CTNF 18/919,513 CTNF 85507 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 4 recites the limitation "the size” (line 2), “the region” (line 2), “the two orthogonal directions" (line 2), “the size” (line 3), “the region” (line 3), and “the other” (line 3). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 5 recites the limitation "the size” (line 2), “the region” (line 2), “the two orthogonal directions" (line 2), “the size” (line 4), “the region” (line 4), and “the other” (line 4). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 6 recites the limitation “the region” (line 2, twice), “the other” (line 3), “the two orthogonal directions" (line 3), “the region” (line 4), “the one of two orthogonal directions” (line 4), and “the one” (line 5). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al., US 2021/0093950 A1 (hereinafter Duncan) in view of Bennett, US 2011/0311083 A1 (hereinafter Bennett) . Regarding Claim 1 : Duncan discloses an input device comprising: a first microphone (Duncan, in some implementations microphone assembly 222 includes a microphone 224 for receiving the audio signals through microphone port 124 [0076]); an exterior member that accommodates the first microphone (Duncan, microphone assembly 222 is positioned against an inside surface of bottom housing 102b at or proximate a rear portion of bottom housing 102b [0076]; [Fig. 1F]; and [Fig. 16]); a right held section and a left held section configured to be held by user's hands and separated in a left-right direction (Duncan, input device 100 includes a left grip 104 intended to be held in a user's left hand, and a right grip 106 intended to be held by the user's right hand [0050] and [Fig. 1A]-[Fig. 1B]); a right input member and a left input member configured to be operated by user's fingers and located on the right held section and the left held section, respectively; (Duncan, input device 100 includes at least one directional control pad assembly 108, which may also be referred to as a “D-pad,” that extends through top housing 102a; in some implementations, directional control pad assembly 108 may be a multi-way directional control configured to be operated by a user's thumb, e.g., the user's left thumb while left grip 104 is positioned in the user's left hand; in some such implementations, direction control pad assembly 108 includes a separate button for each directional control. In some implementations, directional control pad assembly 108 is a four-way directional control; input device 100 may include at least one control stick, for example, left and right control sticks 110a, 110b, which extend through top housing 102a [0051] and [Fig. 1A]-[Fig. 1B]) a center section located between the right held section and the left held section (Duncan, input device 100 may also include one or more function buttons 114; in some implementations, function buttons 114 may be positioned between directional control pad 108 and action buttons 112 and home button 116 may be positioned between left and right control sticks 110a, 110b [0052] and [Fig. 1G]); and a first sound hole penetrating the exterior member to be connected to the first microphone (Duncan, input device 100 further includes a microphone port 124 for receiving audio signals [0053]). Duncan fails to explicitly disclose an exterior surface of the exterior member has one or a plurality of wall portions that surround the first sound hole, the first sound hole is located in the center section and formed on a lower surface of the input device, and a region surrounded by the one or the plurality of wall portions is elongated in the left-right direction or a forward-rearward direction. Bennett teaches an exterior surface of the exterior member has one or a plurality of wall portions that surround the first sound hole, the first sound hole is located in the center section and formed on a lower surface of the input device, and a region surrounded by the one or the plurality of wall portions is elongated in the left-right direction or a forward-rearward direction (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Bennett teaches a potable audio device including an integrated microphone assembly (Bennett [0037]). The integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording (Bennett [0037]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with an aperture with a chamfer as taught by Bennet in order to provide high resolution, low distortion audio. Regarding Claim 2 : Bennett further teaches wherein: the exterior surface of the exterior member has a recessed portion, and an inner surface of the recessed portion serves as the wall portion (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]). Regarding Claim 5 : Bennet further teaches wherein: the size of the region in one of the two orthogonal directions is larger than twice a size of the first sound hole (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]), and the size of the region in the other of the two orthogonal directions is smaller than twice the size of the first sound hole (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]). Regarding Claim 6 : Bennet further teaches wherein: a size of the region in one of two orthogonal directions is larger than a size of the region in the other of the two orthogonal directions (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]), and a size of the region in the one of two orthogonal directions is larger than a size of the first microphone in the one of the two orthogonal directions (Bennett, the integrated microphone assembly may have an acoustically tuned aperture, sloped to have a conical mouth and a narrow stem such as a funnel, specifically tuned with a chamfer or sloped sides of 60 degrees (with a range of 45.about.75 degrees) on the horizontal axis and 30 degrees (with a range of 15.about.45 degrees) on the vertical axis to offer a highly linear frequency response to provide a high resolution, low distortion recording [0037]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Bennett, and further in view of OGURA et al., US 2016/0234594 A1 (hereinafter Ogura) . Regarding Claim 3 : Duncan, as modified, discloses the invention as recited above. Duncan, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose wherein: the exterior surface of the exterior member has one or a plurality of projected portions that surround the first sound hole, and side surfaces of the one or plurality of projected portions serve as the wall portions. Ogura teaches wherein: the exterior surface of the exterior member has one or a plurality of projected portions that surround the first sound hole, and side surfaces of the one or plurality of projected portions serve as the wall portions (Ogura, a frame cover 225 in which a mesh-shaped ventilation portion (sound pressure input portion) 226 is installed is disposed in a sound entrance of the case frame 221 [0169] and [Fig. 16]; the frame cover is a projection having a wall). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Ogura teaches a microphone capable of improving environmental resistance even in a case in which the microphone is disposed outside a vehicle cabin (Ogura [0009]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with the microphone of Ogura in order to improve the environmental resistance of the operating device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Bennett, and further in view of Nielsen et al., US 2015/0070821 A1 (hereinafter Nielsen) . Regarding Claim 4 : Duncan, as modified, discloses the invention as recited above. Duncan, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose wherein: the size of the region in one of the two orthogonal directions is larger than 7.0 mm, and the size of the region in the other of the two orthogonal directions is smaller than 3.0 mm. Nielsen teaches wherein: the size of the region in one of the two orthogonal directions is larger than 7.0 mm (Nielsen, at least one fine feature 142 of the cover 136 includes a slot, wherein a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm [0040] and [Fig. 5]), and the size of the region in the other of the two orthogonal directions is smaller than 3.0 mm (Nielsen, at least one fine feature 142 of the cover 136 includes a slot, wherein ... a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm [0040] and [Fig. 5]). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Nielsen teaches a cover adapted to an electronic device (Nielsen [Abstract]). Often, there are various features, such as a hole, a slot, an opening and so on, created on the glass component either for aesthetic/decoration or functional purpose (Nielsen [0005]). The electronic device may include a microphone (Nielsen [0022]). The cover includes a slot wherein a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm, a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm, and a distance R2 between an edge of the second covering member 40 and the slot is greater than 2 mm (Nielsen [0040]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with slot with a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm, a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm as taught by Nielsen in order to provide an opening allowing sound to reach the microphone . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Bennett, and further in view of Zhang, US 2019/0394316 A1 (hereinafter Zhang) . Regarding Claim 7 : Duncan, as modified, discloses the invention as recited above. Duncan, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose: a second microphone; and a second sound hole penetrating the exterior member to be connected to the second microphone. Zhang teaches: a second microphone (Zhang, in some embodiments, the number of the microphones 701 may also be two [0089]); and a second sound hole penetrating the exterior member to be connected to the second microphone (Zhang, the two microphones 701 may be respectively disposed adjacent to the slot 801 and the slot 802 and configured to collect the external sound signals via the slot 801 and the slot 802, respectively [0089]). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Zhang discloses an electronic apparatus including a microphone disposed below a display screen (Zhang [0086]). The microphone is configured to collect an external sound signal via a slot (Zhang [0086]). The number of the microphones may also be two (Zhang [0089]). The two microphones may be respectively disposed adjacent to the slot 801 and the slot 802 and configured to collect the external sound signals via the slot 801 and the slot 802 (Zhang [0089]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with a second microphone as taught by Zhang in order to clearly capture audio signals from opposite sides . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Bennett, in view of Zhang, and further in view of Nielsen . Regarding Claim 8 : Duncan, as modified, discloses the invention as recited above. Duncan, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose wherein a size of the region is larger than a size of the second sound hole. Nielsen teaches wherein a size of the region is larger than a size of the second sound hole (Nielsen, at least one fine feature 142 of the cover 136 includes a slot, wherein a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm, a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm, and a distance R2 between an edge of the second covering member 40 and the slot is greater than 2 mm [0040] and [Fig. 5]). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Nielsen teaches a cover adapted to an electronic device (Nielsen [Abstract]). Often, there are various features, such as a hole, a slot, an opening and so on, created on the glass component either for aesthetic/decoration or functional purpose (Nielsen [0005]). The electronic device may include a microphone (Nielsen [0022]). The cover includes a slot wherein a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm, a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm, and a distance R2 between an edge of the second covering member 40 and the slot is greater than 2 mm (Nielsen [0040]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with slot with a length L of the slot is smaller than 20 mm, a width W of the slot is approximately between 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm as taught by Nielsen in order to provide an opening allowing sound to reach the microphone . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan, in view of Bennett, and further in view of Igarashi et al., US 2015/0290534 A1 (hereinafter Igarashi) . Regarding Claim 9 : Duncan, as modified, discloses the invention as recited above. Duncan, as modified, fails to explicitly disclose a size of the region in the left-right direction is larger than a size of the region in the forward-rearward direction. Igarashi teaches a size of the region in the left-right direction is larger than a size of the region in the forward-rearward direction (Igarashi [0066] and [Fig. 1]; the sound passing hole region is wider than it is tall). Duncan discloses a user input device for an electronic system (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, the user input device is configured as a video game controller (Duncan [0002]). In some implementations, input device further includes a microphone port for receiving audio signals (Duncan [0053]). The microphone assembly includes a microphone for receiving the audio signals through microphone port (Duncan [0053]). Igarashi teaches a microphone disposed at the position of sound passing holes that are wider than they are tall (Igarashi [0066] and [Fig. 1]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the user input device including a microphone as disclosed by Duncan with a size of the region in the left-right direction is larger than a size of the region in the forward-rearward direction as taught by Igarashi in order to provide an opening allowing sound to reach the microphone . Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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. 08-34 AIA Claim 1-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,151,157 B2 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they vary slightly in terms of language . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WERNER G GARNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7147. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-15:30 EST. 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, DAVID LEWIS can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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. /WERNER G GARNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 2 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 3 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 4 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 5 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 6 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 7 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 8 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 9 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 10 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 11 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 12 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 13 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 14 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 15 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/919,513 Page 16 Art Unit: 3715
Prosecution Insights