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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20210313750 A1) in view of Lin et al. (US 20140211394 A1, hereafter Lin) and Tsuji (US 20170168594 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches a computing device comprising:
a base (438) comprising: a raised surface defining an internal volume (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], the electronic device 438 being a tablet computer having both an input surface and an internal volume);
computing components disposed in the internal volume ([0030]-[0031], a tablet computer necessarily having computing components disposed within);
a hinge (400) comprising a retaining portion and a pivot member (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the hinge includes a first retaining portion 416; Fig. 1A, showing the pivot member);
the retaining portion comprising a magnetic channel sized to retain a display and selectively secure the display in the magnetic channel (Fig. 4A, [0032], where the engagement portions 410 and 416 include magnetic components such as lugs or posts to retain and secure the display)
the pivot member rotatably attaching the retaining portion to the base (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the hinge includes a first retaining portion 416; Fig. 1A, showing the pivot member); and
the display including a display screen, the display being removably attached to the retaining portion such that when the computing device is in a closed state: the display screen is configured to flip from being oriented toward the input surface to being oriented away from the input surface (Figs. 4D-4E, [0033]-[0034], where first electronic device 438 may be flipped so that the combined electronic device 401 is used in a tablet-style mode shown in Fig. 4E instead of a clamshell configuration in Fig. 4D).
But, Liu does not teach the computing device wherein the base further comprises an input surface recessed relative to the raised portion and wherein an input device is configured to be removably attached to the input surface. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Lin (Figs. 2 and 2, [0018]-[0021], where there is a receiving space 111 that is recessed relative to the rest of working surface 11). Both Liu and Lin teach computing devices with modules rotating about a hinge. Liu teaches a hinge apparatus which plugs into distinct modules. Lin features a recessed surface capable of receiving a unit such as a keyboard module 30. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable a user to swap out input surface modules depending on the task (e.g., keyboard vs. touchscreen).
But, the combination of Liu and Lin does not teach the computing device wherein when the computing device is in a closed state: the input device is configured to be removably attached to the input surface between the base and the display. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Tsuji (Fig. 2, [0033]-[0037]). Liu teaches that a device may be folded in either a clamshell configuration (i.e., the input device and display face each other) or may be folded in a tablet configuration where the display faces away from the input surface. Liu does not teach that changing the orientation of the display such that, when folded, the tablet configuration has the input surface facing the back of the display. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable reattachment of electronic devices as taught by Tsuji such that, in a tablet configuration, damage can be prevented to the input surface.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Liu further teaches the computing device wherein the retaining portion comprises a first side wall and a second side wall, the first side wall and the second side wall defining the magnetic channel sized to receive the display (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the hinge includes a first retaining portion 416 to retain an electronic device such as a tablet computer, the first retaining portion being an extension having a first or front wall and second or back wall designed to fit into the port 432; [0032], where the engagement portion may have magnetic components).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Lin in the combination further teaches the computing device comprising a keyboard removably attached to the input surface ([0018], where an electronic device may include a keyboard module 30).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Lin in the combination further teaches the computing device wherein the display is a first display, and the computing device further comprises a second display removably attached to the input surface (Figs. 1 and 2, [0021], where the removable element 321 is a touch screen).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Liu further teaches the computing device wherein the base comprises a component retention magnet (Fig. 4A, [0032], where magnetic elements are used to retain a connection).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Liu further teaches the computing device wherein the base comprises a raised input component alignment portion ([0027], where there is defined a mechanical connector portion which aligns the hinge connecting to the base).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 1. Lin in the combination teaches the computing device further comprising a sensor disposed in the internal volume to detect a user input (Figs. 1 and 2, [0021], where the removable element 321 is a touch screen placed in the receiving space 111).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 7. Lin in the combination further teaches the computing device wherein the sensor comprises a capacitive touch sensor; and the sensor is disposed in the internal volume below a portion of the base defining the input surface (Figs. 1 and 2, [0021], where the removable element 321 is a touch screen placed in the receiving space 111).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 7. Liu further teaches the computing device wherein the sensor detects a position and a motion of an extremity of a user in a region adjacent to the input surface ([0030]-[0031], where a touchscreen comprises a sensor within the screen for detecting user input).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20210313750 A1) in view of Lin et al. (US 20140211394 A1, hereafter Lin), Tsuji (US 20170168594 A1), and Files et al. (US 20200343057 A1, hereafter Files).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Liu, Lin, and Tsuji would show the computing device of claim 7. But, the combination does not explicitly teach the computer device further comprising a light emitting component disposed in the internal volume; wherein the sensor receives light emitted by the light emitting component and reflected off an object to detect a location of the object. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Files ([0056], [0069], where the devices 102, 104 have optical sensors defining an input surface area). Liu teaches that its devices 428 and 438 comprise touchscreens but does not explicitly state what kind of touch sensing is used. Files teaches a configurable clamshell device with various removable components and explicitly teaches the use of optical sensing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate optical sensing as taught by Files into the devices of Liu and such an incorporation would have yielded a predictable result.
Claims 11-14, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20210313750 A1) in view of Zaloom (US 10253536 B1) and Tsuji (US 20170168594 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Liu teaches an electronic device, comprising:
a body (438) at least partially defining an internal volume (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], the electronic device 438 being a tablet computer having an internal volume);
computing components disposed in the internal volume ([0030]-[0031], a tablet computer necessarily having computing components disposed within);
a retaining portion (416) comprising a first wall and a second wall, the first wall and the second wall at least partially defining a channel sized to receive and retain a display and magnetically lock the display in the channel (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the hinge includes a first retaining portion 416 to retain an electronic device such as a tablet computer, the first retaining portion being an extension having a first or front wall and second or back wall designed to fit into the port 432; Fig. 4A, [0032], where the engagement portions 410 and 416 include magnetic components such as lugs or posts to retain and secure the display); and
a pivot member rotatably coupling the retaining portion to the body (Fig. 1A, [0018], where there is a hinge 106 functioning as a pivot member);
wherein an orientation of the display relative to the body is configured to be flipped via the retaining portion (Figs. 4D-4E, [0033]-[0034], where first electronic device 438 may be flipped so that the combined electronic device 401 is used in a tablet-style mode shown in Fig. 4E instead of a clamshell configuration in Fig. 4D).
But, Liu does not explicitly teach the electronic device wherein the channel is recessed between the first wall and the second wall. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Zaloom (Figs. 14A-20, where the holding bracket 350 is J-shaped). Both Liu and Zaloom teach mechanisms for attaching display devices upon a folding axis. Liu teaches a channel in a display device into which a mechanism having a first wall and second wall is received. Zaloom teaches a J-shaped bracket into which a display device is inserted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Liu to receive a wide variety of tablet-like devices without requiring a specific connector.
But, the combination of Liu and Zaloom does not teach the electronic device wherein an input device is configured to be removably attached to the body between the body and the display when the electronic device is in a closed state. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Tsuji (Fig. 2, [0033]-[0037]). Liu teaches that a device may be folded in either a clamshell configuration (i.e., the input device and display face each other) or may be folded in a tablet configuration where the display faces away from the input surface. Liu does not teach that changing the orientation of the display such that, when folded, the tablet configuration has the input surface facing the back of the display. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable reattachment of electronic devices as taught by Tsuji such that, in a tablet configuration, damage can be prevented to the input surface.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 11. Liu further teaches the electronic device further comprising a display retention magnet positioned adjacent to the channel (Fig. 4A, [0032], where magnetic elements are used to retain a connection).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 11. Zaloom in the combination further teaches the electronic device wherein a height of the first wall is larger than a height of the second wall (Figs. 14A-20, where the holding bracket 350 is J-shaped).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 1. Liu further teaches the electronic device wherein the computing components comprise a battery, a processor, and a memory ([0031], where a portable tablet computer necessarily includes these components).
Regarding claim 16, Liu teaches an electronic device, comprising:
a first retention portion (416) to removably retain a display comprising a display screen and selectively lock the display in the first retention portion, the first retention portion including a magnetic wall (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0032], where the retaining portion 416 receives device 428 and the engagement portions have magnetic components);
a second retention portion (410) to removably retain an input component (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the retaining portion 410 receives device 438); and
an intermediate portion positioned between the first retention portion and the second retention portion, the first retention portion and the second retention portion being rotatably coupled to the intermediate portion, the intermediate portion defining an internal volume ([0025]-[0026], where the body of the hinge adapter contains within computing components to facilitate communication between the attached electronic devices); and
computing components disposed in the internal volume ([0025]-[0026], where the body of the hinge adapter contains within computing components to facilitate communication between the attached electronic devices);
wherein the first retention portion enables the display to be flipped between: a first orientation including the display screen oriented toward the input component; and a second orientation including the display screen oriented away from the input component (Figs. 4D-4E, [0033]-[0034], where first electronic device 438 may be flipped so that the combined electronic device 401 is used in a tablet-style mode shown in Fig. 4E instead of a clamshell configuration in Fig. 4D).
But, Liu does not explicitly teach the electronic device wherein the first retention portion further defines a cavity, wherein the cavity is recessed relative to the intermediate portion disposed between the cavity and the second retention portion. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Zaloom (Figs. 14A-20, where the holding bracket 350 is J-shaped). Both Liu and Zaloom teach mechanisms for attaching display devices upon a folding axis. Liu teaches a retention mechanism in a display device into which a mechanism having a first wall and second wall is received. Zaloom teaches a J-shaped bracket or cavity into which a display device is inserted. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Liu to receive a wide variety of tablet-like devices without requiring a specific connector.
But, the combination of Liu and Zaloom does not teach the electronic device wherein an input device is configured to be removably attached to the body between the body and the display when the electronic device is in a closed state. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by Tsuji (Fig. 2, [0033]-[0037]). Liu teaches that a device may be folded in either a clamshell configuration (i.e., the input device and display face each other) or may be folded in a tablet configuration where the display faces away from the input surface. Liu does not teach that changing the orientation of the display such that, when folded, the tablet configuration has the input surface facing the back of the display. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable reattachment of electronic devices as taught by Tsuji such that, in a tablet configuration, damage can be prevented to the input surface.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 16. Liu further teaches the electronic device wherein the display is a first display and at least one of the first retention portion or the second retention portion comprises a second display ([0031], where each electronic device 428 and 438 may comprise a display).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 16. Liu further teaches the electronic device wherein the first retention portion defines a channel sized to receive the display (Fig. 4A, [0030]-[0031], where the hinge includes a first retaining portion 416 to retain an electronic device such as a tablet computer, the first retaining portion being an extension having a first or front wall and second or back wall designed to fit into the port 432).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 16. Liu further teaches the electronic device wherein the first retention portion and the second retention portion are independently rotatable relative to the intermediate portion (Figs. 4C-4E, [0033], where the electronic devices 428 and 438 may be rotated independently).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 20210313750 A1) in view of Zaloom (US 10253536 B1), Tsuji (US 20170168594 A1), and McKittrick et al. (US 20200192430 A1, hereafter McKittrick).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Liu, Zaloom, and Tsuji would show the electronic device of claim 11. But, the combination does not explicitly teach the electronic device further comprising an inductive charging coil disposed in the internal volume. However, this was well known in the art as evidenced by McKittrick (Fig. 9, [0028], where the power receiving unit is coupled to a charging coil that accepts inductive signals). Both Liu and McKittrick teach clamshell computing devices. Liu is completely silent with respect to power sources or batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a power source and battery into the device of Liu as taught by McKittrick and that such an incorporation would yield a predictable result.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 11 and 12 of Applicant’s arguments/remarks, Applicant asserts that the portion of the Liu reference cited “does not specifically describe the claimed ‘magnetic channel’ nor of securing the display ‘in the magnetic channel’.” However, paragraph [0032] of Liu describes the magnetic interface as magnetic lugs or posts which are received in complementary magnetic receptables or pockets, where a reasonable interpretation of channel would include a receptacle or pocket.
On page 12 of Applicant’s arguments/remarks, reference is made to the Examiner’s acknowledgement of the previously cited references failing to teach “when the computing device is in a closed state … an input device to be removably attached to the input surface between the base and the display” which is then followed by an assertion that the newly cited Tsuji reference does not teach the magnetic channel. The Tsuji reference is relied upon to teach the rotation and re-attachment of components such that the claimed configuration can be achieved, not for the magnetic channel. Further arguments on pages 13-16 regarding the alleged deficiencies of the Liu and Zaloom references are similarly addressed by the Tsuji reference.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER D MCLOONE whose telephone number is (571)272-4631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 5712727764. 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.
/PETER D MCLOONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621