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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character not mentioned in the description: 244 in Fig. 4. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: A first display module 351 and a second display module 353 are alluded to as appearing in Fig. 1 of the Drawings. Neither a first display module 351 nor a second display module 353 are shown in the Drawings. Further, reference numeral 351 is used in the Specification to refer to both a first display module and a first damping member. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 8 contains reference character 392. Since this is the only reference character appearing in the claims, Examiner is assuming this was done in error. Additionally, line 12 includes an erroneous parenthesis following the word “display.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. In the Drawings (specifically Figs. 7A-12), the “direction in which the first hinge arm is disposed with respect to the first plate” is the -Z direction. The claim requires that “the first inclined surface faces an opposite direction.” This would presumably be the +Z direction. The direction normal to the first inclined surface in Figs. 7A-8 and 12 is somewhere between the +X and -Z. The direction normal to the first inclined surface in Figs. 9-10 is somewhere between +X and +Z. Examiner is unsure how to interpret this limitation given that it is not shown in the Drawings.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the hinge arm” in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant should correct this claim to recite either “the hinge arms comprise,” “the first hinge arm comprises,” or “the second hinge arm comprises.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 12, 14-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 2024/0338058 A1), hereinafter Xu.
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches an electronic device (electronic device 100) comprising:
a first housing (first housing 10);
a second housing (second housing 30) rotatably disposed with respect to the first housing (from paragraph 0140: “[T]he first housing 10 and the second housing 30 can be rotated (unfolded or folded) relative to each other.”);
a hinge (rotating mechanism 20) including a first hinge arm (door plate swing arm 23) connected to the first housing (10) and a second hinge arm (at least two door plate swing arms 23 are disclosed; see e.g. Figs. 11 and 20) connected to the second housing (30);
a flexible display (flexible display screen 200) disposed on the first housing (10) and the second housing (30; see Figs. 1 and 4) and spaced apart from each of the first hinge arm and the second hinge arm (first non-bending portion 2001 is disposed on first housing 10, second non-bending portion 2003 is disposed on second housing 30, and bending portion 2002 is disposed on first and second support surfaces 211 and 221 of first and second rotating door plates 21 and 22);
a first plate (first rotating door plate 21) disposed between the first hinge arm (23) and the flexible display (200; see paragraph 0149); and
a second plate (second rotating door plate 22) disposed between the second hinge arm (23) and the flexible display (200) and spaced apart from the first plate (21; see paragraph 0149),
wherein the first plate comprises a first edge portion including a first inclined surface inclined with respect to a direction in which the first hinge arm and the flexible display are spaced apart from each other (see annotated Fig. 43 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
363
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu
further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the second plate (22) comprises: a second edge portion including a second inclined surface inclined with respect to a direction in which the first plate and the second plate are spaced apart from each other (see annotated Fig. 43 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
368
541
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the first edge portion and the second edge portion face each other in the direction in which the first plate and the second plate are spaced apart from each other (see Figs. 11, 20, 29-30, 34, and 43).
Regarding claim 4, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the first incline surface faces the first hinge arm (see Figs. 11, 20, 29-30, 34, 38 and 43).
Regarding claim 5, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein an inclination angle is formed between the first inclined surface and the first hinge arm (see Figs. 11, 20, 29-30, 34, and 43).
Regarding claim 6, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: a hinge cover (top cover 11) in which at least a portion of the hinge is configured to be received (from paragraph 0205: “The top cover 11 is a configured to shield and protect an internal structure of the rotating mechanism 20.”), and wherein at least a portion of the first inclined surface faces the hinge cover (see Figs. 11, 21, 29, 37, and 42).
Regarding claim 7, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the hinge arm (23) comprises:
a first portion spaced apart from the first plate (see annotated Fig. 51 below);
a protrusion portion extending toward the first plate from the first portion (see annotated Fig. 51 below); and
a second portion on which the first plate is seated and facing the first inclined surface (see annotated Fig. 51 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
319
547
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: a folding space (screen accommodating space 900) to which the flexible display (200) is configured to be deformable and formed between the first plate (21) and the second plate (22; see Fig. 41), and wherein the first inclined surface is inclined toward the folding space (see Figs. 11, 20, 29, 34, 38, 41, and 43).
Regarding claim 9, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first inclined surface is configured to come closer to the flexible display from a first edge of the first inclined surface to a second edge of the first inclined surface opposite to the first edge (see annotated Figs. 20 and 29 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
341
234
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
214
369
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. As best understood in light of the above-mentioned 112(a) issue, Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first inclined surface faces an opposite direction to a direction in which the first hinge arm is disposed with respect to the first plate (see Figs. 11, 20, 29-30, 34, and 43).
Regarding claim 14, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising: a support bar (lifting plate 26) disposed between the first plate (21) and the second plate (22) and facing the first inclined surface (see Figs. 10-11, 20, 29-30, 34, 38, and 43).
Regarding claim 15, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 as stated above. Xu further teaches the electronic device of claim 14, wherein the first inclined surface is configured to become farther from the first hinge arm from a first edge to a second edge opposite to the first edge (see annotated Figs. 20 and 29 above).
Regarding claim 16, Xu teaches an electronic device (100) comprising:
a first housing (10);
a second housing (30) rotatably coupled to the first housing (from paragraph 0140: “[T]he first housing 10 and the second housing 30 can be rotated (unfolded or folded) relative to each other.”);
a flexible display (200) seated on the first housing (10) and the second housing (30; see Figs. 1 and 4) and configured to be at least partially deformable (from paragraph 0141: “When the first housing 10 and the second housing 30 are folded or unfolded relative to each other, the bending portion 2002 is deformed.”);
a hinge (20) connecting the first housing (10) and the second housing
a first plate (21) disposed between the flexible display (200) and the hinge (20); and
and a second plate (22) disposed between the flexible display (200) and the hinge (20) and spaced apart from the first plate (21; see paragraph 0149),
wherein a folding space (900) where the flexible display
Regarding claim 17, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as stated above. Xu
further teaches the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the first plate includes a first inclined surface inclined with respect to a direction in which the first plate and the second plate are spaced apart from each other, and wherein the second plate includes a second inclined surface inclined with respect to the direction in which the first plate and the second plate are spaced apart from each other (see annotated Fig. 43 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
373
454
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as stated above. Xu
further teaches the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the edge portions include inclined surfaces facing the hinge (see annotated Fig. 43 above).
Regarding claim 20, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as stated above. Xu
further teaches the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the edge portions include inclined surfaces configured to approach the flexible display toward the folding space (see annotated Fig. 43 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
362
577
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (WO 2022/030789 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 10, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu lacks a specific teaching that the electronic device further comprises a damping member comprising a flexible material disposed between the flexible display and the first plate.
Kim teaches a foldable electronic device (200) comprising a damping member formed of a flexible material (cushion layer 2541) disposed between a flexible display (display panel 253) and a first plate (first reinforcing plate 271; see Figs. 7a-b).
Xu and Kim are considered to be analogous arts because they are in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to include a damping member comprising a flexible material disposed between the flexible display and the first plate. Doing so would provide a cushion to protect the display from the first plate.
Regarding claim 11, Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches that the flexible display comprises a panel (see paragraph 0142), but lacks a specific teaching that a first digitizer is disposed between the panel and the first plate and facing the first edge portion.
Kim teaches a flexible display (flexible display 250) comprising a panel (253) and a digitizer disposed between a panel (253) and a first plate (271) (from pg. 12, paragraph 2: “[T]he foldable electronic device 200 may further include a member (e.g., a digitizer) for recognizing a handwriting input, which is disposed under the flexible display 250.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to place a digitizer between the panel and the first plate and facing the first edge portion. Doing so would allow the device to recognize touch input.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cui et al. (US 2022/0365561 A1), hereinafter Cui.
Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Xu further teaches a folding space (900) to which the flexible display (200) is configured to be deformed and formed between the first plate (21) and the second plate (22; see Fig. 41). Xu fails to teach that the first inclined surface is configured to come closer to the first hinge arm as the first inclined surface approaches the folding space. Rather, the first inclined surface moves farther away from the first hinge arm (the downward direction in Fig. 43) as the first inclined surface approaches the folding space (the right to left direction in Fig. 43).
Cui teaches display device with a folding space (gap 8) to which a flexible display (flexible display module 3) is configured to be deformed and formed between a first plate (first support member 1) and a second plate (second support member 2; see Fig. 2). The first plate (1) has a first inclined surface (111b in Fig. 1) that becomes farther away from the flexible display (3) as the first inclined surface (111b) approaches the folding space 8; see Fig. 1).
Cui is considered to be analogous art because it is in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to configure the first inclined surface to come closer to the first hinge arm, and away from the flexible display, as the first inclined surface approaches the folding space. Doing so would help facilitate smooth bending of the flexible display as the device is folded (see Cui, paragraph 0063).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Lee (KR 10-2299989 B1).
Xu teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as stated above. Xu lacks a specific teaching that the edge portions are configured to be deformable toward the hinge.
Lee teaches an electronic device comprising a flexible display panel (120) and first (first device 110a) and second (second device 110b) plates that include first (support member 115a) and second (support member 115b) edge portions. The edge portions (115a-b) are connected to hinge shafts (114a-b) and are therefore capable of bending or deforming inwardly toward a main hinge (U-shaped hinge housing 130; see Figs. 5-6).
Lee is considered to be analogous art because it is in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to configure the edge portions to be deformable toward the hinge. Doing so would help to protect the flexible display from damage during folding/unfolding and when the device is in an unfolded state and a force is applied on the portion of the flexible display directly above the hinge.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSS TERRY MULARSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Imani Hayman can be reached at (571)270-5528. 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.
/R.T.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841