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 currently pending and prosecuted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends the amendments to Claim 9 overcome the prior art of record. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues the amendments to Claim 9 overcome the prior art of record. However, the amendments, as currently presented, do not require both a first machine and a second machine, as was presented to the Examiner in the Examiner interview, dated 17 December 2025, but was changed by the Applicant in filing the official amendments. The amendments filed 18 December 2025 are different and do not overcome the prior art of record as they only require a single input from a single machine due to the inclusion of the “or” limitation. The prior art of record, Kong, in [0061]-[0063]; Figs. 10-16, and corresponding descriptions, and Kyung, in Figs. 2A-5, and corresponding descriptions, noting when the user presses the control device an instruction to sent to the computing system in order to perform an intended function, teaches these limitations.
As such, Applicant’s arguments are not considered persuasive.
Applicant's arguments filed 18 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the amendments overcome the prior art of record. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The prior art of record Shuster teaches the amendments in Figs. 3A-3E and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions, which shows the head having a shape element and the movement of the post within the device. As such, applicant’s arguments are not considered persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 18 December 2025, with respect to Claims 1-4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejection of Claims 1-4 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shuster et al., US PG-Pub 2016/0299602, hereinafter Shuster, in view of Crofford, USPN 9,142,105, hereinafter Crofford.
Regarding Claim 5, Shuster teaches a morphable surface (flexible, elastic membrane 312) for receiving a tactile input of a user (Figs. 3A-3E and 6, and corresponding descriptions; [0048]-[0049], “force applied by the pins of the electronic device 100 on an external object, such as a user's hand, finger, thumb, face, appendage, or other items, held by a user applying force to the pins”) and displaying to the user ([0034], [0126]-[0128], [0164]) comprising:
(a) a support structure (body 302, 702, 1002 and 1102) comprising a top surface and a bottom surface (Figs. 3A-3E, and corresponding descriptions); and
(b) at least one shape element (pins 304) comprising:
(i) a head (heads 320) intersecting said support structure and movable relative thereto, said at least one shape element (Figs. 3A-3E and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions);
(ii) a base plate (proximal portion 310);
(iii) at least one post (distal portion 308) configured to connect said head and said base plate, wherein said at least one post disposed through an opening in said support structure (Figs. 3A-3E and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0051]), with said head disposed above said support structure, said base plate disposed below said support structure, and said at least one post extending through and physically intersecting said support structure to guide translational movement of said at least one shape element relative to said support structure (Figs. 3A-3E and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions);
(iv) a well (fluid reservoir 824) defining a volume for holding a resistive fluid (Figs. 3A-3E, 5 and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0116]-[0125]), the viscosity of the resistive fluid is configured to be controllable (Figs. 3A-3E, 5 and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0116]-[0125]);
(v) a rod (hollow passages 822) configured to extend from said base plate and be slidingly disposed through a periphery of said well and immersed within the resistive fluid (Figs. 3A-3E, 5 and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0116]-[0125]); and
wherein the tactile input of said at least one shape element at said head in a direction from said head to said base plate causes a reactive force to be developed in resisting a movement of said block in the resistive fluid to temper a speed at which said block is moved with respect to said well (Figs. 3A-3E, 5 and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0116]-[0125]) and when the tactile input is removed, said device returns said block to its position prior to the application of the press and the movement of said block in the resistive fluid is inversely proportional to the viscosity of the resistive fluid (Figs. 3A-3E, 5 and 7A-8B, and corresponding descriptions; [0116]-[0125]).
However, Shuster does not explicitly teach (vi) a spring configured to be disposed between said bottom surface and said well; wherein a reactive force causes said spring to be compressed; and when the tactile input is removed, said spring assists in returning said block to its position prior to the application of the press.
Crofford teaches (iv) a spring (Crofford: resistance spring 6) configured to be disposed between said bottom surface of said support structure and said [base] (Crofford: Figs. 8-9b, and corresponding descriptions);
wherein a reactive force causes said spring to be compressed (Crofford: Col. 11, l. 9 to Col. 12, l. 8; Figs. 8-9b, and corresponding descriptions), and when the tactile input is removed, said spring assists in returning said block to its position prior to the application of the press (Crofford: Col. 11, l. 9 to Col. 12, l. 8; Figs. 8-9b, and corresponding descriptions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the spring taught by Crofford into the device taught by Shuster in order to allow the user tactile feedback (Crofford: Col. 11, l. 64 to Col. 12, l. 8), thereby providing a more immersive user experience.
Regarding Claim 6, Shuster, as modified by Crofford, teaches the morphable surface of claim 5, further comprising a light emitter (Shuster: display 528) configured to be disposed on said top surface of said support structure between said head and said support structure (Shuster: [0081], “The display 528 may project an image or may be embedded in the pins or on heads that are disposed on the pins in order to display information, such as images, on the pins”; [0126]-[0128]).
Regarding Claim 7, Shuster, as modified by Crofford, teaches the morphable surface of claim 5, wherein said head is a lens constructed from a light-transmissible material (Shuster: [0126], “The heads 714 or portions of the heads 714 may also be transparent such that an image or images are displayable through the heads 714”).
Regarding Claim 8, Shuster, as modified by Crofford, teaches the morphable surface of claim 5, further comprising a controller configured to detect an electrical resistance of the resistive fluid (Shuster: [0158], “A controller controls fluid movement from the reservoir 1122 to the pockets 1124 and from the pockets 1124 to the reservoir 1122”), wherein said electrical resistance of the resistive fluid corresponds to a degree of the tactile input (Shuster: [0150]-[0151], [0156]-[0158]).
Claims 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong, US PG-Pub 2018/0364832, hereinafter Kong, in view of Kyung et al., US PG-Pub 2011/0199321, hereinafter Kyung.
Regarding Claim 9, Kong teaches a machine controller (conductive material 10) for controlling a first machine or a second machine (computing or processing device 24), said machine controller comprising:
(a) a control surface (surface 14) comprising a plurality of alterable physical properties (areas 16); and
(b) a control device (intermediary processing device 28) is functionally connected to said control surface and configured to communicate via a communication in a first instance with the first machine or in a second instance with the second machine ([0062]), wherein said control device is configured to receive (Figs. 1-9, and corresponding descriptions, showing the areas 16 of control surface 14 have alterable physical properties) a first input ([0061]-[0063]) indicative of the type of the first machine in the first instance or a first input indicative of the type of the second machine in the second instance and a second input ([0061]-[0063]), from said control surface ([0061]-[0063]; Figs. 10-16, and corresponding descriptions) and said control device is configured to generate an instruction to change at least one of said plurality of alterable physical properties of the said control surface in response to said first input and said second input ([0061]-[0063], [0066]-[0075]; Figs. 5-7 and 10-16, and corresponding descriptions, showing how the control device changes the control surface based on the input provided to the surface).
wherein the at least one machine comprises a visual display ([0062], noting the intermediary device 24 displays the information representative of the input signal; Figs. 5-7 and 10-16, and corresponding descriptions) and said machine controller is a remote controller ([0060]-[0063], noting the conductive material is remote from the intermediary device and may be connected wirelessly; Figs. 5-7 and 10-16, and corresponding descriptions).
However, Kong does not explicitly teach said control device is further configured to generate an instruction to control the first machine in the first instance or the second machine in the second instance in response to said first input and said second input.
Kyung teaches said control device is further configured to generate an instruction to control the first machine in the first instance or the second machine in the second instance in response to said first input and said second input (Kyung: Figs. 2A-5, and corresponding descriptions, noting when the user presses the control device an instruction to sent to the computing system in order to perform an intended function).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the instructions taught by Kyung into the device taught by Kong in order to provide the user with a touch feeling which seems like touching an actual key button (Kyung: [0056]-[0057]), thereby augmenting the user’s overall tactile experience.
Regarding Claim 10, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, wherein said plurality of alterable physical properties comprise a property selected from the group consisting of shape, color, texture, surface properties and any combinations thereof (Kong: Figs. 2(a)-2(k), and corresponding descriptions, noting the different shapes, textures and surface properties provided; Kyung: [0122]).
Regarding Claim 11, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 10, wherein said color is configured to be displayed in a plurality of hues and a plurality of luminosity levels (Kyung: [0122], noting the use of multiple colors).
Regarding Claim 12, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 10, wherein said shape comprises a shape selected from the group consisting of a dial, a button, a switch, a slider, a knob, a directional pad and any combinations thereof (Kong: Figs. 3-6 and 15(a)-16, and corresponding descriptions, noting the use of different shapes).
Regarding Claim 13, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, wherein said control surface comprises a support structure (Kyung: haptic element array 110), a shape element disposed in a first position (Kyung: visual display layer 120) and an intersecting relationship with respect to said support structure and an actuator (Kyung: actuator 400) configured to dispose said shape element in a second position (Kyung: Figs. 5-6B, and corresponding descriptions, showing an intersecting relationship with the support structure and the actuator in order to move the shape element to a second position).
Regarding Claim 14, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 13, further comprising a resilience member (Kyung: elastic lid 520) configured to return said shape element to said first position (Figs. 6A-7, and corresponding descriptions; [0094]-[0096]).
Regarding Claim 15, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 13, further comprising a shape element contact detector (Kyung: touch sensor layer 130) configured to detect a contact with said shape element (Kyung: [0063]-[0065]), wherein said second input comprises a contact input to said shape element (Kyung: Figs. 5-7, and corresponding descriptions).
Regarding Claim 16, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 15, wherein the contact is a contact selected from the group consisting of touch and pressure (Kong: [0062]-[0064]), said shape element contact detector for touch is a capacitive touch detector and said shape element contact detector is a resistive touch detector (Kong: [0063]).
Regarding Claim 17, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, further comprising a light emitter (Kyung: [0122], “The visual display element 630 may be implemented as a light emitting diode (LED)”).
Regarding Claim 18, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, further comprising a detector configured to detect the presence of an occurrence to trigger a third input based on the detection of said occurrence (Kong: Figs. 15-16, and corresponding descriptions; [0075], noting the use of a soft button shape), wherein said total input further comprises said third input (Kong: Figs. 15-16, and corresponding descriptions; [0075], noting the use of a soft button shape).
Regarding Claim 19, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, further comprising an audio component configured for emitting sound (Kong: [0075]), wherein said audio component is functionally connected to said control device (Kong: Fig. 16, and corresponding descriptions; [0075]).
Regarding Claim 20, Kong, as modified by Kyung, teaches the machine controller of claim 9, wherein said control surface comprises a support structure (Kyung: haptic element array 110), a shape element disposed in a first position (Kyung: visual display layer 120) and an intersecting relationship with respect to said support structure and a resistance controller (Kyung: actuator 400) configured to present a variable resistance to a movement of said shape element to a second position (Kyung: Figs. 5-6B, and corresponding descriptions, showing an intersecting relationship with the support structure and the actuator in order to move the shape element to a second position).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant’s amendments, and corresponding arguments, overcome the prior art of record. Specifically, the amendments overcome the prior art of record when taken as a whole with the remainder of the invention. Support for the amendments can be found in Fig. 10, and corresponding descriptions. The closest prior art of record, Shuster and Crofford, teaches a haptic device with springs but not in a manner as currently claimed and as argued in the remarks.
As such, Claims 1-4 are considered allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 STEPHEN T REED whose telephone number is (571)272-7234. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 0800-1800.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. 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.
STEPHEN T. REED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Stephen T. Reed/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627