Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. The application amendment filed on December 09, 2025, has been received and made of record. In response to Non-Final Office Action mailed on September 10, 2025, independent claim 1 and dependent claim 11 have been amended and dependent claims 2-10 have been maintained. Applicants added claims 12-20 of which claims 12 and 18 are independent after the Non-Final Office Action. NO claim has been cancelled. Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending for consideration.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments in "REMARKS" filed on December 09, 2025, with respect to independent claim 1 has been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection as necessitated by the applicant's amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1) in view of Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1)(herein after Liu).
Regarding claim 1, YOO teaches a touch device(mobile terminal 100, fig.1, Para-42), comprising:
a circuit board assembly(PCB assembly 400, PCBs 410, 420, figs.9-10, Para-138), comprising:
a first circuit board(first printed circuit board PCB 410, or second printed circuit board PCB 420, figs.9-10, Para-138, 139) having a touch electrode layer(Para-63) disposed thereon (fig.4);
a second circuit board(second circuit board 420, figs.9-10) having a coil set(antennas 112a or 113a, figs.4,9-10, Para-115, 140)(obvious to have coil in an antenna) disposed thereon(Para-112); and
a plurality of supporting units(shield block 430, figs.9-10, Para-138, 139) physically contact and that provide support between the first circuit board(PCB 410) and the second circuit board(PCB 420).
Nevertheless, YOO is not found to teach expressly the touch device, comprising: a magnet set, disposed on the first circuit board and disposed corresponding to the coil set.
However, Liu teaches a force sensing module with vibration feedback, comprising:
a magnet set(magnet set 41, fig.3, Para-38), disposed on the first circuit board(carrier piece 422, fig.3, Para-38) and disposed corresponding to the coil set(coil 421, fig.3, Para-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO with the teaching of Liu to include the feature in order to provide a force sensing module with vibration feedback having simplified structure and cost effective.
Regarding claim 6, YOO as modified by Liu teaches the touch device of Claim 1, wherein the touch device further comprises a plurality of force sensors(magnetic sensors 30, fig.3, Para-32, Liu) disposed on a side of the second circuit board (mounting surface 12, fig.3, Para-32, Liu) facing the first circuit board(carrier piece 422, fig.3, Liu).
8. Claims 2, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1) in view of Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1) and further in view of Kang(US 7,417,422 B2).
Regarding claim 2, YOO as modified by Liu is not found to teach expressly the touch device of Claim 1, wherein the magnet set is disposed on a side of the first circuit board facing the second circuit board.
However, Kang teaches a rotary manipulation type input apparatus, wherein the magnet set(magnet 13, fig.1) is disposed on a side of protective cover(11, fig.1) [the first circuit board] facing the second circuit board(printed circuit board 31, fig.1, Col-3, Lines 38-50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO further with the teaching of Kang to include the feature in order to provide a rotary input apparatus having a simple composition and excellent durability.
Regarding claim 8, YOO as modified by Liu and Kang teaches the touch device of Claim 1, further comprising: a casing(base 39, fig.1, Col-3, Lines 43-46) located below the second circuit board(printed circuit board 31, fig.1, Col-3, Lines 38-50); and
a connecting member(insertion hole 43, fig.1, Kang)(obvious to have adhesive or screw to connect) connected between the casing(39) and the second circuit board(31), wherein the connecting member has a plurality of concavities(43)(Col-6, Lines 33-42, Kang) (for motivation see the rejection of claim 2).
Claim 11 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 8 since both claims 8 and 11 recite almost identical claim limitations with minor change in wording and twisting in terminology.
9. Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1) in view of Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1) and further in view of Kern et al.(US 2014/0176478 A1) (herein after Kern).
Regarding claim 3, YOO as modified by Liu is not found to teach expressly the touch device of Claim 1, wherein the second circuit board comprises a plurality of elastic arms, and the plurality of supporting units are disposed on the plurality of elastic arms individually.
However, Kern teaches an operator control apparatus, wherein the second circuit board(5, figs.2-3) comprises a plurality of elastic arms(elastic elements 9, fig.3, Para-23)(elastic elements 9 through openings 8 also giving support between the first circuit board and the second circuit board), and the plurality of supporting units are disposed on the plurality of elastic arms individually(Para-23: twelve openings 8 through which the elastic elements 9 project can be seen in the second printed circuit board 5. The first printed circuit board 3 associated with this exemplary embodiment and the associated first ferromagnetic areal component 1 are of corresponding design).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO further with the teaching of Kern to include the feature in order to increase operating safety and reliability of the operating control apparatus.
Regarding claim 4, YOO as modified by Liu and Kern teaches the touch device of Claim 3, wherein the second circuit board(5, fig.3, Kern) comprises a plurality of through grooves (openings 8, fig.3, Para-23, Kern), and the plurality of through grooves(8) are adjacent to edges of the plurality of elastic arms(9) individually(when the elastic elements 9 pass through the openings 8, edges of both elastic elements and openings are adjacent to each other).
Regarding claim 5, YOU as modified by Liu and Kern is not found to teach expressly the touch device of Claim 4, wherein the plurality of through grooves are U-shaped grooves.
However, U-shapes grooves are well-known in the art and the examiner takes Official Notice for the limitations. One of ordinary skill in the art would modify Kern further with the teaching of common knowledge in the art to include the feature in order to minimize stress points.
10. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1) in view of Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1) and further in view of Feng et al.(US 2023/0142704 A1)(herein after Feng).
Regarding claim 7, YOO as modified by Liu teaches the touch device of Claim 6, wherein the second circuit board(5, figs.2-3, Liu) comprises a plurality of elastic arms(9, figs.2-3, Liu), but is not found to teach expressly the touch device, wherein a plurality of force sensors are disposed on the plurality of elastic arms individually.
However, Feng teaches an electronic device, where pressure sensor is enclosed by inner elastic and outer elastic layer (figs.2-7 and related texts).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO further with the teaching of Feng to include the feature in order to absorb vibration and improve accuracy.
11. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1), Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1), Kang(US 7,417,422 B2) and further in view of MIKAWA(US 2018/0160083 A1).
Regarding claim 10, YOO as modified by Liu and Kang is not found to teach expressly the touch device of Claim 8, wherein the connecting member has two sides that are opposite to each other, and the plurality of concavities are on at least one side of the two sides of the connecting member.
However, MIKAWA teaches an image generation device, wherein the connecting member(subplate 515, figs.7-8) has a plurality of concavities(hole, grooves, figs.7-8, Para 62-63, 68), the connecting member has two sides that are opposite to each other(figs.7-8), and the plurality of concavities are on at least one side of the two sides of the connecting member (figs.7-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO further with the teaching of MIKAWA to include the feature in order to provide a display device with higher driving performance, stably generate a projection image, and also provides a projection image with high reliability.
12. Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1) in view of Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1)(herein after Liu) and further in view of MIKAWA(US 2018/0160083 A1).
Regarding claim 18, YOO teaches a touch device(mobile terminal 100, fig.1, Para-42), comprising:
a circuit board assembly(PCB assembly 400, PCBs 410, 420, figs.9-10, Para-138), comprising:
a first circuit board(first printed circuit board PCB 410, figs.9-10, Para-138, 139) having a touch electrode layer(Para-63) disposed thereon (fig.4);
a second circuit board(second circuit board 420, figs.9-10) having a coil set(antennas 112a or 113a, figs.4,9-10, Para-115, 140)(obvious to have coil in an antenna) disposed thereon(Para-112); and
a plurality of supporting units(shield block 430, figs.9-10, Para-138, 139) that provide support between the first circuit board(PCB 410) and the second circuit board(PCB 420);and
a casing below the second circuit board(rear case 102, fig.4, Para-87; also figs.2&3).
Nevertheless, YOO is not found to teach expressly the touch device, comprising: a magnet set, disposed on the first circuit board and disposed corresponding to the coil set.
However, Liu teaches a force sensing module with vibration feedback, comprising: a magnet set(magnet set 41, fig.3, Para-38), disposed on the first circuit board(carrier piece 422, fig.3, Para-38) and disposed corresponding to the coil set(coil 421, fig.3, PPara-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified YOO with the teaching of Liu to include the feature in order to provide a force sensing module with vibration feedback having simplified structure and cost effective.
Neither YOO nor Liu teaches expressly the touch device, comprising, a connecting member connected between the casing and the second circuit board, wherein the connecting member has a plurality of concavities, the connecting member has two sides that are opposite to each other, and the plurality of concavities are on at least one side of the two sides of the connecting member.
However, MIKAWA teaches an image generation device, comprising:
a connecting member(subplate 515, figs.7-8) connected between the casing(figs.1,4-8) and the second circuit board (control board 514, figs.7-8, Para-60, 62), wherein the connecting member has a plurality of concavities(hole, grooves, figs.7-8, Para 62-63, 68), the connecting member has two sides that are opposite to each other(figs.7-8), and the plurality of concavities are on at least one side of the two sides of the connecting member(figs.7-8).
The prior art, as embodied in the teachings of YOO, Liu and MIKAWA, included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and in that combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. The combination is desirable as it provides a display device with higher driving performance, stably generate a projection image, and also provides a projection image with high reliability.
Regarding claim 20, YOO as modified by Liu and MIKAWA teaches the touch device of Claim 18, wherein the touch device further comprises a plurality of force sensors(magnetic sensors 30, fig.3, Para-32, Liu) disposed on a side of the second circuit board(mounting surface 12, fig.32, Para-32, Liu) facing the first circuit board(carrier piece 422, fig.3, Liu).
13. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOO(US 2013/0016484 A1), Liu et al.(US 2023/0333656 A1), MIKAWA(US 2018/0160083 A1) and further in view of Kern et al.(US 2014/0176478 A1) (herein after Kern).
For mapping and motivation, see the rejection of claim 3 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
14. Claim 9 is 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 and also overcoming the Double Patent rejection.
15. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9: None of the cited prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination provides a reasonable motivation to fairy teach or suggest the applicant’s invention, “the touch device of Claim 8, further comprising a plurality of force sensors, wherein the second circuit board comprises a plurality of elastic arms, the plurality of force sensors are disposed on the plurality of elastic arms individually, and the plurality of concavities are disposed under and corresponding to the plurality of force sensors”.
16. Claims 12-17 are allowed.
17. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 12: None of the cited prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination provides a reasonable motivation to fairy teach or suggest the applicant’s invention, “a touch device, comprising:----; and a connecting member connected to the second circuit board, wherein the connecting member has a plurality of concavities; and a plurality of force sensors, wherein the second circuit board comprises a plurality of elastic arms, the plurality of force sensors are disposed on the plurality of elastic arms individually, and the Page 3 of 10plurality of concavities are disposed under and corresponding to the plurality of force sensors(figs.1-4 and related text of the specification submitted on October 16, 2024) with all other limitations cited in claim 12.
Claims 13-17 are also allowed because of their dependency on the allowed base claims respectively.
Conclusion
18. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground 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.
Examiner Note
19. The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the references, as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the references or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1530. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae, can be reached on (571) 272-3017. 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.
/MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626