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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-20, pages 10-14 of the remarks filed 6/23/2026, have been considered but are not persuasive.
In response to arguments, page 11; Applicant contends, essentially, that:
PNG
media_image1.png
141
633
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner disagrees, please note that the rejection of independent claim 1
has been revised (using the same prior art – Xu) to clarify or expand on
citations in the previous Office action, particular clarification about what
constitutes the hinge bracket, the rotary rail and guide rail, for example. Additional note, the term “spaced apart” as currently recited does not necessitate an extent, distance or degree of separation/spacing – is so intended
In response to arguments, page 12; Applicant contends, essentially, that:
PNG
media_image2.png
210
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner disagrees, these limitations have been revised to clarify or expand on citations in the previous Office action, particular clarification about what constitutes the rotating member and sliding pin, for example. Noting further, the claim as currently presented does not particularize these elements in such a way as to firmly distinguish from Xu, in a structural sense.
In response to arguments, page 13; Applicant contends, essentially, that:
PNG
media_image3.png
176
640
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner disagrees, these limitations have been revised to clarify or expand on citations in the previous Office action, particular clarification about what constitutes the sliding opening, for example. It is useful to note that the claim as currently presented does not specify the features in such a way as to limit examiner’s interpretation.
In response to arguments, page 13; Applicant contends, essentially, that:
PNG
media_image4.png
163
626
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner disagrees, these limitations have been revised to clarify or expand on citations in the previous Office action; noting applicants’ remarks are not commensurate with scope of the claim, the claim as currently presented does not particularize these elements in such a way as to firmly distinguish from Xu, structurally. For example, Applicant may limit or restrict the shape of hinge structure to a particular type of hinge by expressly reciting as such in the claim – if so intended.
Examiner believes each and every element as claimed are in fact taught by Xu. As it stands, the current recitation of the features applicant argues as not being taught, has not gone far enough to overcome Xu. Examiner suggests including more positive recitation that further limit the structure of at least, the most pertinent feature(s) of the claim.
Upon further consideration, however, arguments on page 14 toward dependent claims 3, 10-11 and 18 were considered and are persuasive. Xu does not teach these features in the manner claimed and are found to contain allowable subject matter identified below. The previous rejection of these claims has been withdrawn.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being
anticipated by Xu CN114185398A (English translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses an electronic device (100, Fig 2) comprising: a first housing (10, Fig 2); a second housing (30, Fig 2); a hinge structure (1, Fig 6, 7) rotatably connecting the first housing and the second housing to each other (see Fig 3); and a display (200, Fig 3) disposed on the first housing and the second housing across the hinge structure (see Fig 3); wherein the hinge structure includes: a hinge bracket (20a, Fig 11) including a rotary rail (91, Fig 23a) and a guide rail (15, Fig 11) spaced apart from the rotary rail (as depicted in Figs 11-16 for example; 91 spaced apart from 15); a rotating member (31 including 310, Fig 15, 16) coupled to the first housing (as in Figs 34, 37 for example) and including a sliding pin (51 sliding relative to 9113 for example, Figs 16, 34, 35), and a supporting member (41 and/or including 61, Figs 12, 35) supporting the display (on 11, Figs 1, 2), and including a sliding opening (156, Fig 35) configured to slide relative(Fig 35), and a guide groove (153, Fig 29) guided by the guide rail (Figs 29-31), wherein the rotating member is rotatable along the rotary rail (91, Fig 15) by a movement of the first housing (see Figs 18, 21-23b), based on a first rotational axis (axis along F1 or F1x for example, Figs 16, 17); and wherein the supporting member is rotatable along the guide rail by a movement of the sliding opening (see motion depicted in Figs 35, 38, 40-41, for example), based on a second rotational axis (along 41C, Fig 12) distinct from the first rotational axis (Figs 12-14).
Regarding claim 2, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein a
width of one end of the guide groove facing of the display is smaller than a width of the other end of the guide groove opposite to the one end of the guide groove (width other end near 153c for example, Fig 29).
Regarding claim 4, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the supporting member is configured to move toward an outer surface of the hinge bracket (see Figs 37 with respect to Fig 40) when an angle between the first housing and the second housing is equal to or bigger than a designated angle (angle in flat/unfolded position relative smaller than angle in folded position, Figs 33, 40).
Regarding claim 5, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first rotational axis is fixed while the rotating member rotates (fixed at 5112, Fig 18), and wherein the second rotational axis is changed according to a movement of the supporting member (along 41C, Fig 12; see motion depicted in Fig 34-41, for example).
Regarding claim 6, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the sliding opening is bent to have a curvature (see Fig 16).
Regarding claim 7, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the sliding pin overlaps the hinge bracket when the hinge structure is viewed from above (see, Figs 33-34).
Regarding claim 8, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the rotating member is rotatable with respect to the hinge bracket within a first
angle range (see Fig 35 with respect to Fig 37), and wherein the supporting member is rotatable with respect to the hinge bracket within a second angle range bigger than the first angle range (note support member angle range at least 0-180 degrees, while rotating member range is less, Figs 15, 35, 37).
Regarding claim 9, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the rotating member further includes a rotary groove (3111, Fig 14) configured to have a constant curvature (at 311 for example, Fig 14) along the rotary rail
and to be guidable by the rotary rail (Figs 12-14).
Regarding claim 16, Xu discloses an electronic device (100, Fig 2) comprising: a first housing (10 including 21, Fig 4); a second housing (30 including 22, Fig 4) rotatable with respect to the first housing (Figs 2, 3); a hinge structure (1, Fig 6, 7) changeable between a folded state (as in Figs 1-4, 7) in which a surface of the first housing (bottom of 10, Fig 4) faces a surface of the second housing (bottom of 30, Fig 4), and an unfolded state (as in Fig 1) in which the surface of the first housing and the surface of the second housing facing in a same direction (both surfaces facing down, as in Fig 1); and a display (200, Fig 3) including a first display region (2001, Fig 3) disposed on the first housing (Fig 3) and a second display region (2003, Fig 3) disposed on the second housing (Fig 3) and a third display region (2002, Fig 3) disposed on the hinge structure (Figs 1-3); wherein the hinge structure includes: a hinge bracket (20a, Fig 11) including a rotary rail (91, Figs 12-13) and a guide rail (15, Fig 11) spaced apart from the rotary rail (as depicted in Figs 11-16 for example; 91 spaced apart from 15), a rotating member (31 including 310, Fig 15, 16) including a sliding pin (51 sliding relative to 9113 for example, Figs 16, 34, 35), coupled to the first housing (Figs 34, 37) and rotatable based on a first rotational axis (axis along F1 or F1x for example, Figs 16, 17) along the rotary rail by the movement of the first housing (Figs 16-18), and a supporting member (41 and/or including 61, Figs 12, 35) including a sliding opening (156, Fig 35) configured to slide relative to the sliding pin (Fig 35) and a guide groove (153, Fig 29) guided by the guide rail (Figs 29-31), the supporting member supporting the third display region (at bottom surface of 2002, Fig 1, 3, 7); wherein the supporting member is rotatable along the guide rail based on a second rotational axis (along 41C, Fig 12) distinct from the first rotational axis by the sliding of the sliding opening (Figs 12-16), wherein the supporting member is rotatable within an angle range (see Fig 35 with respect to Fig 37) bigger than an angle range of the rotating member (note support member angle range at least 0-180 degrees, Figs 16, 17, while rotating member range is less, Figs 35, 37), wherein a width of one end of the guide groove (width one end near 153a for example, Fig 29) facing the third display region (Figs 3, 5) is smaller than a width of the other end of the guide groove opposite to the one end of the guide groove (width other end near 153c for example, Fig 29), and wherein a part of the third display region is supported by the supporting member (once assembled, Figs 3, 5 for example) and is inclined with respect to the first display region when in the folded state (see Figs 1-7).
Regarding claim 17, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the supporting member moves toward an outer surface of the hinge bracket (see Figs 37 with respect to Fig 40) when an angle between the first housing and the second housing is equal to or bigger than a designated angle (angle in flat/unfolded position relative smaller than angle in folded position, Figs 33, 40).
Regarding claim 19, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the sliding pin overlaps the hinge bracket when the hinge structure is viewed from above (see, Figs 33-34).
Regarding claim 20, Xu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the sliding opening is bent to have a curvature (see Fig 16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 10-15 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The dependent claims listed below, in combination with the remaining elements of the independent claim(s) from which they directly/indirectly depend, are not taught, or adequately suggested in the prior art of record.
Claim 3. The electronic device of claim 2, wherein a width of the guide groove is configured to increase from the one end of the guide groove toward the other end of the guide groove.
Claim 10. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the supporting member further includes: a supporting plate, in which the guide groove is disposed, configured to support the display; and a connecting member, in which the sliding opening is disposed, coupled to the supporting plate to be movable together with the supporting plate. *Claim 11 depends directly on claim 10 and is therefore allowable for at least the same reason.
Claim 12. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the rotating member further includes a sliding groove disposed outside of the hinge bracket, wherein the hinge structure further includes: a shaft rotatably coupled to the hinge bracket to be rotatable with respect to the hinge bracket; an arm rotatable with respect to the shaft, the arm including one end configured to face the sliding groove and the other end disposed on the shaft, and a rotary pin movable within the sliding groove and configured to couple the arm and the rotating member, and wherein the rotary pin is configured to rotate the arm by sliding in the sliding groove by a rotation of the rotating member. *Claims 13-15 depend directly on claim 12 and are therefore allowable for at least the same reason.
Claim 18. The electronic device of claim 16, wherein a width of the guide groove increases from the one end of the guide groove toward the other end of the guide groove.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see PTO 892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHEN E MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-8852. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached at 571-270-5528. 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.
/RASHEN E MORRISON/Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights