CTNF 18/834,892 CTNF 87828 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION This communication is responsive to the application filed on 07/31/2024. Claims 1-10 are pending in this application. This action is made non-final . Foreign Priority 23-19 AIA Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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 . 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2019/0391648; Hereinafter Park) . Re claims 1 and 9-10, Park teaches an information processing apparatus ([0015], a tactile feedback generating system) comprising: a control unit that controls a presentation period of tactile feedback presented in response to a collision of an object on a basis of a flexibility of the object (fig. 5 and [0015], [0028], and [0041], A collision detection module 151 of the haptic rendering unit 150 detects a contact or a collision with a virtual object based on the updated virtual hand position/shape information, and a calculation module 153 calculates a tactile feedback stimulation based on a contact position, a contact area or the like when the contact is detected. The calculated tactile feedback stimulus is transmitted to the palm tactile feedback device 130 , or is PWM (pulse with modulation)-converted through a conversion module 143 and then transmitted to the finger tactile feedback device 120 . Each device is driven according to the calculated tactile feedback stimulus to give a finger tactile feedback and a palm tactile feedback) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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 . 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Pasquero (US 2011/0304559) . Re claim 7, Park teaches a collision detection module 151 of the haptic rendering unit 150 detects a contact or a collision with a virtual object based on the updated virtual hand position/shape information, and a calculation module 153 calculates a tactile feedback stimulation based on a contact position, a contact area or the like when the contact is detected. The calculated tactile feedback stimulus is transmitted to the palm tactile feedback device 130 , or is PWM (pulse with modulation)-converted through a conversion module 143 and then transmitted to the finger tactile feedback device 120 . Each device is driven according to the calculated tactile feedback stimulus to give a finger tactile feedback and a palm tactile feedback (fig. 5 and [0015], [0028], and [0041]) but Park does not explicitly teach wherein the control unit controls the presentation period of the tactile feedback in consideration of a flexibility of a collision object that collides with the object. However, it is taught by Pasquero ([0053], detecting touches on a touch-sensitive display, determining force values for the touches, and changing tactile feedback based on the force values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching as seen in Pasquero’s content into Park’s invention because it would improve realism of the tactile feedback by accounting for physical characteristics of both participants in the collision, yielding a more accurate representation of the collision event. Re claim 8, Park teaches a collision detection module 151 of the haptic rendering unit 150 detects a contact or a collision with a virtual object based on the updated virtual hand position/shape information, and a calculation module 153 calculates a tactile feedback stimulation based on a contact position, a contact area or the like when the contact is detected. The calculated tactile feedback stimulus is transmitted to the palm tactile feedback device 130 , or is PWM (pulse with modulation)-converted through a conversion module 143 and then transmitted to the finger tactile feedback device 120 . Each device is driven according to the calculated tactile feedback stimulus to give a finger tactile feedback and a palm tactile feedback (fig. 5 and [0015], [0028], and [0041]) but Park does not explicitly teach wherein the control unit changes the flexibility of the object in accordance with a temperature of the object at the time of collision. However, it is taught by Pasquero ([0036], Tactile feedback may be perceived differently by different users depending on tactile sensitivity of the user. Tactile sensitivity varies depending on the user and may also vary based on conditions during use, such as temperature and humidity. Users generally press with greater force when tactile feedback is weak and press with lesser force when tactile feedback is strong). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching as seen in Pasquero’s content into Park’s invention because it would improve realism, accuracy, and physical fidelity of the haptic simulation by accounting for a known physical relationship between temperature and flexibility. Allowable Subject Matter 07-43 Claims 2-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims set forth in this action. Conclusion The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 ( c ) to consider these references fully when responding to this action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOAN H VU whose telephone number is (571)270-3482. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP 9-5:30 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Hong can be reached on 571-274124. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TOAN H VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/834,892 Page 2 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/834,892 Page 3 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/834,892 Page 5 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/834,892 Page 6 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/834,892 Page 7 Art Unit: 2178
Prosecution Insights