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 1-19 are pending in the current application.
Claim Objections
Regarding each of Claims 1-10, the “Z-shape” of the bending structure does not appear to be clearly identified in the drawings.
Regarding Claim 1, line 5: it appears that the term “reinforcement” should be changed to “reinforcement part.”
Regarding Claim 9, line 5: it appears that the term “reinforcement” should be changed to “reinforcement part.”
Regarding Claim 10, line 10: it appears that the term “reinforcement” should be changed to “reinforcement part.”
Regarding Claim 11, line 5: it appears that the term “reinforcement” should be changed to “reinforcement part.”
Regarding Claim 11, line 6: it appears that the term “having” should be changed to “first support having.”
Regarding Claim 15, line 5: it appears that the term “reinforcement” should be changed to “reinforcement part.”
Regarding Claim 18, line 12: it appears that the term “having” should be changed to “first support having.”
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim 2 of copending Application No. 18/896,982 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claim 1 is within the scope of subject matter claimed in Claim 2 of the reference application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 9, and 10, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ning et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2023/0084860 A1, hereinafter “Ning”).
Specifically, regarding Claim 1, Ning discloses a keycap lifting mechanism (Abstract), comprising: a first support (144; FIG. 4), the first support (144) comprising a first support body (1442; FIG. 5) and a first reinforcement part (1444; FIG. 5), the first reinforcement part (1444) being embedded into the first support body (1442; FIG. 5), an elastic modulus of the first reinforcement being greater than an elastic modulus of the first support body (1442; ¶ [0017]), and a second support (142), the second support (142) and the first support (144) being pivotally connected around a pivot axis (14a; FIG. 5), wherein the first reinforcement part (1444) comprises a Z-shaped bending structure (1444a; FIG. 4), and the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) extends parallel to the pivot axis (14a; FIG. 4).
Regarding Claim 2, Ning discloses that the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) is located on a side fringe of the first reinforcement part (1444; FIG. 4), the first support (144) has a sliding shaft (S1; FIG. 5 reproduced and annotated below), and the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) and the sliding shaft (S1) overlap in a direction parallel to the pivot axis (14a; see, e.g., FIGS. 2 and 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
752
1112
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Ning discloses that the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) comprises two bending portions (within each of 144a; FIG. 4), and the sliding shaft (S1) and one of the two bending portions overlap in the direction parallel to the pivot axis (14a; FIG. 4).
Regarding Claim 4, Ning discloses that the first support (144) has a pivot (also S1), the first support (144) is pivotally connected to the second support (142) through the pivot (FIG. 5), the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) comprises two bending portions (within each of 144a; FIG. 4), and the pivot and one of the two bending portions overlap in a direction parallel to the pivot axis (14a; FIG. 5).
Regarding Claim 7, Ning discloses that the Z-shaped bending structure (1444a) comprises a first plate portion (1PP; FIG. 4, a portion of which is reproduced and annotated below), a second plate portion (2PP), and a connecting plate portion (CPP), the first plate portion (1PP), the second plate portion (2PP), and the connecting plate portion (CPP) extend parallel to the pivot axis (14a) and are not coplanar (FIG. 4), the first plate portion (1PP) and the second plate portion (2PP) are connected to opposite sides of the connecting plate portion (CPP; FIG. 4), an included angle is formed by the first plate portion (1PP) and the connecting plate portion (CPP), and the included angle is greater than 90 degrees (an angle from an axis of 1PP to an axis in which CPP extends, i.e., from an intersection of 1PP and CPP to an intersection of 2PP and CPP is greater than 90 degrees; FIG. 4).
PNG
media_image2.png
552
376
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Ning discloses that the second support (142) comprises a second support body and a second reinforcement part (1446), the second reinforcement part (1446) is embedded into the second support body (1422), an elastic modulus of the second reinforcement [part] is greater than an elastic modulus of the second support body (1422; ¶ [0023]), and the second reinforcement part (1446) comprises a Z-shaped bending structure (1444a), extending perpendicular to the pivot axis (14a; 1446 extends away from 140a and the pivot axis; FIG. 4).
Claim 10 includes language substantially similar to that disclosed above with respect to Claim 1 and is rejected for reasons at least similar to those discussed above. Ning discloses a keyswitch structure (FIG. 1), comprising: a base plate (10; Abstract, FIG. 1) and a keycap (12; FIG. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, and 8, 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. Claims 11-19 would be allowable but for the objections identified above. The prior art fails to teach, disclose, or suggest, either alone or in combination, a keycap lifting mechanism comprising the claimed first reinforcement part surrounding a sliding hole and going through a sliding shaft.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY R. JIMENEZ whose telephone number is 313-446-6518. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 1030am - 9pm.
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.
/ANTHONY R JIMENEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights