaches the first and second regions that would otherwise distinguish claim 8 in a similar manner to claim 3 (see Allowable subject matter below).
2) The claim as a whole (that is, incorporating all limitations of claim 1) ultimately amounts to a known “tri-fold” display device, similar to what was claimed in claim 2.
3) Comparing the claim language of claim 2 to claim 8, the third part and second part are substitutable for the first region and second region.
Therefore, the Examiner understands Kim to teach the aforementioned limitations of claim 8.
Kim in view of Bohn fails to explicitly teach:
the second part faces the second direction, and the third part faces the first direction;
the first direction and the second direction satisfy an opposite condition; and
the first part and the third part satisfy an adjacent condition.
Gadget Fight teaches:
the second part faces the second direction, and the third part faces the first direction;
the first direction and the second direction satisfy an opposite condition; and
the first part and the third part satisfy an adjacent condition (see Note 8B).
Note 8B: In Note 4A, Gadget Fight showcases a device that can be folded to match the limitations of claim 8 (relevant figure shown below). The device is folded such that the first and third parts are adjacent and visible on the opposite side of the second part, which faces the user.
PNG
media_image5.png
403
712
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Gadget Fight with Kim in view of Bohn. Including various usage modes of the foldable device, as in Gadget Fight, enhances the Kim in view of Bohn teachings by enabling the user to freely save and/or increase the amount of screen and physical space used by the device.
Regarding claim 9:
Kim in view of Bohn and Gadget Fight teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 8 (as shown above), wherein:
the image data includes first content and second content, display sizes of the first content and the second content meeting a same condition (see Note 9B); the second part is configured to display the first content; the first part and the third part are configured to display the second content together (see Note 9A).
Note 9A: Gadget Fight showcases that the second part of the device may show image content that differs from the first and third parts.
PNG
media_image14.png
392
688
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
391
693
media_image15.png
Greyscale
On the left (0:31), the second part shows first image content. On the right (0:36), the first and third parts show second image content.
In the image shown above, the Examiner notes that it may appear as though the first and third parts do not show the second image content “together”. However, at 0:36 in the video, the user transitions to the phone home screen, and it is clearer that the first and third region show the same image content. Furthermore, when the user first folds the phone at 0:26, the transition reveals that a backdrop used for the second image content is being displayed under the first image content.
PNG
media_image16.png
694
1223
media_image16.png
Greyscale
The first and third region show the same image content (0:37).
Note 9B: Gadget Fight (as well as Kim in Fig. 3) shows that the area covered by the first and third parts is the same as the first part. Therefore, when image content is shown on the first and third part, it will at least be obvious to have the first and second image content be the same size as the image content for the second part in order to prevent the screen from appearing blank or cut-off.
Regarding claim 10:
Kim in view of Bohn, and Gadget Fight teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 9 (as shown above), wherein:
the second content includes a first portion and a second portion in an order; the image data includes the second portion of the second content, the first content, and the first portion of the second content in an order, such that the second portion is displayed on the first part and the first portion is displayed on the third part (see Note 10A).
Note 10A: At 0:27 in the Gadget Fight reference, the device transitions to showing the first and second image content. Visible under the second image content (the TikTok video) is a background which is displayed in order on the first and third region.
PNG
media_image17.png
392
693
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
391
693
media_image15.png
Greyscale
The background used for the first and third parts is visible behind the second image content. Note the blue above and the purple on the bottom (left image). The blue and purple background is shown in the same order from the back of the device (right image).
Regarding claim 13:
Kim in view of Bohn and Gadget Fight teaches:
The electronic device according to claim 8 (as shown above), wherein:
the body assembly includes a first body, a second body, and a third body; the first body is connected to the first part; the second body is connected to the second part; the third body is connected to the third part (see Note 4A: The three bodies are labelled in the figure associated with the note.);
the first body is rotationally connected to the second body and the third body is rotationally connected to the second body (see Note 13A); and
the first part and the second part are configured to rotate relative to each other, and the third part and the second part are configured to rotate relative to each other, such that the first part faces the first direction, the second part faces the second direction, and the third part faces the first direction (see Note 8B and Note 13B).
Note 13A: In Note 4A above, it was shown that the first and third bodies in Gadget Fight are rotationally connected, as the user rotates them in order to fold the phone.
PNG
media_image3.png
687
1224
media_image3.png
Greyscale
0:24 in Gadget Fight.
The “parts” attached to the “body” are interpreted to be the flexible display segment attached to its respective foldable segment. This is shown above in Gadget Fight, but is also showcased in Fig. 1 of Kim. For more details, see Note 2C.
Note 13B: As shown in Note 13A, the first and third bodies can be rotated relative to the second body. Additionally, in Note 4B, it is also shown that the bodies are rotated to the configuration required by the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 11-12, and 14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7:
Claim 7 recites the limitation: “a support assembly at least partially disposed between the second part and the rotation shaft assembly, connected to the first sub-body through a third elastic assembly, and connected to the second sub-body through a fourth elastic assembly”.
Cho (US 20230176629 A1) teaches a hinge assembly including a shaft (“elastic member support pin”, [0009]) and four elastic member connection spaces ([0124]). However, as best understood by the Examiner, Cho does not teach “a support assembly at least partially disposed between the second part and the rotation shaft assembly, connected to the first sub-body through a third elastic assembly, and connected to the second sub-body through a fourth elastic assembly”.
Regarding claim 11:
Claim 11 recites the limitation: “the third content is displayed on the first part, the second part, and the third part; the third content includes a first portion, a second portion, and a third portion in an order; the first portion is displayed on the first part, the second portion is displayed on the second part, and the third portion is displayed on the third part; and the second image data includes the first portion, the second portion, and the third portion in an orderly manner.”
Gadget Fight showcases that the screen may be divided into at least two portions (see Claims 9 and 10 above) but does not clearly show that the screen may be divided into three ordered portions. None of the other prior art on the record, Kim, Bohn, Batio, or The Verge teaches the limitations of claim 11.
Claim 12 depends on claim 11, and are therefore allowable for the same reason(s) recited above.
Regarding claim 14:
Claim 14 recites the limitation: “the third part is configured to move from a first side of the second body to the second side of the second body when the third body slides relative to the second body, such that the first part faces the first direction, the second part faces the second direction, and the third part faces the first direction.”
It is noted that Claim 14 recites similar limitations to Claim 13, except that the parts are configured to move via sliding. In Claim 13, it was shown that the first and third part could be rotated to face a first direction different from the second direction. However, none of the prior art searched or on the record explicitly teaches sliding a first and third part relative to each other such that they face a first direction different from the second direction.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kwon (US 20170003714 A1) teaches a three part display separated into first, second, and connecting bodies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT ALEXANDER PROVIDENCE whose telephone number is (571)270-5765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
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, King Poon can be reached at (571)270-0728. 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.
/VINCENT ALEXANDER PROVIDENCE/Examiner, Art Unit 2617 /KING Y POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2617