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 § 112
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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the determined location" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is believed that claim 4 is meant to depend from claim 3.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the displayed map" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is believed that claim 5 is meant to depend from claim 4.
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.
Claims 1 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov (US Pub. 2024/0211058 A1) in view of Fleck (TW 494348) in view of Valtamer Alltab, Alltab Specifications1.
Regarding claim 1, Alexandrov discloses a dive computer (Alexandrov, ¶0135; The inventive information input and display device for use underwater and a wireless stylus can be used by amateur divers and commercial divers, underwater archaeologists and other researchers, underwater services and repair and construction teams, ...)
comprising: a display; (Alexandrov, Figs. 4-5 and ¶0060; The screen 8 can be an LCD screen, an electronic ink screen, or any other conventional screen,)
a stylus (Alexandrov, Figs. 2-5 and 8-12 and ¶0068; the wireless stylus 5 )
including a first inductive coil presenting a first resonant frequency (Alexandrov, Figs. 8-12 and ¶0089; an oscillator circuit is disposed inside the housing 24 of the stylus 5 and includes an inductor 12 with a ferrite core.)
wherein the first inductive coil is associated with a first end of the stylus (Alexandrov, Figs. 8-12 and ¶0094; the tip 11 is configured such that when mechanical stimulus is applied upon the front portion 19 of the tip 11, its rear portion 20 mechanically effects on the movable part 13 of the ferrite core of the inductor 12)
an electromagnetic touch panel associated with the display, (Alexandrov, Figs. 4-5 and ¶0064; A touchpad 30 operating on the electromagnetic resonance principle is disposed under the screen 8. The touchpad 30 comprises an inductive touch unit having inductors, typically printed.)
the electromagnetic touch panel configured to detect a position of the stylus (Alexandrov, ¶0013; the advantage of using such tablets with electromagnetic resonance-based screens and touchpads is that they provide highly precise detection of stylus location and therefore high accuracy of data input; ¶0106; the wireless stylus is reliably protected and can be used underwater without risk of damage, while maintaining its full functionality, including the ability to detect the state and position of the tip, and determine the amount and nature of effect upon it (sensitivity).)
a processor coupled with the display and electromagnetic touch panel, (Alexandrov, ¶0042; an environmentally-insulated housing accommodating an electromagnetic resonance-based touchpad comprising, electrically connected with each other, an inductive touch unit, a screen, electronic components including at least a microcontroller, a wireless data transmission unit, a memory unit, a power supply, and a non-contact on/off switching means; wherein the housing of the device has a window with a protective glass to enable viewing information on the screen; ¶0117; A microcontroller registers parameters of the inductors and calculates position of the stylus.)
the processor configured to; provide a writing function based on the position of the first end of the stylus; and control the display to present an indication of the writing function (Alexandrov, Fig. 3 and ¶0048; FIG. 3 is a general view of the information input and display device, showing the device in use; ¶0118; The processed stylus signal is converted into coordinates and transmitted to the device screen configured to display these coordinates as dots on the screen, corresponding to the stylus location, and thus form an image that can be viewed by the user through the protective glass of the device.)
and a housing retaining the display, electromagnetic touch panel, and processor, (Alexandrov, ¶0012; Main components of the device are a housing, accommodated in the housing an LCD screen, under which an inductive touch unit is disposed, typically comprising printed inductors, a microcontroller and other electronic components necessary to ensure operation of the screen and the inductive touch unit and electrically connected to them; )
Alexandrov does not disclose and a second inductive coil presenting a second resonant frequency. Fleck in the same field of endeavor, however, teaches employing the technique. (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; Erase End 31... The writing tip 33 emits many different f writing frequencies for example, frequencies a, b, and c. The eraser tuning circuit 37 is separate and different from the writing circuit 35 (see Figure 4). The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase)
and the second inductive coil is associated with a second end of the stylus; (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; erase end 31... The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase)
and the touch panel configured to differentiate between the first and second end of the stylus based on the first and second resonant frequencies of the coils; (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 2-3; ... the user can draw or write text on the corresponding display screen in a known manner. The user can also move the indicator (such as a stylus or disc) within the menu area; Pages 4-5; The writing tip 33 emits many different f writing frequencies for example, frequencies a, b, and c. The eraser tuning circuit 37 is separate and different from the writing circuit 35 (see Figure 4). The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase... According to some embodiments of the present invention, the amount of pressure applied to the surface of the input board 15 by the erasing tip 3 causes the change of the coil 39. And therefore the phase output by the circuit 37. If the predetermined voltage limit is exceeded, the 3 7 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase erasing message indicates the material to be selected for erasing.)
provide an erasing function based on the position of the second end of the stylus; and to present an indication of the erasing function (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; The user presses the pen 17 to the tablet over the text to be erased 'and then at the end of the selection ...causes the selection to be erased. ...the circuit 37 sends an eraser instruction signal, and when the user presses the tip 31 against the input board and causes the limit to be interrupted, an erase signal is issued) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov, with the known technique of providing a second inductive coil presenting a second resonant frequency and associated with a second end of the stylus, as taught by Fleck, in order to allow a user to easily switch between writing and erasing functions. (Fleck, Page 5, ..for writing stylus switches, such as the stylus side. Switching or pressing does not need to look down at the input board, for moving, erasing, etc.)
While Alexandrov discloses use in highly extreme environments, such as deep water, ¶021, Alexandrov does not give a specific depth rating and therefore does not disclose the housing having a depth dive rating of at least 100 meters. Valtamer Alltab, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses the limitation. (Valtamer Alltab, Alltab Specifications: Depth Rating 150 m, (Pressure tested to 200 m in a wet chamber)) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with the known technique of providing a depth rating of at least 100 meters, as taught by Valtamer Alltab, in order to carry out Alexandrov teaching of providing for operating in extreme underwater environments.
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 1, Alexandrov discloses further including a mount and a hall-effect sensor associated the housing, wherein the hall-effect sensor is configured to detect the presence of the stylus and the processor is configured to wake the dive computer from a sleep mode when the stylus is removed from the mount. (Alexandrov, Figs. 2-3 and 6 and ¶¶0067-0069; The device also comprises a non-contact on/off switching means. The means can be implemented by conventional devices such as a reed switch or a Hall sensor... the means for non-contact on/off switching of the device can comprise an electronic printed circuit board 6 mounted in the device housing with a reed switch, or a Hall sensor 7 and a magnet provided in the wireless stylus 5... The operation principle of the reed switch and the Hall sensor relies on the effect of a magnetic field applied to them, which in the present invention will be transmitted through the wall of the device housing. If the device housing is made of a material that shields the magnetic field, a glass or an insert made of another material that does not shield the magnetic field can be hermetically disposed at the location of the reed switch or the Hall sensor. The magnet can be accommodated in the wireless stylus.)
Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 1, Alexandrov discloses wherein the display includes a fully-potted display assembly. (Alexandrov, Fig. 6 and ¶¶0070-0072; air pockets in the housing 1 are filled with a dielectric 10... The dielectric 10 eliminates the effect of varying ambient pressure as the depth changes, since the material fills air pockets and expels air therefrom... the dielectric expels air from free cavities of the device, and fills free air pockets in the closed housing... The dielectric solidifies after being placed in the device housing and does not flow out, reliably fixing the position of all internal components and reliably protecting them.;)
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 1, Alexandrov discloses wherein the stylus further includes a pressure sensor configured to detect physical pressure applied to the first end of the stylus. (Alexandrov, ¶¶0116-0117; the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit is changed by changing the resistance of the electrical circuit of the oscillator circuit by transferring mechanical stimulus from the tip 11 of the stylus 5 to the conductive element 35, which shrinks under the pressure and presses against the electrode electrically connected to the oscillator circuit, and then expands, causing a change in the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit and modulation of the electromagnetic field of the required frequency.... the stylus, which in turn sends a response signal that is not just a reflection of the initial signal, but a newly generated signal which typically carries additional information identifying the particular stylus, data on the pressure force, stylus location and other characteristics necessary to form a high quality image on the screen.)
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab, in view of Erikson (US Pub. 2017/0144737 A1).
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 depends from claim 1. As already discussed the limitations of claim 1 are obvious over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab. Concerning claim 2, Alexandrov does not disclose further including a sonar transducer coupled with the processor, wherein the sonar transducer is controlled by the processor to generate underwater communication signals. Erikson, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses providing the functionality. (Erikson, Figs. 3B and 5 and ¶0028; the communication unit 25 can include a portable sonar system having one or more transmitters 25a, transducers 25b, and receivers 25c.; ¶0037; ... the diver attachment unit is not limited...nonlimiting examples include ...underwater tablets, dive computers; ¶0038; As shown best in FIG. 3B, the diver control unit 33 can include a main body 33a having a processor 22′ that is conventionally connected to ...a base communication unit 34, a user interface 35, .. and/or a diver display 40; ¶0041; the communication unit 34 can include a portable sonar system having a plurality of receiver sensors 34a .... so as to receive signals from any direction ... The communication unit 34 can also include an SOS transducer and transmitter 34b.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with the known technique of providing a sonar transducer coupled with the processor, wherein the sonar transducer is controlled by the processor to generate underwater communication signals, as taught by Erikson, in order to enable two way underwater communication capability with divers. (Erikson, Fig. 5 and ¶0029 and ¶0032)
Claims 3-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab, in view of Erikson in view of Megdal et al. (US Pub. 2011/0141853 A1).
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 depends from claim 1. As already discussed the limitations of claim 1 are obvious over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab. Concerning claim 3 Alexandrov does not disclose further including a sonar transducer. Erickson, however discloses the limitation. (Erickson, ¶0041; the communication unit 34 can include a portable sonar system having a plurality of receiver sensors 34a .... so as to receive signals from any direction ... The communication unit 34 can also include an SOS transducer and transmitter 34b)
wherein the sonar transducer is configured to receive positioning signals (Erickson, ¶0049; the transmitter can emit the sound waves 2 through the water which can be detected by each of the dive units providing the same with the location of the POE (the divers Point of Entry) at all times.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with added functionality of including a sonar transducer wherein the sonar transducer is configured to receive positioning signals, as taught by Erickson, in order to aid all divers in safely returning to the divers Point of Entry (Erickson, ¶0004)
Erickson does not disclose the processor is configured to determine a location of the dive computer based on the received positioning signals. Megdal, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses the limitation. (Megdal, Fig. 1 and 6-7 and ¶0013; the disclosure relates to a transmitter for use in an underwater navigation system. The transmitter comprises at least two underwater acoustic transducers transmitting position information and timing information to an underwater receiver; ¶0025; The transmitter unit 102 ... transmits to the underwater receivers 104 via the underwater transmit array 108, using acoustic signals... the acoustic signals are navigational signals. ... Using this information, the underwater receivers 104 calculate their own absolute position.... In an embodiment, the underwater receiver 104 displays its position as latitude and longitude values. In another embodiment, the underwater receiver displays its position as a dot on a map.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Erickson with the added functionality of the processor being configured to determine a location of the dive computer based on the received positioning signals, as taught by Megdal in order to aid to divers in underwater navigation. (Megdal, ¶0008)
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 depends from claim 2. As already discussed the limitations of claim 2 are obvious over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab in view of Erikson. Concerning claim 4, Alexandrov does not specifically discloses wherein the processor is configured to control the display to present a map corresponding to the determined location of the dive computer. Megdal, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses the limitation. (Megdal, Fig. 6 and ¶0025; the underwater receiver displays its position as a dot on a map.; ¶0081; the display 516 displays an underwater map with the locations of other nearby underwater receivers 104, the location of a boat associated with the transmitter unit 102, the heading, the depth, the latitude, and the longitude of the underwater receiver 104... ) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with the known added functionality of the display to present a map corresponding to the determined location of the dive computer, as taught by Megdal, in order to aid divers in underwater navigation. (Megdal, ¶0008)
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 3, Megdal discloses wherein the processor is configured to provide a navigation function based on the determined location. (Megdal, Fig. 6 and ¶0006; the underwater receiver can easily implement all the functionality expected from a modern GPS receiver, such as, for example recording tracks, marking and navigating to waypoints, displaying location on maps, and the like; ¶0025; the underwater receiver displays its position as a dot on a map.; ¶0081; the display 516 displays an underwater map with the locations of other nearby underwater receivers 104, the location of a boat associated with the transmitter unit 102, the heading, the depth, the latitude, and the longitude of the underwater receiver 104... ¶0096; The compass allows easy navigation to locations and allows a displayed map to be automatically oriented north.)
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab in view of Erikson in view of Megdal in view of Duggan et al. (US Pub. 2020/0089744 A1).
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 depends from claim 3. As already discussed the limitations of claim 3 are obvious over Alexandrov in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab, in view of Erikson in view of Megdal. Concerning claim 3, while Megdal discloses displaying a map, Megdal does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to annotate the displayed map using the writing function. Duggan also in the area of employing computing devices to display maps to a user, however, teaches the limitation. (Duggan, Fig. 1A and Abstract; A computing device includes a display, a logic machine, and a storage machine holding instructions executable to display a map via the display, and associate a note with location data defining a geographic location. The note is associated with an annotation displayable on the map; ¶0019; a user may create a note by writing on map 104 to create digital ink data, which may then be saved by the computing device and represented on map 104 by an annotation; ¶0027; ...allowing for the creation of handwritten notes which may be represented on map 104 by annotations, e.g., passive stylus, active stylus, human finger. Versions of map 104 not presented via touch-sensitive display devices may still accept handwritten notes such as the note represented by annotation 106C.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Megdal with the added functionality of the processor being configured to annotate the displayed map using the writing function, as taught by Duggan, in order to allow a user to add information specific to particular locations viewable on the map. (Duggan, ¶0002)
Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Erikson in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab.
Regarding claim 10, Alexandrov discloses a dive computer (Alexandrov, ¶0135; The inventive information input and display device for use underwater and a wireless stylus can be used by amateur divers and commercial divers, underwater archaeologists and other researchers, underwater services and repair and construction teams...)
comprising: a display; (Alexandrov, Figs. 4-5 and ¶0060; The screen 8 can be an LCD screen, an electronic ink screen, or any other conventional screen,)
a stylus (Alexandrov, Figs. 2-5 and 8-12 and ¶0068; the wireless stylus 5 )
including: a first inductive coil presenting a first resonant frequency; (Alexandrov, Figs. 8-12 and ¶0089; an oscillator circuit is disposed inside the housing 24 of the stylus 5 and includes an inductor 12 with a ferrite core.)
wherein the first inductive coil is associated with a first end of the stylus (Alexandrov, Figs. 8-12 and ¶0094; the tip 11 is configured such that when mechanical stimulus is applied upon the front portion 19 of the tip 11, its rear portion 20 mechanically effects on the movable part 13 of the ferrite core of the inductor 12)
and a first pressure sensor configured to detect physical pressure applied to the first end of the stylus; (Alexandrov, ¶¶0116-0117; the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit is changed by changing the resistance of the electrical circuit of the oscillator circuit by transferring mechanical stimulus from the tip 11 of the stylus 5 to the conductive element 35, which shrinks under the pressure and presses against the electrode electrically connected to the oscillator circuit, and then expands, causing a change in the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit and modulation of the electromagnetic field of the required frequency.... the stylus, which in turn sends a response signal that is not just a reflection of the initial signal, but a newly generated signal which typically carries additional information identifying the particular stylus, data on the pressure force, stylus location and other characteristics necessary to form a high quality image on the screen.)
an electromagnetic touch panel associated with the display, (Alexandrov, Figs. 4-5 and ¶0064; A touchpad 30 operating on the electromagnetic resonance principle is disposed under the screen 8. The touchpad 30 comprises an inductive touch unit having inductors, typically printed.)
the electromagnetic touch panel configured to detect a position of the stylus (Alexandrov, ¶0013; the advantage of using such tablets with electromagnetic resonance-based screens and touchpads is that they provide highly precise detection of stylus location and therefore high accuracy of data input; ¶0106; the wireless stylus is reliably protected and can be used underwater without risk of damage, while maintaining its full functionality, including the ability to detect the state and position of the tip, and determine the amount and nature of effect upon it (sensitivity).)
a processor coupled with the display and the electromagnetic touch panel, (Alexandrov, ¶0042; an environmentally-insulated housing accommodating an electromagnetic resonance-based touchpad comprising, electrically connected with each other, an inductive touch unit, a screen, electronic components including at least a microcontroller, a wireless data transmission unit, a memory unit, a power supply, and a non-contact on/off switching means; wherein the housing of the device has a window with a protective glass to enable viewing information on the screen; ¶0117; A microcontroller registers parameters of the inductors and calculates position of the stylus.)
the processor configured to; provide a writing function based on the position of the first end of the stylus (Alexandrov, Fig. 3 and ¶0048; FIG. 3 is a general view of the information input and display device, showing the device in use; ¶0118; The processed stylus signal is converted into coordinates and transmitted to the device screen configured to display these coordinates as dots on the screen, corresponding to the stylus location, and thus form an image that can be viewed by the user through the protective glass of the device.)
and the pressure detected by the first pressure sensor; (Alexandrov, ¶0117; ...the stylus, which in turn sends a response signal that is not just a reflection of the initial signal, but a newly generated signal which typically carries additional information identifying the particular stylus, data on the pressure force, stylus location and other characteristics necessary to form a high quality image on the screen.)
and control the display to present an indication of the writing function (Alexandrov, Fig. 3 and ¶0048; FIG. 3 is a general view of the information input and display device, showing the device in use; ¶0118; The processed stylus signal is converted into coordinates and transmitted to the device screen configured to display these coordinates as dots on the screen, corresponding to the stylus location, and thus form an image that can be viewed by the user through the protective glass of the device.)
and a housing retaining the display, electromagnetic touch panel, and processor, (Alexandrov, ¶0012; Main components of the device are a housing, accommodated in the housing an LCD screen, under which an inductive touch unit is disposed, typically comprising printed inductors, a microcontroller and other electronic components necessary to ensure operation of the screen and the inductive touch unit and electrically connected to them; )
Alexandrov does not disclose a sonar transducer; the processor coupled to the sonar transducer, and configured to control the sonar transducer processor to generate underwater communication signals. Erikson, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses providing the functionality.. (Erikson, Figs. 3B and 5 and ¶0028; the communication unit 25 can include a portable sonar system having one or more transmitters 25a, transducers 25b, and receivers 25c.; ¶0037; ... the diver attachment unit is not limited....nonlimiting examples include ...underwater tablets, dive computers; ¶0038; As shown best in FIG. 3B, the diver control unit 33 can include a main body 33a having a processor 22′ that is conventionally connected to ...a base communication unit 34, a user interface 35, ... and/or a diver display 40; ¶0041; the communication unit 34 can include a portable sonar system having a plurality of receiver sensors 34a .... so as to receive signals from any direction ... The communication unit 34 can also include an SOS transducer and transmitter 34b.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with the known added functionality of providing a sonar transducer coupled with the processor, wherein the sonar transducer is controlled by the processor to generate underwater communication signals, as taught by Erikson, in order to enable two way communication capability with underwater divers. (Erikson, Fig. 5 and ¶0029 and ¶0032)
Alexandrov does not disclose a second inductive coil presenting a second resonant frequency. Fleck in the same field of endeavor, however, teaches the limitation. (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; The writing tip 33 emits many different f writing frequencies for example, frequencies a, b, and c. The eraser tuning circuit 37 is separate and different from the writing circuit 35 (see Figure 4). The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase)
and the second inductive coil is associated with a second end of the stylus; (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; Eraser End 31... The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase)
and the touch panel configured to differentiate between the first and second end of the stylus based on the first and second resonant frequencies of the coils; (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 2-3; ... the user can draw or write text on the corresponding display screen in a known manner. The user can also move the indicator (such as a stylus or disc) within the menu area; Pages 4-5; The writing tip 33 emits many different f writing frequencies for example, frequencies a, b, and c. The eraser tuning circuit 37 is separate and different from the writing circuit 35 (see Figure 4). The eraser circuit 37 shown in FIG. 3 includes a variable coil 39 and a capacitor 41... the 37 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase... According to some embodiments of the present invention, the amount of pressure applied to the surface of the input board 15 by the erasing tip 3 causes the change of the coil 39. And therefore the phase output by the circuit 37. If the predetermined voltage limit is exceeded, the 3 7 sends out a frequency in a predetermined phase erasing message indicates the material to be selected for erasing.)
provide an erasing function based on the position of the second end of the stylus;
and control the display to present an indication of the erasing function; (Fleck, Figs. 2-4 and Pages 4-5; The user presses the pen 17 to the tablet over the text to be erased 'and then at the end of the selection ...causes the selection to be erased. ...the circuit 37 sends an eraser instruction signal, and when the user presses the tip 31 against the input board and causes the limit to be interrupted, an erase signal is issued) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexander, with the known technique of providing a second inductive coil presenting a second resonant frequency and associated with a second end of the stylus, as taught by Fleck, in order to allow a user to easily switch between writing and erasing functions. (Fleck, Page 5, ..for writing stylus switches, such as the stylus side. Switching or pressing does not need to look down at the input board, for moving, erasing, etc.)
While Alexandrov discloses use in highly extreme environments, such as deep water, ¶021, Alexandrov does not give a specific depth rating and therefore does not disclose the housing having a depth dive rating of at least 100 meters. Valtamer Alltab, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses the limitation. (Valtamer Alltab, Alltab Specifications: Depth Rating 150 m, (Pressure tested to 200 m in a wet chamber)) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Alexandrov with the known technique of providing a depth rating of at least 100 meters, as taught by Valtamer Alltab, in order to carry out Alexandrov teaching of providing for operating in extreme underwater environments.
Regarding claim 14, which depends from claim 10, Alexandrov discloses wherein the stylus further includes a second pressure sensor configured to detect pressure applied to a part of the stylus spaced from the first end. (Alexandrov, ¶¶0116-0117; the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit is changed by changing the resistance of the electrical circuit of the oscillator circuit by transferring mechanical stimulus from the tip 11 of the stylus 5 to the conductive element 35, which shrinks under the pressure and presses against the electrode electrically connected to the oscillator circuit, and then expands, causing a change in the resonant frequency of the oscillator circuit and modulation of the electromagnetic field of the required frequency.... the stylus, which in turn sends a response signal that is not just a reflection of the initial signal, but a newly generated signal which typically carries additional information identifying the particular stylus, data on the pressure force, stylus location and other characteristics necessary to form a high quality image on the screen.)
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Erikson in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab in view of Megdal.
Regarding claim 11, which depends from claim 10, Erickson discloses wherein the sonar transducer is configured to receive positioning signals (Erickson, ¶0049; the transmitter can emit the sound waves 2 through the water which can be detected by each of the dive units providing the same with the location of the POE (the divers Point of Entry) at all times.)
Erickson does not disclose the processor is configured to determine a location of the dive computer based on the received positioning signals. Megdal, in the same field of endeavor, however, discloses the limitation. (Megdal, Fig. 1 and 6-7 and ¶0013; the disclosure relates to a transmitter for use in an underwater navigation system. The transmitter comprises at least two underwater acoustic transducers transmitting position information and timing information to an underwater receiver; ¶0025; The transmitter unit 102 ... transmits to the underwater receivers 104 via the underwater transmit array 108, using acoustic signals... the acoustic signals are navigational signals. ... Using this information, the underwater receivers 104 calculate their own absolute position.... In an embodiment, the underwater receiver 104 displays its position as latitude and longitude values. In another embodiment, the underwater receiver displays its position as a dot on a map.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Erickson with the added functionality of the processor being configured to determine a location of the dive computer based on the received positioning signals, as taught by Megdal in order to aid to divers in underwater navigation. (Megdal, ¶0008)
Regarding claim 12, which depends from claim11, Megdal discloses wherein the processor is configured to control the display to present a map corresponding to the determined location of the dive computer. (Megdal, Fig. 6 and ¶0025; the underwater receiver displays its position as a dot on a map.; ¶0081; the display 516 displays an underwater map with the locations of other nearby underwater receivers 104, the location of a boat associated with the transmitter unit 102, the heading, the depth, the latitude, and the longitude of the underwater receiver 104... )
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexandrov in view of Erikson in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab in view of Megdal in view of Duggan.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 depends from claim 12. As already discussed, the limitations of claim 12 are obvious over Alexandrov in view of Erikson in view of Fleck in view of Valtamer Alltab, in view of Megdal. Concerning claim 12, while Megdal discloses displaying a map, Megdal does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to annotate the displayed map using the writing function. Duggan also in the area of displaying maps, however, teaches the limitation. (Duggan, Fig. 1A and Abstract; A computing device includes a display, a logic machine, and a storage machine holding instructions executable to display a map via the display, and associate a note with location data defining a geographic location. The note is associated with an annotation displayable on the map; ¶0019; a user may create a note by writing on map 104 to create digital ink data, which may then be saved by the computing device and represented on map 104 by an annotation; ¶0027; ...allowing for the creation of handwritten notes which may be represented on map 104 by annotations, e.g., passive stylus, active stylus, human finger. Versions of map 104 not presented via touch-sensitive display devices may still accept handwritten notes such as the note represented by annotation 106C.) Consequently, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed subject matter, to implement Megdal with the added functionality of the processor being configured to annotate the displayed map using the writing function, as taught by Duggan, in order to allow a user to add information specific to particular locations viewable on the map. (Duggan, ¶0002)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEROLD B MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-1564. The examiner can normally be reached M-T, Th-F 10am-7pm, W 1pm-5pm.
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, STEVEN LIM can be reached at 5712701210. 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.
/JEROLD B MURPHY/Examiner, Art Unit 2688
/STEVEN LIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2688
1 The Alltab underwater tablet was introduced in 2017