Response to Amendment
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 .
Status of Claims
In the response of 12/22/2025, Applicant amended claims 1, 12, and 14, and canceled claims 8-9 and 16-17, 21 and 24. Therefore claims 1-7, 10-15 and 18 are pending.
Response to Arguments
The indicated allowability of previously presented claims 9 and 17 is withdrawn in view of reconsidered reference(s) to Serval et al.(WO2020/212950 A1) Rejections based on the reference(s) follow.
This Action is Non-Final.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “at least one mechanical interaction element configured for,” “a sensor configured to” and “a data storage unit for” in claim 1 and “a drive mechanism, coupled to the mechanical interaction element, and configured to” in claim 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-7, 10-12, 14-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porcella et al. (US Pub. 20210375564 A1)(hereinafter Porcella) in view of Serval et al.(WO2020/212950 A1)(hereinafter Serval).
Regarding claim 1, Porcella discloses a system, (Porcella, Fig. 1 and Abstract; Keyboards, input devices, and related systems;.)
the system including: at least one mechanical interaction element configured for interaction with the user; (Porcella, Figs. 1 and 4-5 and ¶0041, The keyboard 102 includes keys or key assemblies with keycaps (e.g., keycap 103) or button caps that move when depressed by a user)
a sensor configured to measure the interaction by a user with the at least one mechanical interaction element so as to obtain interaction data; (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to transduce a position of the keycap 402 relative to the support surface 410 and can thereby output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position (or relative distance of movement) of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412;.)
a data storage unit for storing previously acquired interaction data relating to the user; and a processor, (Porcella, ¶0009; The system can comprise a processor, a keyboard in electronic communication with the processor, and a memory device in electronic communication with the processor; ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences;)
configured to compare the obtained interaction data to the stored interaction data (Porcella, ¶0011; The processor can also be further configured to detect ... wherein the first feedback force corresponds to the first user identity, and detect a second user identity by receiving the user input. The second user identity can be different from the first user identity, wherein the second feedback force can correspond to the second user identity; ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences; ¶0080; The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity...)
wherein the processor is configured to derive a characteristic, indicative of the identity of the user, from the obtained interaction data and to use the derived characteristic in the comparison, (Porcella, ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity ...)
Porcella does not disclose wherein the characteristic includes shape information, wherein the shape information is used to determine a shape of a body art of the user used to interact with the at least one mechanical interaction element. Serval, also in the area of mechanical interaction elements, however, teaches the functionality. (Serval, ¶0066; ... the memory device 140 can be configured to cause the processor 132 to determine an identity of the user based on the pressure data, the image data, or both. As an example, the user profile includes a shape of the portion of the user (e.g., a foot, a hand, or the like), a dimension of the portion of the user, or the like, or any combination thereof.) 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 Porcella, with the known technique of the characteristics including shape information as taught by Serval, in order to allow for user customization of a system. (Serval, ¶00144)
Regarding claim 2, which depends from claim 1, Porcella discloses wherein the interaction data obtained by the sensor is one or any combination of: force data, displacement data, time data. (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to ... output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position (or relative distance of movement) of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412; ¶0063; ... a feedback force applied to resist a user's input force is controlled based on the magnitude of the input force, based on the measured displacement of a key structure while the keycap is being pressed, which can be directly measured or can be derived from velocity or acceleration measurements over time.)
Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 2,. while Porcella discloses wherein the interaction data includes force data and/or displacement data (Porcella, ¶0010; The system can further comprise a position sensor, wherein the user input is a displacement of the keycap sensed by the position sensor. ¶0080; The user identity can comprise a personal identity or registered identity of the user providing the input or can comprise categorizing the user as a member of a group or type of user. The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity or a type of user), Porcella does not discuss the displacement in mm and therefore does not specifically disclose which is within a range of 1 mm to 100 mm. However, Porcella, 0050, does discloses “The encoder 404 can be configured to transduce a position of the keycap 402 relative to the support surface 410 and can thereby output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position (or relative distance of movement) of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412.” (Emphasis Added) 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 Porcella with a range of 1 mm to 100 mm, since it has been held, in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, MPEP §2144.05 I
Regarding claim 4, which depends from claim 2, Porcella discloses wherein the interaction data obtained by the sensor comprises a plurality of sets of interaction data, collected over a plurality of time periods, ( ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences;) While Porcella employs timing periods, i.e. speed determined over time, of each set of interaction data, Porcella does not specifically disclose the timing period being spaced at least 1 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm, 50 mm, or 100 mm apart. However, at the time of the claimed invention, 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 Porcella with the timing periods being spaced at least 1 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm, 50 mm, or 100 mm apart, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, MPEP §2144.05 II A
Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1, Porcella discloses wherein the processor is configured to store the obtained interaction data for comparison with future obtained interaction data. (Porcella, ¶0011; The processor can also be further configured to detect ... wherein the first feedback force corresponds to the first user identity, ¶0080; The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity ...)
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 1, Porcella discloses wherein the at least one mechanical interaction element is a pin. (Porcella, Fig. 6 and ¶0055; The linkage 612 can comprise smooth ball-to-plane or ball-to-socket pivot joints 616, 618 that help transfer linear vertical movement of the keycap 602 to an actuator arm 620 positioned on an internal side of the housing 610.)
Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 1, Porcella discloses wherein there are a plurality of interaction elements, (Porcella, Figs. 1 and 4-5 and ¶0041, The keyboard 102 includes keys or key assemblies with keycaps or button caps that move when depressed by a user)
each being a pin, (Porcella, Fig. 6 and ¶0055; The linkage 612 can comprise smooth ball-to-plane or ball-to-socket pivot joints 616, 618 that help transfer linear vertical movement of the keycap 602 to an actuator arm 620 positioned on an internal side of the housing 610.)
the plurality of pins being arranged to form a grid. (Porcella, Figs.1-2 and ¶0041, The keyboard 102 includes keys or key assemblies with keycaps (e.g., keycap 103) or button caps that move when depressed by a user)
Regarding claim 10, which depends from claim 1, Serval discloses wherein the data storage unit and processor are located in a server which is connected to a data collection unit. (Serval, ¶0064; While the machine-readable medium can be a single medium, the term “machine- readable medium” should be taken to include a single medium or multiple media (e.g., a centralized or distributed database, and/or associated caches and servers) that store the one or more sets of instructions.; ¶0273; The performance of certain of the operations may be distributed among the processors, not only residing within a single machine, but deployed across a number of machines... the processors or processor-implemented engines may be located in a single geographic location e.g., within a ...server farm).)
the data collection unit containing the at least one mechanical interaction element (Porcella, Figs. 1 and 4-5 and ¶0041, The keyboard 102 includes keys or key assemblies with keycaps or button caps that move when depressed by a user)
and the sensor. (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to transduce a position of the keycap 402 relative to the support surface 410 ...; ¶0063; ... the measured displacement of a key structure while the keycap is being pressed, which can be directly measured ...)
Regarding claim 11, which depends from claim 1, Porcella further comprising a drive mechanism, coupled to the mechanical interaction element, and configured to provide a force to the mechanical interaction element in response to the user interaction. (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0051; The motor 406 is a type of actuator configured to cause a physical movement, to resist physical movement or to otherwise apply a force to the keycap 402 in response to an input electrical signal)
Regarding claim 12, which depends from claim 1, Porcella discloses wherein the system is a user identification system for determining a user identity using interaction data obtained from the user, and wherein the processor is configured to compare the obtained interaction data to the stored interaction data so as to determine a degree of similarity between the obtained and stored interaction data, to allow the user identity to be determined. (Porcella, Fig. 13 and ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0080; The user or environmental input of block 1304 can also be used by the controller to determine a user identity, as indicated in block 1306.... The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity ...,)
Regarding claim 14, Porcella discloses a method using (Porcella, ¶0002; The described embodiments relate generally to devices and methods for controlling feedback provided by key mechanisms of a keyboard or by a similar input device.)
the system of claim 1,
Regarding claim 1, Porcella discloses a system, (Porcella, Fig. 1 and Abstract; Keyboards, input devices, and related systems;.)
the system including: at least one mechanical interaction element configured for interaction with the user; (Porcella, Figs. 1 and 4-5 and ¶0041, The keyboard 102 includes keys or key assemblies with keycaps (e.g., keycap 103) or button caps that move when depressed by a user)
a sensor configured to measure the interaction by a user with the at least one mechanical interaction element so as to obtain interaction data; (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to transduce a position of the keycap 402 relative to the support surface 410 and can thereby output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position (or relative distance of movement) of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412;.)
a data storage unit for storing previously acquired interaction data relating to the user; and a processor, (Porcella, ¶0009; The system can comprise a processor, a keyboard in electronic communication with the processor, and a memory device in electronic communication with the processor; ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences;)
configured to compare the obtained interaction data to the stored interaction data (Porcella, ¶0011; The processor can also be further configured to detect ... wherein the first feedback force corresponds to the first user identity, and detect a second user identity by receiving the user input. The second user identity can be different from the first user identity, wherein the second feedback force can correspond to the second user identity; ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences; ¶0080; The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity...)
wherein the processor is configured to derive a characteristic, indicative of the identity of the user, from the obtained interaction data and to use the derived characteristic in the comparison, (Porcella, ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences)
Porcella does not disclose wherein the characteristic includes shape information, wherein the shape information is used to determine a shape of a body art of the user used to interact with the at least one mechanical interaction element. Serval, also in the area of mechanical interaction elements, however, teaches the functionality. (Serval, ¶0066; ... the memory device 140 can be configured to cause the processor 132 to determine an identity of the user based on the pressure data, the image data, or both. As an example, the user profile includes a shape of the portion of the user (e.g., a foot, a hand, or the like), a dimension of the portion of the user, or the like, or any combination thereof.) 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 Porcella, with the known technique of the characteristics including shape information as taught by Serval, in order to allow for system user customization. (Serval, ¶00144)
the method including the steps of: measuring an interaction by a user with the at least one mechanical interaction element and obtaining interaction data; (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to transduce a position of the keycap 402 relative to the support surface 410 and ... output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position or relative distance of movement of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412; ¶0063; ... the measured displacement of a key structure while the keycap is being pressed, which can be directly measured or can be derived from velocity or acceleration measurements over time.)
and comparing the obtained interaction data to stored interaction data, (Porcella, ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys, the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity ...; ¶0080; The keys pressed, the force applied to a key, the direction of the input, the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity ...)
and deriving a characteristic, indicative of the identity of the user, and using the derived characteristic in the comparison, (Porcella, ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the speed of the typing; ¶0075; the speed or input force values can be associated with user identity or related preferences; ¶0080; the velocity of the input, and combinations thereof can be interpreted by the controller as correlating with a user identity or a type of user)
Porcella does not disclose the characteristic includes shape information, and therefore does not disclose wherein the characteristic includes shape information, relating to a shape of the body part of the user used to interact with the at least one mechanical interaction element, derived from the obtained interaction data, the shape information being used in the step of comparing to obtain interaction data. Serval, also in the area of mechanical interaction elements, however, teaches the functionality. (Serval, ¶0066; ... the memory device 140 can be configured to cause the processor 132 to determine an identity of the user ... The determining process can be carried out by, for example, a machine learning algorithm. As an example, the user profile includes a shape of the portion of the user (e.g., a foot, a hand, or the like), a dimension of the portion of the user, or the like, or any combination thereof.) 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 Porcella, with the known technique of the characteristics including shape information as taught by Serval, in order to allow for user customization of a system. (Serval, ¶00144)
Regarding claim 15, which depends from claim 14, Porcella discloses wherein the interaction data is one or any combination of: force data, displacement data, time data. (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0038; User identities can be determined while a user types on a keyboard based on the force applied to the keys,; ¶0050; The encoder 404 can be configured to ... output an electrical signal corresponding to an absolute position (or relative distance of movement) of the keycap 402 in response to application of an input force 412; ¶0063; based on the measured displacement of a key structure while the keycap is being pressed, which can be directly measured or can be derived from velocity or acceleration measurements over time.)
Regarding claim 18, which depends from claim 14, Porcella discloses further comprising providing a force to the mechanical interaction element, via a drive mechanism coupled to the mechanical interaction element, in response to the user interaction. (Porcella, Fig. 4 and ¶0051; The motor 406 is a type of actuator configured to cause a physical movement, to resist physical movement or to otherwise apply a force to the keycap 402 in response to an input electrical signal)
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porcella in view of Serval in view of Tadele et al. (2021/0295661 A1)(hereinafter Tadele)
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 depends from claim 1. As already discussed the limitation of claim 1 are obvious over Porcella in view of Serval. Concerning claim 13, Porcella does not disclose health monitoring and therefore does not disclose wherein the system is a health monitoring system for determining a user's health using interaction data obtained from the user, and wherein the processor is configured to compare the obtained interaction data to the stored interaction data so as to determine whether the user's health has changed. Tadele, also in the field of detecting mechanical inputs obtaining interaction data, ¶0155, however disclose including the added functionality of the system being a health monitoring system. (Tadele, ¶0052; The companion device may be any suitable electronic device, including sleep monitors, wearable electronic devices, timekeeping devices, health monitoring or fitness devices, ¶0152; For example, the sensor(s) 1825 may a health monitoring sensor, and so on.) 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 Porcella, with the added functionality of providing health monitoring as taught by Tadele in order to provide insight into a user’s general health and wellness or provide positive feedback to promote pursuing wellness goals. (Tadele, ¶0161)
.
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, STEVEM 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 2687
/STEVEN LIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2688