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 .
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 1, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang US (US20180106956) in view of Frame (US. Pat. 4,415,781).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a backlit keyboard device comprising: a light-emitting unit including at least one light-emitting member 41; and a thin-film circuit unit including a substrate 1, a bottom circuit layer 12 that is disposed on a top surface of said substrate, a spacer layer 2 that is disposed on a top surface of said bottom circuit layer, a top circuit layer 31 that is disposed on a top surface of said securing adhesive layer; wherein said spacer layer, said securing adhesive layer, and said top circuit layer cooperatively define an accommodation space 221 on said bottom circuit layer, said at least one light-emitting member being disposed in said accommodation space and electrically connected to said bottom circuit layer (Figs. 5 and paragraph 23). Wang does not teach a securing adhesive layer that is disposed on a top surface of said spacer layer, and a resistor unit disposed between said securing adhesive layer and said top circuit layer. However, Frame teaches a securing adhesive layer 20 that is disposed on a top surface of a spacer layer 20 (col. 2, lines 20-30), and a resistor unit (R1-R4) disposed between said securing adhesive layer 20 and a top circuit layer 24 (Figs. 1-4 and col. 2, lines 5-35). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Frame to provide an anti-ghosting and more secure keyboard.
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches the backlit keyboard device wherein: said top circuit layer 24 having a thin film with a bottom surface, and a top circuitry 26 that is disposed on said bottom surface of said thin film and covered by said securing adhesive film (col. 2, lines 20-30); and said resistor unit (R1-R4) is disposed on said bottom surface of said thin film together with said top circuitry (Figs. 1-4 and col. 2, lines 5-30).
Regarding claim 5, Wang teaches the backlit keyboard device wherein said bottom circuit layer 12 has a bottom contact 122, and said at least one light-emitting member 41 is proximate to said bottom contact (Fig. 5 and paragraph 23).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Frame as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sharp (US. Pat. 5,120,912).
Regarding claim 2, Wang does not teach the resistor unit having at least one printed carbon resistor. However, Sharp teaches a resistor unit has at least one printed carbon resistor (col. 2, lines 60-65). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Sharp to provide an anti-ghosting while preserving the thin integrated LED construction.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Frame as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wada (US20150311012)
Regarding claim 3, Wang does not teach the claimed anisotropic conductive film and its arrangement. However, Wada teaches a similar membrane switch with a top circuit layer 1, spacer layer 3, a bottom circuit layer 2, adhesive layer (paragraph 62), and an anisotropic conductive film formed on said top circuit layer (paragraph 110), said spacer layer having a first window 3a, said securing adhesive layer having a second window (the adhesive layer have the same shape as the spacer, which makes it to have a second window); and said anisotropic conductive film is allowed to extend into said first window and said second window for electrically connecting with said bottom circuit layer (Figs. 3, 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Wade to provide a reliable, low-profile electrical connection between the top and the bottom circuit layers while preserving the thin integrated structure.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Frame as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chiu (US20200373107).
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the backlit keyboard device wherein said thin-film circuit unit further has a light blocking layer 3 disposed on said top circuit layer 31, said accommodation space extending through said light blocking layer, said at least one light-emitting member 41 protruding upward toward said light blocking layer. Wang does not teach the light-emitting member protruding upward through said light blocking layer. However, Chiu teaches a similar keyboard with an accommodation space that receives a at least one light-emitting member 170, and a light blocking layer 130; the least one light-emitting member extending through said light blocking layer, said at least one light-emitting member 41 protruding upward toward through said light blocking layer (Fig. 6 and paragraph 50). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Chiu to provide a better illuminated keyboard
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED M SAEED whose telephone number is (571)270-7976. The examiner can normally be reached 10-8pm.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/AHMED M SAEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights