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 Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because it appears to be identical to claim 15. Please correct or cancel claim 16. Claim 16 is not rejected under prior art.
Claim Interpretation
During patent examination, pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." MPEP 2111; See also, MPEP 2173.02. Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969). See also, In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989) ("During patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow"). The reason is simply that during patent prosecution when claims can be amended, ambiguities should be recognized, scope and breadth of language explored, and clarification imposed. An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.
The Examiner respectfully requests of the Applicant in preparing responses, to consider fully the entirety of the reference(s) as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. It is noted, REFERENCES ARE RELEVANT AS PRIOR ART FOR ALL THEY CONTAIN.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103/Official Notice with U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0046327 A1 to Karilainen,
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 12-13, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0046327 A1 to Karilainen, in view of Official Notice
With regard to claim 1, Karilainen discloses:
1. An electronic device, comprising:
a housing (see, Fig. 2, and detailed description, including, schematic representation of a portion of device housing 101 from the inside, according to an embodiment, para. 0018);
at least one light emitter, which is disposed in an area of the housing, configured to emit at least one of first color light or second color light (see, detailed description, including, one or more of light sources 106, 107, 108 may comprise multiple light sources adapted spatially such that different visual patterns may be created, para. 0018);
memory, comprising one or more storage media, storing instructions (see, detailed description, including, using any computer-readable media that are accessible by the device 100, para. 0023); and
one or more processors communicatively coupled to the at least one light emitter and the memory (see, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, and detailed description, including, 100 may comprise a controller 420 configured to control light sources 421. According to an embodiment, the light sources 421 may comprise light sources 106, 107 and 108 of embodiments, para. 0024)
wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
detect that an event occurs related to a first application or a second application installed in the electronic device, (see, detailed description, including, that the instructions cause the device to detect that an event occurs related to a first or second application, the controller 420 may divide the detected events into categories. These categories may include type of event, priority of event, and initiator of the event, etc. Initiator of an event may be for example a caller, a sender of a message or an email, an application hosted in the device, a web based service providing financial, weather, traffic, news or emergency alerts, etc., para. 0024)
in case that the detected event relates to the first application, control the at least one light emitter to emit the first color light based on at least one color associated with a first icon image of the first application, (see, detailed description, including, and the controller 420 may provide different visual notifications for different categories of events. According to an embodiment, the notifications may be different in color, placement of the light sources 421 in the device housing, in frequency of turning on/off or a combination thereof, para. 0024).
Karilainen does not disclose:
in case that the detected event relates to the second application, control the at least one light emitter to emit the second color light based on at least one color associated with a second icon image of the second application.
The Examiner takes Official Notice that the selecting the color of a notification is a mere design choice for a skilled practitioner. A skilled practitioner would naturally choose a color that, if possible, supports a mental association with the type of notification and, where possible, would consider a color for the symbol associated with the notification to be an appropriate choice.
With regard to claim 2, Karilainen discloses:
2. The electronic device of claim 1, further comprising:
a display (see, Fig. 3, and detailed description, including, a display screen 115, para. 0020); and
a sensor (see, detailed description, including, including but not limited to smartphones, mobile phones, wearable devices, laptops, tablets, phablets, game consoles, media players, cameras, smart speakers, etc. These devices may typically include a primary user interface which may be used to notify a user of an even, para. 0015 and 0024),
wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
detect, via the sensor, that the display is facing down (see, detailed description, including, notifications in response to a detected event may be provided if a primary user interface is disabled or inaccessible, for example if a screen is turned off or the device 100 is in silent mode, para. 0024),
detect that the event occurs in a first orientation of the electronic device corresponding to the display facing down, (see, detailed description, including, the device 100 may comprise two modes: a primary mode wherein a primary user interface is available, and a secondary mode wherein the primary user interface is turned off or inaccessible, para. 0024).and
while the first orientation is maintained, control the at least one light emitter to emit the first color light and/or the second color light (see, detailed description, including, Visual notifications may be provided by turning on the light sources 421 in the secondary mode. Controller 420 may determine the mode of the device 100 and if it is in a secondary mode, detect events and provide visual notifications in response to the detected events, by controlling the turning on and off of the light sources 421, para. 0024).
Karilainen does not explicitly disclose:
That the electronic device with the display is facing down.
The Examiner takes Official Notice that electronic device with the display facing down merely amounts to a situation when the notification from the display is otherwise unavailable, and is a mere design choice for a skilled practitioner. A skilled practitioner would naturally choose another operation mode that, if possible, supports an association with the type of notification and, where possible, would consider a color for the symbol associated with the notification to be an appropriate choice.
With regard to claim 12, claim 12 (a method claim) recites substantially similar limitations to claim 1 (a device claim) and is therefore rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above.
With regard to claim 13, claim 13 (a method claim) recites substantially similar limitations to claim 2 (a device claim) and is therefore rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above.
With regard to claim 20, claim 20 (a non-transitory computer-readable storage media claim) recites substantially similar limitations to claim 2 (a device claim) (with memory 404, para. 0023) and is therefore rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-11, 14-15, and 17-19, 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.
For convenience, claims 3-11 are presented below.
3. The electronic device of claim 2, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
determine a plurality of colors based on an icon of an application corresponding to the event; and
control the at least one light emitter to emit two or more colors light.
4. The electronic device of claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
select two colors, among the plurality of colors included in the icon of the application, based on sizes of areas of the plurality of colors; and
control the at least one light emitter to emit two colors light in a gradient.
5. The electronic device of claim 1, further comprising:
a rear camera disposed in the area corresponding to a rear side of the housing,
wherein the at least one light emitter comprises a plurality of light emitting elements disposed in a ring-shape to surround a peripheral area of the rear camera.
6. The electronic device of claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
detect that the event occurs while the display is in a low power state; and
control the light emitter with two or more colors associated with the event while the display remains in the low power state.
7. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
divide, based on a number of events being two or more, the at least one light emitter into a plurality of areas corresponding to the number of events; and
control the at least one light emitter to emit light via the plurality of areas such that each of the plurality of areas is spaced apart from each other.
8. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
divide, based on a number of events being two or more, the at least one light emitter into a plurality of areas corresponding to the number of events; and
control the at least one light emitter to:
emit light via some areas of the plurality of areas in at least one color related to the first application in which a first event occurs, and
emit light via remaining areas in at least one color related to the second application in which a second event occurs.
9. The electronic device of claim 8, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
determine the number of areas and the number of remaining areas among the plurality of areas based on the number of the first event occurring in the first application and the number of the second event occurring in the second application.
10. The electronic device of claim 1,
wherein the at least one light emitter includes a plurality of areas, and
wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
when an event related to a process progress occurs, change a light-emitting area among the plurality of areas based on a process progress rate.
11. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic device to:
when an event related to a battery sharing operation with an external electronic device occurs, emit light in at least a portion of a first area of the at least one light emitter based on remaining battery amount of the electronic device; and
emit light in at least a portion of a second area of the at least one light emitter that is different from the first area based on remaining battery amount of the external electronic device.
A sampling of the prior art made of record and not relied upon and considered pertinent to Applicants’ disclosure includes: U.S. Patent No. 11,540,377 B2 to Lee et al. (hereinafter Lee) that discusses an electronic device for preventing misrecognition by a proximity sensor is provided. The electronic device includes a display, a proximity sensor disposed under the display, at least one processor operatively connected with the display and the proximity sensor, and a memory operatively connected with the processor. The memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to in response to the display being turned on, detect a light entering the proximity sensor by using the proximity sensor, calibrate a reference range, based on a characteristic of the entering light, and identify whether an external object is close to the electronic device, based on the calibrated reference range.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM D. TITCOMB whose telephone number is (571)270-5190. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM (M-F).
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, Stephen C. Hong can be reached at 571-272-4124. 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.
WILLIAM D. TITCOMB
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2178
/WILLIAM D TITCOMB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178 9-23-2026
Prosecution Insights