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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by HIRAKATA et al. (US2015/0062927).
Regarding claim 1 HIRAKATA discloses:
A portable communication device comprising:
a housing (e.g. 100 FIG.1A) including a first housing (e.g. 111 FIG.1A) and a second housing (e.g. 113 FIG.1A);
a hinge structure (e.g. between 111 and 113 FIG.1A) coupled with each of the first housing and the second housing;
a flexible display (e.g. 101 FIG.1A) including a first display portion and a second display portion accommodated in the first housing and the second housing (e.g. shown FIG.1A), respectively, and configured to form a folding area therein according to the folding or unfolding of the housing (e.g. shown FIG.1B); and
a sealing member (e.g. upper 102 FIG.2) disposed substantially along a space between the flexible display and the housing such that a first side of the sealing member is in contact with a side surface of the flexible display, and a second side of the sealing member opposite to the first side is in contact with an inner side surface of the first housing and an inner side surface of the second housing (e.g. shown/indicated FIG.3C).
Regarding claim 2 HIRAKATA discloses:
an elastic support member (e.g. lower 102, 112, FIG.2) disposed substantially in the folding area between the side surface of the flexible display and the inner side surface of the first housing or the inner side surface of the second housing (e.g. shown FIG.2).
Regarding claim 3 HIRAKATA discloses:
the second side of the sealing member is in contact with a first side surface of the elastic support member facing the flexible display (e.g. shown FIG.2).
Regarding claim 4 HIRAKATA discloses:
a second side surface of the elastic support member opposite to the first side surface thereof is in contact with the inner side surface of the first housing and the inner side surface of the second housing (e.g. indicated FIG.2).
Regarding claim 5 HIRAKATA discloses:
the sealing member has a first width at a first portion thereof between the side surface of the flexible display and the inner side surface of the first housing (e.g. along long edge shown FIG.2), and a second width smaller than the first width at a second portion thereof between the side surface of the flexible display and the first side surface of the elastic support member (e.g. along short edge FIG.2).
Regarding claim 6 HIRAKATA discloses:
the elastic support member comprises a rib (e.g. top edges of 112 FIG.2) and a support part (e.g. broad portion of 112 FIG.2) proximate to a folding axis of the flexible display.
Regarding claim 7 HIRAKATA discloses:
the support part of the elastic support member is in contact with a bottom surface of the sealing member proximate to the folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown FIG.3B2).
Regarding claim 8 HIRAKATA discloses:
the second side surface of the sealing member is in contact with the rib of the elastic support member proximate to the folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown/indicated FIG.3B2).
Regarding claim 9 HIRAKATA discloses:
the elastic support member tapers from a first width to 0 at a particular distance from a folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. tapering edges of lower 102 into 111/113 FIG.2).
Regarding claim 10 HIRAKATA discloses:
a distance between the inner side surface of the first housing and an outer side surface of the first housing is a first distance proximate to a folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. rounded corners of 111 toward 112 shown FIG.2), and the distance between the inner side surface of the first housing and the outer side surface of the first housing is a second distance larger than the first distance in an area distal from the folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. at outer corners of 111 shown FIG.2).
Regarding claim 11 HIRAKATA discloses:
the distance tapers from the first distance to the second distance at a particular distance from the folding axis of flexible display (e.g. along the rounded corner in the direction away from 112 shown FIG.2).
Regarding claim 12 HIRAKATA discloses:
the elastic support member includes a first fastening protrusion adjacent to a first end of the elastic support member (e.g. portion of bottom 102 in 111 FIG.2) and a second fastening protrusion adjacent to a second end of the elastic support member (e.g. portion of bottom 102 in 113 FIG.2).
Regarding claim 13 HIRAKATA discloses:
the first fastening protrusion is engaged in a fastening hole (e.g. between top and bottom 111 FIG.2) of the first housing and the second fastening protrusion is engaged in a fastening hole of the second housing (e.g. between top and bottom 113 FIG.2).
Regarding claim 14 HIRAKATA discloses:
a dustproof member (e.g. 213 FIG.13C) disposed below the elastic support member (e.g. below top 112 FIG.2).
Regarding claim 15 HIRAKATA discloses:
the elastic support member comprises a rib (e.g. top edges of 112 FIG.2) and a support part (e.g. section of lower 102 in contact with 101 FIG.3B2), and wherein the support part is in contact with the dustproof member (e.g. shown FIG.3B2).
Regarding claim 16 HIRAKATA discloses:
the hinge structure supports the elastic support member at a folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown/indicated FIG.1B).
Regarding claim 17 HIRAKATA discloses:
the housing is configured to maintain a folded state wherein the first housing and the second housing maintained at least one angle (e.g. shown FIG.1C).
Regarding claim 18 HIRAKATA discloses:
the first and second housing include support plates (e.g. plate portions of 111, 113 FIG.2) supporting at least an end portion of flexible display at a region distal from the folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown FIG.2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HIRAKATA et al. (US2015/0062927) in view of SEO et al. (US 2017/0364123).
Regarding claim 19 HIRAKATA discloses:
the first housing has a first side surface substantially parallel to a folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown FIG.1C),
HIRAKATA does not explicitly disclose:
further comprises a front facing camera closer to the first side surface of the first housing than the folding axis
SEO teaches:
further comprises a front facing camera (e.g. 235 FIG.46) closer to the first side surface of the first housing than the folding axis (e.g. shown FIG.46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of SEO as pointed out above, in HIRAKATA, as one having ordinary skill in the art would have would have recognized the teaching, suggestion, and motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings (as pointed out above) to arrive at the claimed invention, and would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because such a combination and/or modification would have allowed for: placement of the camera close to a support of the phone housing for improved stability on the flexing housing (paragraphs [0296], [0298]).
Regarding claim 20 HIRAKATA as modified discloses:
the second housing has a first side surface substantially parallel to the folding axis of the flexible display (e.g. shown FIG.1C), and
HIRAKATA does not explicitly disclose:
comprises a microphone closer to the first side surface of the second housing than the folding axis
SEO teaches:
comprises a microphone (e.g. 230 FIG.48) closer to the first side surface of the second housing than the folding axis (e.g. shown FIG.48).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of SEO as pointed out above, in HIRAKATA, as one having ordinary skill in the art would have would have recognized the teaching, suggestion, and motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings (as pointed out above) to arrive at the claimed invention, and would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because such a combination and/or modification would have allowed for: placement of the microphone close to a support of the phone housing for improved stability on the flexing housing and insure clear audio input closer to the vocal chords of the user (paragraphs [0296], [0300]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THERON S MILLISER whose telephone number is (571)270-1800. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
Limited examiner interviews are available.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani N. 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.
/THERON S MILLISER/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/ANTHONY M HAUGHTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841