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 .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027).
As in claim 1, Bendavid discloses a handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus), comprising:
a housing having an elongated shaft extending between first and second tip portions; (Fig 4 and Par 0050) discloses stylus 10 having elongated shaft housing
a removable tip member configured to be coupled to the first tip portion [(Fig 4, 8 and Par 0050) discloses stylus 10 with writing tip 136 for use in stylus operation mode and (Fig 8) discloses replaceable tip unit 70], wherein the removable tip member comprises a position sensor that tracks a position of the first tip portion relative to a surface; (Fig 8 item 130 and Par 0072) discloses optical mouse unit 130 may be incorporated at an inclined or conical surface of a tip unit of a stylus. (Par 0021) discloses the stylus may include an optical mouse unit with an optical emitter and detector on a side of the stylus to allow position tracking
and a force sensor in the first tip portion configured to gather force input through the removable tip member. (Fig 8 item 120 and Par 0026, 0027, 0075, 0076) discloses the stylus removable tip is configured to provide input to the host device based on a user actuating a pressure sensor.
As in claim 3, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 1 wherein the position sensor comprises an optical flow sensor. (Fig 3 and Par 0045).
As in claim 11, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 1 further comprising: a motion sensor that gathers motion sensor data; a camera that captures image data; and control circuitry configured to determine a tilt of the elongated shaft relative to the surface based on at least one of the motion sensor data and the image data, wherein the position of the first tip portion relative to the surface is determined based on the tilt. (Par 0022-0023 and 0047) discloses the stylus comprising an optical sensor for surface movement detection and an orientation sensing device 170 (e.g. a gyroscope) for detecting an orientation of the stylus. The processor may select one of the two image sensors to actuate for tracking based on input received from the orientation sensing device 170.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027).
As in claim 8, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 1; (Fig 8 and Par 0075) discloses removable tip member configured to be coupled to the first tip portion via mounting mechanism for detachable mounting. The mounting mechanism may be at least one of an insertion, fitting, fastening, engaging, and/or snapping mechanism, for detachable mounting to the pen-type device. But fails to explicitly disclose the removable tip member is coupled to the first tip portion using a friction fit with a magnetic release. However, given prior art different coupling method of the tip portion it would have been obvious and well known to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to have said removable tip member coupled to the first tip portion using a friction fit with a magnetic release as an alternat method of attaching removable tip member to the first tip portion to yield same predictable outcome via magnetic release method.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Proie et al (Pat NO 11,360,616).
As in claim 2, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 1 wherein the force sensor comprises a strain gauge. (Par 0084) discloses a resistive force sensor. But fails to disclose the force sensor comprising a Infrared strain gauge. However Proie et al (Fig 16 and Col 14 line 35-52) discloses force sensor 192 can be operated to detect user inputs at the tip 190 of the stylus 100 can include strain gauges. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid force sensor comprising resistive force sensor with the teaching of Proie et al force sensor comprising a strain gauge in order to provide high precision, high accuracy, and ability to measure strain on a localized region.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Gavrilliuc et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0371432).
As in claim 4, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 3 wherein the optical flow sensor comprises an infrared light source that emits a pattern of illumination onto the surface and an image sensor that captures an image of the pattern of illumination on the surface. (Fig 3, 8 and Par 0045) discloses optical flow sensor comprises a light source (LED) that emits a pattern of illumination onto the surface and an image sensor that captures an image of reflected or scattered from a surface. But fails to disclose light source being an infrared light. However, Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0032) discloses optical flow sensor comprises Infrared cameras (IR) used in stylus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid with the teaching of Gavrilliuc et al wherein said stylus uses IR light source to detect surface as an alternat light source to yield same predictable outcome.
As in claim 5, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the handheld controller (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 3 wherein the optical flow sensor is operable in a first mode in which a first frame rate is used for tracking the position of the first tip portion relative to the surface and a second mode in which a second frame rate is used for keypoint detection, wherein the second frame rate is lower than the first frame rate. (Par 0018-0022) discloses said device (i.e. stylus) used in different mode wherein a user interacts with the digitizer system by positioning and moving the stylus over a sensing surface of the system, (e.g., a tablet and/or a touch screen). The stylus may include an orientation sensing device 170 (e.g. a gyroscope) for detecting an orientation of the stylus with in a two- or three-dimensional space. But fails to discloses optical flow sensor is operable in a first mode in which a first frame rate is used for tracking the position of the first tip portion relative to the surface and a second mode in which a second frame rate is used for keypoint detection, wherein the second frame rate is lower than the first frame rate. However Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0047-0048) discloses optical sensor is operable in a first mode and second mode wherein The surface movement data is associated with the mixed-input pointing device that transitions from free space input to surface input. When the mixed-input pointing device is generating surface movement data, the surface movement data operates as an indicator to transition from processing exclusively free space movement data to processing the surface movement data and the free space movement data.
As in claim 6, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the handheld controller (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 5 wherein the optical flow sensor is adjusted between the first mode and the second mode based on the force input gathered with the force sensor. Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0047-0048) discloses adjusted between the first mode and the second mode (i.e. free space input and surface input) based on pressure data. The mixed-input pointing device includes a tip portion that is operationally couple to a surface pressure sensor to generate surface pressure data.
As in claim 7, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the handheld controller (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus)defined in claim 6 wherein the optical flow sensor switches from the second mode to the first mode when the force input indicates contact between the removable tip member and the surface. Gavrilliuc et al (Fig 7 and Par 0048-0052) discloses the mixed-input pointing device includes a tip portion that is operationally couple to a surface pressure sensor to generate surface pressure data. [0052] The free space movement data is associated with the mixed-input pointing device that transitions from surface input to free space input. Detecting the free space input can include identifying free space input to be processed based at least in part on not detecting the surface input.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Teiblum (PG Pub NO 2013/0321355).
As in claim 9, Bendavid discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 1 (Fig 8) discloses removable tip member. But fails to disclose the first tip portion has a spring-loaded member that retracts into the housing to form an opening that receives the removable tip member. However Teiblum (Fig 3, 6) discloses first tip portion (112) has a spring-loaded member that retracts into the housing (116) to form an opening that receives the removable tip member (112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid stylus with the teaching of Teiblum such that the first tip portion has a spring-loaded member that retracts into the housing giving the user feedback such that the user would reduce applied presser and prevent damaging input surface.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Watanabe et al (PG Pub NO 2005/0183282).
As in claim 10, the handheld controller defined in claim 1 (Fig 8 item 130 and Par 0021, 0072) discloses position sensor. But fails to disclose the position sensor comprises an interferometer. However, Watanabe et al (Fig 9 and par 0041) discloses the use of interferometer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid stylus with the teaching of Watanabe et al wherein said stylus would use interferometer in order to determine a more precise position of the stylus.
Claim(s) 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Gavrilliuc et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0371432).
As in claim 12, Bendavid discloses an electronic device(Abstract, Par 0001; stylus), comprising:
a housing having an elongated shaft extending between first and second tip portions; (Fig 4 and Par 0050) discloses stylus 10 having elongated shaft housing
an optical sensor at the first tip portion and configured to capture image data, [(Fig 3 and Par 0045) discloses optical flow sensor comprises a light source (LED) that emits a pattern of illumination onto the surface and an image sensor that captures an image of reflected or scattered from a surface.]
and a force sensor configured to detect contact between the first tip portion and a surface [(Fig 8 item 120 and Par 0026, 0027, 0075, 0076) discloses the stylus removable tip is configured to provide input to the host device based on a user actuating a pressure sensor.], wherein the optical sensor is operated in the surface marking mode in response to detecting contact between the first tip portion and the surface.
(Par 0018-0022) discloses said device (i.e. stylus) used in different mode wherein a user interacts with the digitizer system by positioning and moving the stylus over a sensing surface of the system, (e.g., a tablet and/or a touch screen). The stylus may include an orientation sensing device 170 (e.g. a gyroscope) for detecting an orientation of the stylus with in a two- or three-dimensional space. (Par 0026) discloses the stylus is configured to provide input to a host device (not shown) based on a writing tip 136 touching and hovering over a touch-screen of the host device. But fails to explicitly discloses wherein the optical sensor is operable in a surface marking mode and an air input mode; However Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0047-0048) discloses optical sensor is operable in a first mode and second mode wherein The surface movement data is associated with the mixed-input pointing device that transitions from free space input to surface input. When the mixed-input pointing device is generating surface movement data, the surface movement data operates as an indicator to transition from processing exclusively free space movement data to processing the surface movement data and the free space movement data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid with the teaching of Gavrilliuc et al such that given said stylus would be able to be used in different modes (i.e. surface marking mode and an air input mode) using optical sensor in order to provide the user multi use device using existing sensor(s).
As in claim 13, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the electronic device (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 12 wherein the optical sensor comprises a camera and wherein the camera has a higher frame rate in the surface marking mode than in the air input mode. (Bendavid; Par 0045-0046) discloses image sensor capture images while the stylus is being held in a writing position; and Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0047-0048) discloses optical sensor is operable in a first mode and second mode
As in claim 14, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the electronic device (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 12 further comprising control circuitry configured to analyze the image data using key point detection techniques in the air input mode. Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0047-0048) discloses processing exclusively free space movement data (i.e. air input mode).
As in claim 15, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the electronic device (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 12 further comprising a motion sensor and a camera, wherein the control circuitry is configured to determine an angle of the elongated shaft relative to the surface based on information from at least one of the motion sensor and the camera. (Bendavid; Par 0022-0023 and 0047) discloses the stylus comprising an optical sensor for surface movement detection and an orientation sensing device 170 (e.g. a gyroscope) for detecting an orientation of the stylus. The processor may select one of the two image sensors to actuate for tracking based on input received from the orientation sensing device 170.
As in claim 16, Bendavid in view of Gavrilliuc et al discloses the electronic device (Bendavid; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 12 wherein the optical sensor is located in a removable part of the first tip portion and the force sensor is located in a non-removable part of the first tip portion. (Fig 8) discloses an optical sensor and pressure sensor in a first tip portion and (Fig 4) discloses an optical sensor and pressure sensor in a non-removable part of the first tip portion. Therefore it would have been obvious design choice to have certain sensors disposed in a particular portion of electronic device.
Claim(s) 17, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Teiblum (PG Pub NO 2013/0321355)
As in claim 17, Bendavid discloses a handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus), comprising:
a housing having an elongated shaft extending between first and second tip portions; (Fig 4 and Par 0050) discloses stylus 10 having elongated shaft housing
a removable tip member coupled to the first tip portion[(Fig 4, 8 and Par 0050) discloses stylus 10 with writing tip 136 for use in stylus operation mode and (Fig 8) discloses replaceable tip unit 70], wherein the removable tip member comprises an optical flow sensor for tracking surface markings made by the handheld controller on a surface; (Fig 8 item 130 and Par 0072) discloses optical mouse unit 130 may be incorporated at an inclined or conical surface of a tip unit of a stylus. (Par 0021) discloses the stylus may include an optical mouse unit with an optical emitter and detector on a side of the stylus to allow position tracking
(Fig 8) discloses removable tip member. But fails to disclose a spring-loaded member configured to retract into the housing to form an opening that receives a portion of the removable tip member. However Teiblum (Fig 3, 6) discloses first tip portion (112) has a spring-loaded member that retracts into the housing (116) to form an opening that receives the removable tip member (112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid stylus with the teaching of Teiblum such that the first tip portion has a spring-loaded member that retracts into the housing giving the user feedback such that the user would reduce applied presser and prevent damaging input surface.
As in claim 18, Bendavid in view of Teiblum discloses the handheld controller (Bendavid ; Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 17 (Bendavid ,Fig 8 and Par 0075) discloses removable tip member configured to be coupled to the first tip portion via mounting mechanism for detachable mounting. The mounting mechanism may be at least one of an insertion, fitting, fastening, engaging, and/or snapping mechanism, for detachable mounting to the pen-type device. (Teiblum ; Par 0049) discloses conductive tip holder 117 provides a friction fit hold on writing tip 105. But fails to explicitly disclose the first tip portion comprises a first magnet and the removable tip member comprises a second magnet that is attracted to the first magnet. However, given prior art different coupling method of the tip portion it would have been obvious and well known to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to have said removable tip member coupled to the first tip portion using magnet as an alternat method of attaching removable tip member to the first tip portion to yield same predictable outcome via magnetic.
As in claim 20, Bendavid in view of Teiblum discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 17 further comprising a force sensor at the first tip portion and configured to detect contact between the removable tip member and the surface. Bendavid (Fig 8 item 120 and Par 0026, 0027, 0075, 0076) discloses the stylus removable tip is configured to provide input to the host device based on a user actuating a pressure sensor.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bendavid (PG Pub NO 2022/0391027) in view of Teiblum (PG Pub NO 2013/0321355) and in further view of Gavrilliuc et al (PG Pub NO 2017/0371432).
As in claim 19, Bendavid in view of Teiblum discloses the handheld controller (Abstract, Par 0001; stylus) defined in claim 17 further comprising infrared light sources at the first tip portion that produce a sequence of illumination on the surface, wherein the optical flow sensor captures images of the illumination to determine an angle of the elongated shaft relative to the surface. (Fig 3 and Par 0045) discloses optical flow sensor comprises a light source (LED) that emits a pattern of illumination onto the surface and an image sensor that captures an image of reflected or scattered from a surface. But fails to disclose light source being an infrared light. However, Gavrilliuc et al (Par 0032) discloses optical flow sensor comprises Infrared cameras (IR) used in stylus. Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid comprising LED Therefore, it would have been obvious to an ordinary skill person in the art at the time of the filing to modify Bendavid in view of Teiblum with the teaching of Gavrilliuc et al wherein said stylus uses IR light source to detect surface as an alternat light source to yield same predictable outcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENYAM KETEMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7224. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM (M-F).
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at 571-272-3017. 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.
/BENYAM KETEMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626