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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed June 15, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 have been amended and claims 2 and 11 have been canceled. Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-17 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 15, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that US 2023/0359252 A1 (hereinafter “Kang”) does not disclose “a floating piece, one end of the floating piece being connected to each of the first swing arm and the second swing arm when the support structure is in each of the first position and the second position and while the support structure moves between the first position and the second position.” Applicant points to Fig. 10A and ¶ 0173 of Kang, which shows and describes a gap that may be formed between support portion 350 and the respective support ribs 321b and 322b of the first and second arm portions 321 and 322 while the hinge is in an unfolded state.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. While not directly contacting the first and second arm portions 321 and 322 when in an unfolded state (the “first position”), Kang’s support portion 350 is still connected to each of the first and second arm portions 321 and 322 in an unfolded state. Fig. 5 of Kang, for example, shows how support portion 350 couples to stopper 360, which is attached to first and second arm portions 321 and 322 through first and second shafts 331 and 332. This constitutes being “connected” in Examiner’s opinion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 9-10, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kang.
Regarding claim 1, Kang discloses a hinge structure (hinge structures 300a and 300b), comprising:
a first swing arm (arm portion 321) and a second swing arm (arm portion 322); and
a support structure (support portion 350, stopper 360, elastic member 361, and screw 362), disposed between the first swing arm (321) and the second swing arm (322; see Figs. 5-6C and 10A-B), wherein during rotation of the first swing (321) arm and the second swing arm (322), two ends of the support structure are configured to contact the first swing arm and the second swing arm respectively, enabling the support structure to move between a first position (unfolded state shown in Figs. 10A) and a second position (folded state shown in Figs. 10B; from ¶ 0172: “The support portion 350 may move in a direction of a rear face of the flexible display 220 by means of a first support rib 321b of the first arm portion 321 and a second support rib 322b of the second arm portion 322, when the electronic device rotates from the folded state to the unfolded state.”),
wherein posture of the support structure in the first position (see Fig. 10A) is different from posture of the support structure in the second position (see Fig. 10B),
wherein the support structure (350, 360, 361, and 362) comprises:
a floating piece (350), one end of the floating piece being connected to each of the first swing arm and the second swing arm when the support structure is in each of the first position and the second position and while the support structure moves between the first position and the second position (see Response to Arguments above);
a fixing assembly (360 and 362), disposed at another end of the floating piece (350); and
an elastic piece (361), two ends of the elastic piece contacting the fixing assembly (360 and 362) and the floating piece (350) respectively (see Figs. 10A-B and 12A-B),
wherein the elastic piece (361) has different amounts of deformation when the support structure (350, 360, 361, and 362) is in the first position (see Figs. 10A and 12A showing elastic member 361 compressed) and the second position (see Figs. 10B and 12B showing elastic member 361 relaxed).
Regarding claim 3, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the floating piece (350) has a threaded hole (protrusion region 351), and the fixing assembly (360 and 362) comprises:
a fixed plate (360), fitting around the outside of the floating piece (350; see Figs. 5, 10A-B, and 12A-B); and
a floating screw (362), detachably connected to the floating piece (350) through the threaded hole (351; from paragraph 0120: “The screw 362 may be coupled with the protrusion region 351 inserted to the lower end of the stopper 360.”), wherein two ends of the elastic piece (361) contact the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) respectively (see Figs. 12A-B),
wherein distance between the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) when the support structure is in the first position (see Figs. 10A and 12A) is smaller than distance between the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) when the support structure is in the second position (see Figs. 10B and 12B).
Regarding claim 4, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the hinge structure further comprises:
first snap-fit pieces (first 321b and second 322b support ribs), disposed on the first swing arm (321b is disposed on arm 321) and the second swing arm (322b is disposed on arm 322); and
second snap-fit pieces, disposed at two ends of the support structure (left and right protrusions on top portion of support portion 350),
wherein through cooperation of the first snap-fit pieces and the second snap-fit pieces, rotation of the first swing arm and the second swing arm drives the support structure to move accordingly (from paragraph 0118: “In a process in which the electronic device rotates from the folded state to the unfolded state, the first support rib 321b and the second support rib 322b may be in contact with one region of the support portion 350, and the support portion 350 may move in an upper direction by means of the first support rib 321b and the second support rib 322b with the rotation of the first arm portion 321 and the second arm portion 322.”).
Regarding claim 6, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the hinge structure further comprises:
a first support plate (bracket 311), disposed on one side of the first swing arm (321), wherein the first support plate is connected to the first swing arm (see Figs. 4-7); and
a second support plate (bracket 312), disposed on one side of the second swing arm (322), wherein the second support plate is connected to the second swing arm (see Figs. 4-7).
Regarding claim 9, Kang discloses a foldable device (electronic device 101),
comprising: a first folding body (first housing 211), a second folding body (second housing 212), and a hinge structure (300a and 300b), wherein the hinge structure comprises:
a first swing arm (321) and a second swing arm (322); and
a support structure (350, 360, 361, and 362), disposed between the first swing arm (321) and the second swing arm (322; see Figs. 5-6C and 10A-B), wherein during rotation of the first swing arm (321) and the second swing arm (322), two ends of the support structure are configured to contact the first swing arm and the second swing arm respectively, enabling the support structure to move between a first position (unfolded state shown in Figs. 10A) and a second position (folded state shown in Fig. 10B; from paragraph 0172: “The support portion 350 may move in a direction of a rear face of the flexible display 220 by means of a first support rib 321b of the first arm portion 321 and a second support rib 322b of the second arm portion 322, when the electronic device rotates from the folded state to the unfolded state.”)
wherein the support structure (350, 360, 361, and 362) comprises:
a floating piece (350), one end of the floating piece being connected to each of the first swing arm and the second swing arm when the support structure is in each of the first position and the second position and while the support structure moves between the first position and the second position (see Response to Arguments above);
a fixing assembly (360 and 362), disposed at another end of the floating piece (350); and
an elastic piece (361), two ends of the elastic piece contacting the fixing assembly (360 and 362) and the floating piece (350) respectively (see Figs. 10A-B and 12A-B),
wherein the elastic piece (361) has different amounts of deformation when the support structure (350, 360, 361, and 362) is in the first position (see Figs. 10A and 12A showing elastic member 361 compressed) and the second position (see Figs. 10B and 12B showing elastic member 361 relaxed),
wherein posture of the support structure in the first position (see Fig. 10A) is different from posture of the support structure in the second position (see Fig. 10B);
the first swing arm (321) of the hinge structure is connected to the first folding body (211); and
the second swing arm (322) of the hinge structure is connected to the second folding body (212).
Regarding claim 10, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the foldable device further comprises: a display screen (flexible display 220), disposed on one side of the first folding body (211) and the second folding body (212; see Fig. 2A), wherein when the support structure is in the first position, the display screen is unfolded (see Figs. 2A and 10A), and when the support structure is in the second position, the display screen is folded (see Figs. 2B and 10B).
Regarding claim 12, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Kang further teaches that the floating piece (350) has a threaded hole (351), and the fixing assembly (360 and 362) comprises:
a fixed plate (360), fitting around the outside of the floating piece (350; see Figs. 5, 10A-B, and 12A-B); and
a floating screw (362), detachably connected to the floating piece (350) through the threaded hole (351; from paragraph 0120: “The screw 362 may be coupled with the protrusion region 351 inserted to the lower end of the stopper 360.”), wherein two ends of the elastic piece (361) contact the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) respectively (see Figs. 12A-B),
wherein distance between the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) when the support structure is in the first position (see Figs. 10A and 12A) is smaller than distance between the fixed plate (360) and the floating screw (362) when the support structure is in the second position (see Figs. 10B and 12B).
Regarding claim 13, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the hinge structure further comprises:
first snap-fit pieces (321b and 322b), disposed on the first swing arm (321b is disposed on arm 321) and the second swing arm (322b is disposed on arm 322); and
second snap-fit pieces, disposed at two ends of the support structure (left and right protrusions on top portion of support portion 350),
wherein through cooperation of the first snap-fit pieces and the second snap-fit pieces, rotation of the first swing arm and the second swing arm drives the support structure to move accordingly (from paragraph 0118: “In a process in which the electronic device rotates from the folded state to the unfolded state, the first support rib 321b and the second support rib 322b may be in contact with one region of the support portion 350, and the support portion 350 may move in an upper direction by means of the first support rib 321b and the second support rib 322b with the rotation of the first arm portion 321 and the second arm portion 322.”).
Regarding claim 15, Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 as stated above. Kang
further teaches that the hinge structure further comprises:
a first support plate (311), disposed on one side of the first swing arm (321), wherein the first support plate is connected to the first swing arm (see Figs. 4-7); and
a second support plate (312), disposed on one side of the second swing arm (322), wherein the second support plate is connected to the second swing arm (see Figs. 4-7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of WO 2022/010137 A1 (hereinafter “Kim”).
Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 as stated above. Kang lacks a specific teaching that the hinge structure comprises limiting pieces disposed adjacent to the first snap-fit pieces on the first swing arm and the second swing arm, and the limiting pieces are configured to limit rotation angles of the first swing arm and the second swing arm.
Kim teaches a hinge structure (hinge module 300) comprising limiting pieces (stopper protrusions 347) disposed on first (first hinge arm 304a) and second (second hinge arm 304b) swing arms. The limiting pieces (347) are configured to limit rotation angles of the first and second swing arms (see pg. 20, second full paragraph).
Kang 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 limiting pieces adjacent to the first snap-fit pieces on the first swing arm and the second swing arm in order to limit rotation angles. Doing so provides a simple means of limiting the device’s rotation angle and preventing damage to the device due to overfolding.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of CN 113949760 A (hereinafter “Bian”).
Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 as stated above. Kang lacks a specific teaching of reinforcement support strips, disposed on a side of the first support plate away from the first swing arm and on a side of the second support plate away from the second swing arm.
Bian teaches a hinge structure including a reinforcement support strip (movable supporting part 112) disposed on a side of a support plate (driving block 113) located away from a rotating piece (rotating piece 310).
Bian 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 dispose reinforcement support strips on a side of the first support plate away from the first swing arm and on a side of the second support plate away from the second swing arm. Doing so would provide a means to connect a display to the first and second support plates while also protecting the display from damage by uniformly distributing stress caused by bending (see paragraph spanning pgs. 8-9).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang and Bian as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of US 2019/0212781 A1 (hereinafter “Fujimoto”).
Kang in view of Bian teaches all of the limitations of claim 7 as stated above. Kang in view of Bian lack a specific teaching that each of the reinforcement support strips is streamlined at an edge facing the other one of the reinforcement support strips, and a gap is present between the two reinforcement support strips.
Fujimoto teaches reinforcement support strips (first 32A and second 32B core portions) that are streamlined at an edge (inclined surfaces 32A1 and 32B1) facing the other one of the reinforcement support strips, and a gap is present between the two reinforcement support strips (see Fig. 1A).
Fujimoto 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 streamline the edges of the reinforcement support strips facing one another. Doing so would increase flexibility of the strips at their edges, helping to facilitate bending.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kim.
Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 13 as stated above. Kang lacks a specific teaching that the hinge structure comprises limiting pieces disposed adjacent to the first snap-fit pieces on the first swing arm and the second swing arm, and the limiting pieces are configured to limit rotation angles of the first swing arm and the second swing arm.
Kim teaches a hinge structure (300) comprising limiting pieces (347) disposed on first (304a) and second (304b) swing arms. The limiting pieces (347) are configured to limit rotation angles of the first and second swing arms (see pg. 20, second full paragraph).
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 limiting pieces adjacent to the first snap-fit pieces on the first swing arm and the second swing arm in order to limit rotation angles. Doing so provides a simple means of limiting the device's rotation angle and preventing damage to the device due to overfolding.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Bian.
Kang teaches all of the limitations of claim 15 as stated above. Kang lacks a specific teaching of reinforcement support strips, disposed on a side of the first support plate away from the first swing arm and on a side of the second support plate away from the second swing arm.
Bian teaches a hinge structure including a reinforcement support strip (112) disposed on a side of a support plate (113) located away from a rotating piece (310).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to dispose reinforcement support strips on a side of the first support plate away from the first swing arm and on a side of the second support plate away from the second swing arm. Doing so would provide a means to connect a display to the first and second support plates while also protecting the display from damage by uniformly distributing stress caused by bending (see paragraph spanning pgs. 8-9).
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang and Bian as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Fujimoto.
Kang in view of Bian teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as stated above. Kang in view of Bian lack a specific teaching that each of the reinforcement support strips is streamlined at an edge facing the other one of the reinforcement support strips, and a gap is present between the two reinforcement support strips.
Fujimoto teaches reinforcement support strips (32A and 32B) that are streamlined at an edge (32A1 and 32B1) facing the other one of the reinforcement support strips, and a gap is present between the two reinforcement support strips (see Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the present application, to streamline the edges of the reinforcement support strips facing one another. Doing so would increase flexibility of the strips at their edges, helping to facilitate bending.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights