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
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim KR 20220045177 A (citations taken from identical US 2022/0329687) in view of Feng CN 113835470 A.
4. Consider claim 1. Kim teaches an electronic device (fig 9) comprising: a first housing (311a); a second housing (311b) disposed to be movable with respect to the first housing and overlapping with at least part of the first housing; at least one processor; and a flexible display (311) at least partially mounted on a surface of the second housing and at least partially exposed to an outside of the electronic device, wherein part of the flexible display is configured to be inserted into or extended (0006) from the first housing according to driving of a driving module (200) of the electronic device, wherein the at least one processor (180) is configured to: display an execution screen (361 in fig 8) of an application on the flexible display. Kim fails to teach identifying whether a size of an exposed portion of the flexible display and a specified size of the flexible display for the execution screen match, and when the size of exposed portion of the flexible display and the specified size of the flexible display do not match, display at least one control button for changing the size of the exposed portion of the flexible display on the flexible display. However, Feng teaches such (from Feng…by obtaining the current display screen state of the flexible display screen under the current application scene, and according to the history display screen state of the flexible display screen under the current application scene, determining the target display screen state corresponding to the current application scene, so as to automatically control the flexible display screen to stretch when the current display screen state is not matched with the target display screen state; the flexible display screen is in the state of the target display screen, realizing the habit of telescopic display screen under different application scenes according to the user, automatically stretching the flexible display screen to the display screen state meeting the user using habit, without manual stretching the flexible display screen by the user, it also does not need user to trigger the flexible display screen to extend through the key, simplifies the telescopic flow of the flexible display screen, improves the flexible intelligent degree of the flexible display screen….). It would have been obvious, before the effective date to use the teachings of Feng in Kim for faster set up of content watching thus making the device more user friendly. Feng also teaches in the background of his invention, that (…the telescopic mode of the telescopic screen comprises a user manual telescopic and automatic telescopic by the key. wherein, when using manual extension, the user uses the double-hand holding telescopic screen and stretching or shrinking; when the key is automatically telescopic, the user clicks the virtual key or physical key, triggering the screen mechanical structure to drive the telescopic screen to automatically stretch….). Therefore, to use the claimed key (tap taught by Kim) or to do it automatically without as key (taught by Feng) would have been and obvious design improvement. Method claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons as apparatus claim 1, since the recited elements would perform the claimed steps.
5. Regarding claims 2 and 11. Kim teaches (0148) wherein the specified size includes at least one of a size previously stored in a memory of the electronic device corresponding to the execution screen.
6. Regarding claims 3 and 12. Kim teaches wherein the processor is configured to change the size of exposed portion to the specified size, based on a user (0014) input for selection of the at least one control button (361).
7. Regarding claims 6 and 15. Kim teaches (0143) wherein the processor is configured to display the at least one control button for changing the size of exposed portion in a predetermined area of the flexible display.
8. Regarding claim 7. Kim inherently teaches (Fig 9) wherein the processor is configured to provide a visual effect (372) that a predetermined area of the flexible display disappears by rolling away (disappears after executions) and a control area including the at least one control button (tap) for changing the size of exposed portion is displayed.
9. Regarding claim 8. Kim teaches wherein the processor is configured to: display a visual indicator (372) at a boundary (near the bottom) of a predetermined area of the flexible display; and display a control area including the at least one control button for changing the size of exposed portion based on a user input to the visual indicator.
10. Claims 5, 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim KR 20220045177 A (citations taken from identical US 2022/0329687) in view of Feng CN 113835470 A further in view Examiners Official Notice.
11. Regarding claim 9. Kim teaches Fig 18d wherein the processor is configured to: display an indicator (…display an independent indicator indicating the extension mode of the display on the screen on the front side of the mobile terminal…) in a predetermined area of the flexible display; and display a control bar for changing the size of exposed portion based on a user input to the indicator. Although Kim teaches a physical key, Feng teaches in the background of his invention a virtual key. The use of a control bar is well known in the art and the examiner takes official notice of such and would have been an obvious substitution, before the effective date to make the device easier to control the extension.
12. Regarding claims 5 and 14. The combination of Kim and Feng fail to teach wherein the processor is configured to release the display of the at least one control button, when a user input to the at least one control button is not identified for a predetermined time. However, the examiner takes official notice that is it well known in the art to have virtual buttons disappear when not in use for a predetermined period of time. It would have been obvious, before the effective date to use such in the combination in order to maximize the display screen size with minimal clutter.
13. Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim KR 20220045177 A (citations taken from identical US 2022/0329687) in view of Feng CN 113835470 A further in view of Kim CN 112468616 A.
14. Regarding claims 4 and 13. The combination of Kim and Feng fail to teach wherein the processor is configured to release the display of the at least one control button on the flexible display, upon completion of changing the size of exposed portion. However, from the same field of endeavor Kim (fig 13a, 13b) teaches such. Note, the right hand in not shown after the device is expanded which indicates it’s been inherently released upon completion. It would have been obvious, before the effective date to utilized the touch dragging taught by Kim in the combination for faster execution of the extending function.
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang US 20230113925 A1 teaches in a flexible display when the position of the rotation shaft is automatically adjusted, if user authentication succeeds, the processor 1130 may identify one of the first mode to the third mode based on the executed function and move the rotation shaft to operate in the identified mode. For example, the processor 1130 may identify one of the first mode to the third mode to change the currently exposed portion of the flexible display and direction to correspond to the executed function. According to various embodiments, the processor 1130 may move the rotation shaft to operate in the identified mode and rotate the housing and/or adjust the exposed portion of the flexible display in the identified mode to be suitable for the executed function.
Chen CN 113687743 A teaches in a flexible display the electronic device is provided with a position sensor, the telescopic direction and the telescopic length of the flexible display screen according to the position sensor; obtaining the history display size of the record, according to the telescopic length, telescopic direction, and history display size, calculating to obtain the effective display size after stretching; and updating the history display size of the record according to the effective display size.
US12055981 B2 teaches in Fig 8 the processor 730 may identify (or receive) event information associated with a size change of the display 720. Specifically, the processor 730 may receive information on an event for which the size change of the display 720 is required. Meanwhile, in the example embodiment, the processor 730 may determine to change a size of the display 720 based on the received event information and identify the event information therefor. For example, the processor 730 may identify content to be displayed based on at least one of the user input and information received from an external source of the electronic device. Also, the processor 730 may verify whether the size of the display 720 is to be changed based on a current size of the display 720 exposed and the content to be displayed. When the size of the display 720 is to be changed, the processor 730 may generate a control signal for a size change of the display 720 based on at least one of pieces of identified information.
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7499. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th from 530am to 330pm and Fri from 530am to 10am.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew D Anderson, can be reached at telephone number 5712724177. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/CURTIS A KUNTZ/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights