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 .
Claims 31-53 are pending in the instant application. Claims 1-30 are canceled and claims 31-36, 43-44, 47, 50, and 53 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 31-53 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicant’s argument with respect to the 112(a) rejection of claims 31-53 have been fully considered and are persuasive after amending the claims. The 112(a) rejections of claims 31-53 have been withdrawn based on amendments.
Applicant’s argument with respect to the 112b rejection of claims 38 and 44-47 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(b) rejections of claims 38 and 44-47 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed 2/20/2026 with respect to claim 53 is considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant further argues that Gadolfo and Arellano fail to disclose the force-sensing front end circuitry, see Remarks pages 13-15.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Gandolofo teaches a multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller corresponds to a circuitry (see Fig. 4A, para. [0024]). Arellano was introduced to teach that the circuitry is force-sensing front end circuitry configured to receive a signal (see para. [0025], para. [0060], para. [0064]-[0065], para. [0067]-[0073], Fig. 6. The finger hover may be detected by beamforming ultrasonic pressure waves through the display module. one or more processors receive, via the pressure wave module, at least one response pressure wave in response to the beamformed ultrasonic pressure waves. FIG. 6 illustrates detecting the finger hover based on beamformed pressure waves. The one or more processors detect a finger hover above the display module based on the at least one response pressure wave). Based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, the circuitry disclosed by Arellano detects the hover gesture using pressure waves (force) and thus it considered to correspond to a “force sensing front end circuitry”. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Applicant further argues that “Ebefors fails to disclose (or even suggest) the limitation of independent Claim 53 of "force-sensing front end circuitry configured to receive a signal from one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators” and that “[t]he controller cannot reasonably be considered to be "force-sensing front end circuitry" of the kind recited in Claim 53, because the system disclosed in Ebefors does not sense force, but instead senses the presence of an object based on detection of reflected ultrasonic waves”, Remarks pages 16-17.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Ebefors teaches that the micromachined ultrasonic transducer “MUT 200 may be a piezoelectric MUT (p-MUT). The use of p-MUT devices is advantageous for generating high force and displacements, e.g. high sound pressure required to generate human perceivable feedback according to embodiments herein, because p-MUT devices require a low voltage and further transform electrical energy to mechanical energy in a very efficient manner”, para. [0096]-[0099]. In addition, Ebeforts discloses that “[t]he controller 120 may in these embodiments be configured to receive a detection signal SRx from at least one acoustic MUT element 210 of at least one in said two dimensional array; identify a gesture based on the received detection signal or signals SRx; and generate the respective drive signal STx in response to identifying a gesture. Turning again to FIG. 2, details of the controller 120 according to one or more embodiments are shown. As shown in the figure, the controller 120 may comprise an analogue frontend block 122 configured to constitute a first interface towards the acoustic MUT elements 2101 . . . i; an internal digital processing block 126 comprising digital processing circuitry being communicably connected to the analogue frontend block 122”, para. [0058]-[0059]. Therefore, Ebeforts controller with an analogue frontend block is considered a force-sensing front-end circuitry.
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.
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.
Claims 31-32, 35-42, 44-46, 48, and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert et al. (US 20210240283 A1, hereinafter referenced as Knoppert) in view of Yang et al. (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation hereinafter referenced as Yang).
Regarding Claim 31, Knoppert teaches a solid state keyboard device (see Figs. 1-2, para. [0015], para. [0017], para. [0044] and para. [0052]. Solid-state keyboard) comprising:
a user interaction layer for receiving a user input (see para. [0016]-[0017], para. [0048], para. [0050]-[0053] and para. [0070]-[0077]. The keyboard may include, in an embodiment, a coversheet to identify an actuation location of an input actuation device); and
a plurality of haptic actuators (see para. [0016]-[0021], para. [0040] and para. [0043]. Piezo elements in a piezo haptic keyboard assembly. each of the keys of haptic keyboard 114 may be associated with a piezoelectric element or in some embodiments more than one piezoelectric element may be associated with a key. The piezoelectric element may be used to, as described herein, create an electrical charge relative to a key on the keyboard 114 and send that electrical charge as an actuation signal to a controller. In an embodiment, the controller may receive the electrical charge as an actuation signal and the haptic keyboard may register the keystroke and associated alphanumeric character and send an electrical haptic feedback control signal to the piezoelectric element. Upon application of the electrical haptic feedback control signal at the piezoelectric element (i.e., having a specific current and voltage) associated with the actuated key of keyboard 114 causes the piezoelectric element to convert that electrical haptic feedback control signal into a mechanical compression or stretching of piezoelectric material which may cause an upward or downward warping of the piezoelectric element. The mechanical warping of the piezoelectric element due to the application of the electrical haptic feedback control signal to the piezoelectric element may be felt by a user who actuated the key of keyboard 114),
wherein the solid state keyboard device is operable to cause one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators to generate a haptic output at the user interaction layer in response to the received user input (see para. [0018], para. [0042]-[0043], para. [0056]-[0060]-[0062], para. [0071] and para. [0084]. The metal traces formed on the contact foil 210 may further be used to conduct a return electrical haptic feedback control signal from the controller to the piezoelectric element 220 so that the voltage and current of the return electrical haptic feedback control signal may cause the piezoelectric element 220 to warp upward or downward before returning to a planer form as required to cause a specified haptic response to the user via coversheet 205. For example, this electrical haptic feedback control signal may have a certain voltage, current, and polarity (−,+) sufficient to render the piezoelectric material of the piezoelectric element 220 to cause a haptic event or sound. Such a response signal may be a sine wave, a square wave, a pulsed signal, or other waveform of changing current, voltage, or polarity applied to the piezoelectric element 220. This warping of the piezoelectric element 220 may cause a haptic feedback presented at the key 200 via the contact foil 210, adhesive 215, and coversheet 205 that the user may feel. The contact foil 210 may therefore, in an embodiment, include double the number of metal traces on its bottom surface as that of the number of piezoelectric elements 220 used to form a keyboard that includes multiple keys 200.), and
Knoppert does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of haptic actuators is operable as an ultrasonic transmitter array and/or an ultrasonic sensor array.
However, Yang teaches the plurality of haptic actuators is operable as an ultrasonic transmitter array and/or an ultrasonic sensor array (see para. [0011]-[0014], para. [0022]-[0026]. The host computer sends feedback instructions and finger and palm coordinates from the gesture signals to the ultrasonic phased array. An ultrasonic phased array emits ultrasonic signals to the hand based on received feedback commands, as well as finger and palm coordinates, corresponding to the operations performed on the graphical user interface. The ultrasonic phased array emits multiple ultrasonic signals, which are focused onto multiple control focal points located on the hand, thus generating corresponding tactile sensations on the hand).
Knoppert and Yang are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert with Yang’s teachings of providing ultrasonic transmitters as haptic actuators, since it would have been obvious to try from a finite number of actuators known in the art that would have yield the same predictable result of providing haptic feedback.
Regarding Claim 32, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Yang further teaches comprising: output generation circuitry (see para. [0011], para. [0022]. host computer) configured to: generate a set of ultrasonic output signals to supply to the plurality of haptic actuators; or retrieve a set of ultrasonic output signals to supply to the plurality of haptic actuators (see para. [0011]-[0012], para. [0022]-[0026]. The host computer receives gesture signals in real time, compares them with the gesture signals of the previous cycle, generates corresponding gesture commands to execute corresponding operations on the graphical user interface, and detects in real time whether an operation is executed on the graphical user interface; if so, it sends feedback instructions and finger and palm coordinates from the gesture signals to the ultrasonic phased array. An ultrasonic phased array emits ultrasonic signals to the hand based on received feedback commands).
Knoppert and Yang are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang and with Yang’s teachings of providing and output generation circuit, since it would have generated and transmitted feedback instructions to configure ultrasonic phase array to generate corresponding tactile sensations in a user’s hand and thus, it would have provided control over the ultrasonic phase array.
Regarding Claim 35, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knoppert further teaches wherein one or more parameters of the haptic output are variable according to one or more parameters of the received user input or associated with the received user input (see Fig. 6, abstract, para. [0018]-[0023], para. [0062]-[0063]para. [0088]-[0089], para. [0111]-[0112], para. [0134]. The controller may apply a series of voltage pulses to the piezo electric element 220, via the contact foil 210, causing the piezo element 220 to vibrate, pulse, or move between its upward warped, downward warped, or neutral positions over a preset time period. In addition, by applying voltage of varying magnitude or polarity to the piezo element 220, the controller may deform the piezo element 220, to a slightly upward warped position, or slightly downward warped position which may effectively produce a haptic feedback event. Magnitude of upward or downward warping, speed of changes in switching between upward, downward or neutral positions, and duration as well as signal shape, bursts, intervals of the haptic feedback control signal to the piezoelectric element 220 may determine the haptic feedback event that may be experienced by a user at the haptic keyboard or the haptic touchpad. These factors of modification to the haptic feedback control signal or the changes in aspects for the haptic keyboard or haptic touchpad for actuation may be adjusted in some embodiments depending on the mood detected relative to the user's personal typing profile by the typing profile based mood sensing system of embodiments herein. FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating a typing profile based mood sensing system that senses user mood classification based on a specific user's personal typing profile and optimizes piezo haptic keyboard settings, piezo haptic touchpad settings, or other information handling system operations based on the detected mood according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.The typing profile based mood sensing system 626 in an embodiment may develop a personal typing profile including values for a plurality of haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters 610 that can be used to identify a baseline mood for a known, individual user. The typing profile based mood sensing system 626 in an embodiment may then compare later measured values for the same haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters 610, user-defined haptic settings 604, physical surroundings indicators 630, or application usage data 640 to determine changes in user typing behavior, and associate those changes with a known user mood. To account for such a known user mood (e.g., stressed or fatigued), the typing profile based mood sensing system 626 in an embodiment may then alter the haptic keyboard settings (e.g., increase vibration intensity, duration, or sharpness if user is fatigued) by transmitting updated haptic settings 670 to the piezo controller 651 and modify the settings of the haptic keyboard and touchpad control system function. In other embodiments, the detected mood classification by the typing profile based mood sensing system 626 may alter information handling system function such as display lighting levels, sound volumes, software update initiation, error correction measures, or similar changes to the operation of the information handling system or operating software applications operating thereon upon determination of the mood classification).
Regarding Claim 36, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 35.
Knoppert further teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the receive user input or associated with the received user input comprise one or more of: one or more positions of the received user input on the user interaction layer; a pressure of the received user input; a speed of the received user input; a duration of the received user input; and a duration of a user input session (see para. [0018], para. [0113]-[0114], para. [0121], para. [0138], para. [0142] and para. [0147]. For example, such user haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters may describe the force of keystrokes, the location of keystrokes (e.g., in the center of a given key or in the corner of that key), duration of keystrokes, and overall typing speed applied by the user. The piezoelectric elements used with the piezo haptic keyboard of the present embodiments may report keystrike force based on charge accumulated which is relative to mechanical force applied. Further, the piezoelectric elements may measure duration of actuation, speed of down stroke or upstroke for sharpness of a keystroke, keystrike location on a key, pauses, and other keystroke factors. Changes in these behaviors may be used to gauge a change in the user's mood when the identifying patterns are altered or disrupted. The piezo controller 651 may identify the locations of keystrokes and clicks for given keys or the touch pad (e.g., roughly within the center of the key or touch pad, or corner strikes), placement of a user's palms with respect to the keyboard, an average duration of keystrokes or touch pad clicks, force of keystrokes, pauses or intervals in typing, and an overall typing speed).
Regarding Claim 37, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 35.
Knoppert further teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the haptic output comprise one or more of: an amplitude; a frequency; a duration; and a duty cycle (see para. [0044], para. [0062]-[0063]. para. [0065], para. [0089]para. [0137]. The controller may apply a series of voltage pulses to the piezo electric element 220, via the contact foil 210, causing the piezo element 220 to vibrate, pulse, or move between its upward warped, downward warped, or neutral positions over a preset time period. The controller may set the cycle of movement, pulsing, and intensity of the piezo element 220 movement by adjusting the amplitude, polarity, pulsing, or waveform of the haptic control signal provided to a piezo electric element 220. The controller in another example may set the duration of such a haptic response by adjusting the period of haptic response, or the duration of time between detection of the keystroke and deflection of the piezo element 220).
Regarding Claim 38, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper further teaches wherein the plurality of haptic actuators comprise piezoelectric actuators and/or electrostatic actuators (see para. [0016]-[0019], para. [0040]. Piezoelectric elements Upon application of the electrical haptic feedback control signal on the piezoelectric element by the controller, the piezoelectric element may be mechanically stretched or compressed so as to create a haptic feedback event such as the piezoelectric element warping up or down and returning to its pre-deformed state. This warping of the layers of the piezoelectric element causes the user to feel a haptic sensation at the actuated key).
Regarding Claim 39, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper further teaches wherein the plurality of haptic actuators are configured to generate an electrical signal in response to a user input (see para. [0016]-[0019], para. [0040]-[0042], para. [0056], para. [0077]-[0078], para. [0084]-[0085]. The keyboard of the information handling system, in an embodiment, may include a controller of the information handling system operatively coupled to the contact foil to receive an electric charge from the piezoelectric element placed under the mechanical stress. The actuations of these specific locations by, for example, a user's finger causes a mechanical stress to be applied to the piezoelectric element resulting in the deformation of the piezoelectric element. Upon application of this mechanical stress and the deformation of the piezoelectric element, the piezoelectric element accumulates an electric charge that is passed to a controller of the information handling system via the contact foil described herein. The piezoelectric elements used with the piezo haptic keyboard of the present embodiments may report keystrike force based on charge accumulated which is relative to mechanical force applied. Upon receipt of the electrical charge as an actuation signal of a key or touchpad at the controller, the controller may send an electrical haptic feedback control signal back to the piezoelectric element).
Regarding Claim 40, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper further teaches in another embodiment wherein the user interaction layer comprises a substantially continuous layer or a plurality of individual portions (see para. [0051]. In other embodiments, no key pedestals may be formed and a key location may be described in coversheet 205 via markings, depressions, key framing, or other methods).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with a substantially continuous user interaction layer as disclosed by Knoppert in another embodiment, since it would have been obvious to try from a finite number of options for user interaction layers known in the art that would have yield the same predictable result of providing a layer that receives user’s input.
Moreover, combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness.” Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Regarding Claim 41, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 40.
Knopper further teaches wherein each individual portion of the plurality of individual portions is associated with two or more of the plurality of haptic actuators (see para. [0039]-[0040]. the haptic keyboard and touchpad control system 132 may transmit an electric haptic feedback control signal, as adjusted by the typing profile based mood sensing system 126, to any of a plurality of piezoelectric elements each associated with a key on keyboard 114. Each of the keys of haptic keyboard 114 may be associated with a piezoelectric element or in some embodiments more than one piezoelectric element may be associated with a key).
Regarding Claim 42, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 40.
Knopper further teaches wherein each individual portion of the plurality of individual portions is associated with a respective one of the plurality of haptic actuators (see para. [0039]-[0040]. the haptic keyboard and touchpad control system 132 may transmit an electric haptic feedback control signal, as adjusted by the typing profile based mood sensing system 126, to any of a plurality of piezoelectric elements each associated with a key on keyboard 114. each of the keys of haptic keyboard 114 may be associated with a piezoelectric element).
Regarding Claim 44, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 32.
Knopper further teaches user input detection circuitry configured to determine the one or more parameters of the received user input or associated with the received user input (see para. [0017]-[0018], para. [0040]-[0041], para. [0059], para. [0084]-[0085]. [0017] During operation of the solid-state keyboard or touchpad of the information handling system described in embodiments herein, a key on the keyboard or the touchpad may be actuated by a user pressing down on a specific location. In an embodiment, this specific location may be visually indicated by an alphanumeric symbol such as those found on a QWERTY keyboard, a key pedestal or raised location, or another designation such as a tactile frame or depression in a cover sheet. The actuations of these specific locations by, for example, a user's finger causes a mechanical stress to be applied to the piezoelectric element resulting in the deformation of the piezoelectric element. Upon application of this mechanical stress and the deformation of the piezoelectric element, the piezoelectric element accumulates an electric charge that is passed to a controller of the information handling system via the contact foil described herein. In an embodiment, the controller receives the electrical charge to detect occurrence of a keystroke).
Regarding Claim 45, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 44.
Knopper further teaches processing circuitry configured to process a signal output by the user input detection circuitry to determine, based on the signal output by the user input detection circuitry, a nature of a detected user input (see Fig. 1, para. [0018]-[0023], para. [0035]-[0039], para. [0042]-[0045], para. [0047], para. [0111]-[0116], para. [0120]. The typing profile based mood sensing system may detect haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters to compare with a user personal typing profile to discern changes in mood. The typing profile based mood sensing system of embodiments herein may utilize haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters from just keyboard piezo electric elements in some embodiments. The typing profile based mood sensing system 126 may be executed by a haptic keyboard controller, a haptic touchpad controller, other type of controller, a processor such as 102 or any combination of the above. The keyboard controller 130 or a processor 102 of the information handling system 100 executing code of the typing profile based mood sensing system 126 may include a look-up table correlating changes detected in the haptic hardware typing and touch parameters of a user's personal typing profile and correlation to a sensed mood change. In some embodiments, the typing profile based mood sensing system 126 may utilize a machine learning classifier to identify a mood classification based on the combination and value shift levels of measured haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters from those of a stored personal typing profile for a user. In embodiments, the keyboard controller 130 of the information handling system 100 may access the look-up table of a mood correlation database to assess mood classifications and in order to determine how a current pulse is to be applied to any given piezoelectric element and at what polarity or voltage of the haptic response signal to the piezoelectric elements or what other operational changes to function of the information handling system or application programs may be instituted due to the mood classification determination).
Regarding Claim 46, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 45,
Knopper further teaches haptic output generation circuitry configured to generate a haptic output signal or to retrieve from memory a predefined haptic output signal for output to a first set of one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators, based on a signal output by the processing circuitry. (see para. [0018]-[0021], para. [0035]. Para. [0039] para. [0041]-[0045], para. [0047] para. [0077], para. [0111]. [0035] the haptic keyboard and touchpad control system 132 may be executed by a haptic keyboard controller, a haptic touchpad controller, other type of controller, a processor such as 102 or any combination of the above. The haptic keyboard and touchpad control system 132 may, according to the present description, perform tasks related to transmitting an electrical haptic feedback control signal to a piezoelectric element based on custom or learned optimal haptic settings for a specific user, causing a haptic feedback at a key of the keyboard 114 associated with that piezoelectric element. The haptic keyboard and touchpad control system 132 and the typing profile based mood sensing system 126 may also include one or more sets of instructions that, when executed by a processor, adjusts the polarity, voltage, or current of haptic response signals applied to any piezoelectric element for either a haptic keyboard or a haptic touchpad. This adjustment may be completed based on a determined mood of the user, or upon the desired, custom, or learned haptic responses from the piezoelectric elements, the lifespan of the piezoelectric element, the electrical characteristics of the piezoelectric element, the mechanical characteristics of the piezoelectric element, or combinations thereof. Because these characteristics may be different from one piezoelectric element to the other, the electrical haptic feedback control signal applied any given piezoelectric element by the keyboard controller 130 may be customized to produce a specific level of haptic feedback at any given key of keyboard 114 and this may depend on the sensed haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameter values detected by the typing profile based mood sensing system 126 and correlated to a mood for shift in haptic performance or adjustment to other operating factors of the information handling system).
Regarding Claim 48, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper further teaches wherein the solid state keyboard device is operative to monitor or record a user’s interactions with the solid state keyboard device over a predetermined period of time to develop a profile for the user (see para. [0018], para. [0111]-[0120] and para. [0142]. The piezo keyboard controller in embodiments described herein may use such a method to detect and record various metrics describing the dynamics of the piezo haptic keyboard assembly in use by a user over a training period in which the user is in a calm, baseline mood. For example, such user haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters may describe the force of keystrokes, the location of keystrokes (e.g., in the center of a given key or in the corner of that key), duration of keystrokes, and overall typing speed applied by the user. The piezoelectric elements used with the piezo haptic keyboard of the present embodiments may report keystrike force based on charge accumulated which is relative to mechanical force applied. Further, the piezoelectric elements may measure duration of actuation, speed of down stroke or upstroke for sharpness of a keystroke, keystrike location on a key, pauses, and other keystroke factors. The combination of specific values for each of these recorded user haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters may be specific to individual users in that they repeat as a pattern for combinations of parameters, and changes in these behaviors may be used to gauge a change in the user's mood when the identifying patterns are altered or disrupted. For example, a user may type more forcefully or rapidly when stressed, or may make more mistakes (typing off-center or mistyping) when fatigued. The typing profile based mood sensing system 626 in an embodiment may develop a personal typing profile for a given user during an initial setup period in which the user is relaxed, and generally calm, in order to establish a personal typing profile for a baseline mood. This personal typing profile may provide the baseline against which future metrics may be compared to detect a user's mood changes).
Regarding Claim 52, Knopper and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper further teaches a host device comprising the solid state keyboard device of claim 31, wherein the host device comprises a laptop, notebook, netbook or tablet computer, a mobile telephone, a portable device, or an accessory device for use with a laptop, notebook, netbook or tablet computer, a mobile telephone, or a portable device (see Fig. 5, para. [0024], para. [0048] and para. [0108]. An information handling system 100 may be a personal computer, mobile device (e.g., personal digital assistant (PDA) or smart phone), server (e.g., blade server or rack server), a consumer electronic device, a network server or storage device, a network router, switch, or bridge, wireless router, or other network communication device, a network connected device (cellular telephone, tablet device, etc.), IoT computing device, wearable computing device, a set-top box (STB), a mobile information handling system, a palmtop computer, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, a communications device, an access point (AP), a base station transceiver, a wireless telephone, a control system, a camera, a scanner, a printer, a pager, a personal trusted device, a web appliance, or any other suitable machine capable of executing a set of instructions (sequential or otherwise) that specify actions to be taken by that machine, and may vary in size, shape, performance, price, and functionality).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation) further in view of Hamilton et al. (US 20210389825 A1, hereinafter referenced as Hamilton).
Regarding Claim 33, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 32.
Knoppert and Yang do not explicitly disclose wherein the set of ultrasonic output signals is generated or selected to achieve a beamforming effect.
However, Hamilton teaches wherein the set of ultrasonic output signals is generated or selected to achieve a beamforming effect (see para. [0039]. In variations involving ultrasonic tactile stimulation, the ultrasonic tactile stimulation is preferably produced at mid-air localized points perceivable by a user with phased array beamforming (e.g., through a set of beamforming algorithms implemented at a processing system associated with the tactile device), which enables virtual objects to be accurately and perceivably produced with high tactile resolution. Additionally or alternatively, the ultrasonic tactile stimulation can be produced with any other algorithms, processes, and/or phenomena).
Knoppert, Yang and Hamilton are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Hamilton’s teachings of providing ultrasonic output signal generated to achieve a beamforming effect, since it would have produced high tactile resolution (Hamilton para. [0039]).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation) further in view of Ebefors (US 20210162457 A1).
Regarding Claim 34, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knopper and Yang do not explicitly teach detect proximity of an object or a user gesture based on a reflected ultrasonic signal detected by the plurality of haptic actuators.
However, Ebefors teaches detect proximity of an object or a user gesture based on a reflected ultrasonic signal detected by the plurality of haptic actuators (see Fig. 2, Fig. 8, para. [0058], para. [0092], para. [0112]. In some embodiments, wherein the (micromachined ultrasonic transducer) MUT 200 is to be used not only for emitting ultrasonic signals, but also for recognizing whether there is an object in its vicinity, at least one of the acoustic MUT elements 210 of the MUT 200 may be configured to detect entry and exit of an object in a field of detection of the at least one acoustic MUT element 210; generate a detection signal SRx indicative of the detected entry and exit to a transducer controller 120; and send the detection signal SRx to a controller 120 being communicably coupled to the array of acoustic MUT elements 210 and being configured to identify a gesture based on the detection signal SRx. The at least one acoustic MUT element 210 may be configured to detect entry and exit of the object in a field of detection of the at least one acoustic MUT element 210 by generating an ultrasonic signal, or ultrasonic waves, for reflection off the object. In one or more embodiments, the at least one of the MUT element may be configured to detect entry and exit of the object in a field of detection of the at least one MUT element by emitting an ultrasonic signal, or un-modulated ultrasonic waves, for reflection off the object. FIG. 2 illustrates that the acoustic MUT elements may be configured to receive a reflected ultrasonic signal or waves 240.sub.1 . . . j from an object located at the common focal point 230. The object may be a body part of a human, for example a finger, a palm of a hand, a wrist, a foot, part of the chest, the neck, or an ear. The at least one of the acoustic MUT elements configured to detect entry and exit of an object in a field of detection may be, but are not necessarily, part of the at least two MUT elements configured to generate the respective ultrasonic signal).
Knoppert, Yang and Ebefors are related to haptic devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Ebefors teachings, since it would have provide the advantages of being very cost effective (see Ebefors, para. [0016]).
Claims 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation) further in view of Liu et al. (US 20230359351 A1, hereinafter referenced as Liu).
Regarding Claim 43, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 31.
Knoppert and Yang do not explicitly teach wherein the user interaction layer comprises a touch-sensitive layer or a force-sensitive layer.
However, Liu teaches wherein the user interaction layer comprises a touch-sensitive layer or a force-sensitive layer (see Fig. 3. Fig. 5, para. [0024], para. [0363]-[0364], para. [0366]-[0367]and para. [0373]. According to a second aspect, an embodiment of this application provides an electronic device, which may be used in the field of virtual keyboards. The electronic device is provided with a touchscreen. The touchscreen includes a tactile sensing module and a vibration feedback module. The tactile sensing module is configured to obtain first location information of a first contact point on the touchscreen. The tactile sensing module may be represented as a tactile sensing film, and the tactile sensing film may be a capacitive tactile sensing film, a pressure tactile sensing film, a temperature tactile sensing film, or another type of film. FIG. 5 shows an example in which the cover 300 and the tactile sensing module 100 are integrated).
Knoppert, Yang and Liu are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Liu’s teachings, since it would have added functionalities to the keyboard while integrating sensing structures into a single layer.
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A) further in view of Gajiwala et al. (US 20210240267 A1, hereinafter referenced as Gajiwala).
Regarding Claim 47, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 46.
Knopper further teaches wherein the haptic output generation circuitry is further configured to generate an audio output signal or to retrieve from the memory a predefined audio output signal for output based on a signal output by the processing circuitry (see para. [0019]-[0023] and para. [0134] By applying voltages of varying magnitude and polarity to each of the piezo elements in a piezo haptic keyboard assembly in such a way, a controller may control the factors influencing a user's tactile experience, including the force she must use to depress a key, the speed and force with which each of the keycaps returns to its neutral position after being depressed, and the sound such an interaction generates. Each of these factors may be adjusted to, allowing for a wide range of tactile and audio experiences for users. Once the typing profile based mood sensing system 626 associates a detected change in haptic hardware typing or touch behavior parameters 610 with a known mood classification, the typing profile based mood sensing system 626 may determine a mood classification and suggest or automatically apply changes to one or more of the factors controlling the user's haptic experience of the piezo haptic keyboard assembly or the haptic touchpad. Each mood classification may be associated in memory of a mood correlation database with a mood based haptic setting adjustments 670 associated with a mood classification in an embodiment. A mood classification for “fatigued” may be associated in memory with a mood based haptic setting adjustments 670 that keeps the user more alert, such as an increase display brightness or audio volume, such as with audio keystroke feedback or other audio indicators. As yet another example, a mood classification for “relaxed” may be associated in memory with a mood based haptic setting adjustments 670 that decreases the force required to register a keystroke, or decreases the intensity, duration, and sharpness of vibration or haptic feedback movement following a keystroke. In other embodiments mood classification for “relaxed” may be associated in memory with a mood based haptic setting adjustments 670 that invokes a quiet mode, a decrease in audio volume levels of haptic keystroke feedback or for other system indicators or may reduce brightness levels for a display).
Knoppert and Yang do not explicitly teach wherein the haptic output generation circuitry is further configured to generate an audio output signal or to retrieve a predefined audio output signal for output to a second set of one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators, different than the first set.
However, Gajiwala teaches wherein the haptic output generation circuitry is further configured to generate an audio output signal or to retrieve a predefined audio output signal for output to a second set of one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators, different than the first set, based on a signal output by the processing circuitry (see para. [0016]-[0019], para. [0036], para. [0039]-[0041] and para. [0065]. The keyboard of the information handling system, in an embodiment, may include a controller of the information handling system operatively coupled to the contact foil to receive a haptic actuation indicator signal (e.g., a piezo actuation signal) in the form of an electric charge from the piezoelectric element placed under the mechanical stress. The haptic actuation indicator signal may indicate to the controller that a responsive haptic event (e.g., haptic sound feedback or haptic movement feedback) is appropriate. The controller may transmit a haptic movement feedback control signal to a first piezoelectric element to cause haptic movement feedback (tactile sensations felt by the user's finger) at a first location on the haptic keyboard, touchpad, or palm rest, and transmit a separate haptic sound feedback control signal to a second piezoelectric element. The haptic sound feedback control signal in such an example embodiment may cause haptic sound feedback (e.g., click, buzz) at a second location on the haptic keyboard, touchpad, or palm rest. In such a way, the controller may cause two separate piezoelectric elements to provide haptic movement feedback and haptic sound feedback in tandem, and in response to a single received haptic actuation indicator signal (e.g., a piezo actuation signal). The haptic feedback keyboard and touchpad control system 132 may, according to the present description, perform tasks related to receiving an electric charge from a piezoelectric element and return a haptic feedback control signal to that piezoelectric element causing a haptic feedback at a key of the keyboard 114 associated with that piezoelectric element. Input may be received by the haptic feedback keyboard and touchpad control system 132 either simultaneously or concurrently so as to provide a return haptic feedback control signal to the corresponding piezoelectric elements as described herein. A separate haptic feedback control signal for tactile movement feedback may be provided to the actuated piezoelectric element or piezoelectric elements while another haptic feedback control signal for audio feedback may be provided to other piezoelectric elements such as adjacent piezoelectric elements to the actuated piezoelectric elements or located elsewhere according to some embodiments herein. The keyboard controller 130 of the information handling system 100 may access one or more look-up tables (e.g., movement look-up table or sound look-up table). In this embodiment, the keyboard controller 130 of the information handling system 100 may access the look-up tables in order to determine characteristics (e.g., voltage magnitude, frequency, polarity) of a haptic feedback control signal to be applied to any given piezoelectric element to achieve known, user-specified, or learned (e.g., by a neural network) haptic movement intensity levels, haptic sound volume levels, or both).
Knoppert, Yang and Gajiwala are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Gajiwala’s teachings since it would have provided audible haptic sound and haptic feedback against the user's finger causing a sensation of pressing a mechanical key thereby creating a feeling and sound effect to a user that the key was pressed or that a touchpad has been clicked to select an item such as one displayed on a display screen. Various haptic feedback may be utilized to generate any variety of tactile haptic feedback sensations or a variety of audio feedback signals (Gajiwala, para. [0017]).
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation) further in view of Miller et al. (US 20190094973 A1, hereinafter referenced as Miller).
Regarding Claim 49, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 48.
Knoppert and Yang do not explicitly disclose the solid state keyboard device is configured to reduce an amplitude of the haptic output from a first, relatively higher level, to a final, relatively lower level, over the predefined period of time.
However, Miller teaches the solid state keyboard device is configured to reduce an amplitude of the haptic output from a first, relatively higher level, to a final, relatively lower level, over the predefined period of time (see Fig. 3 and para. [0069] As shown, the amplitude of the haptic waveform at time T0 and T1 is the same as at time T2 and T3 whereas the amplitude at time T4 to T5 is lower, and lower still at time T6 to T7. This may function as a “ring down,” ensuring that a user stops feeling a haptic output at a time controlled by the electronic device. Accordingly, it should be appreciated that amplitude of a haptic output may vary).
Knoppert, Yang and Miller are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Miller’s teachings, since it would have ensured that a user stops feeling a haptic output at a time controlled by the electronic device (Miller. para. [0069]).
Claims 50-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knoppert (US 20210240283 A1) in view of), in view of Yang (CN111176449A, see attached English Translation) further in view of Benkreira et al. (US 11112909 B1, hereinafter referenced as Benkreira).
Regarding Claim 50, Knoppert and Yang teach the solid state keyboard device according to claim 31.
Knoppert further teaches a host device incorporating or using the solid state keyboard device (see Fig. 5, para. [0024], para. [0048] and para. [0108]. An information handling system 100 may be a personal computer, mobile device (e.g., personal digital assistant (PDA) or smart phone), server (e.g., blade server or rack server), a consumer electronic device, a network server or storage device, a network router, switch, or bridge, wireless router, or other network communication device, a network connected device (cellular telephone, tablet device, etc.), IoT computing device, wearable computing device, a set-top box (STB), a mobile information handling system, a palmtop computer, a laptop computer, a desktop computer, a communications device, an access point (AP), a base station transceiver, a wireless telephone, a control system, a camera, a scanner, a printer, a pager, a personal trusted device, a web appliance, or any other suitable machine capable of executing a set of instructions (sequential or otherwise) that specify actions to be taken by that machine, and may vary in size, shape, performance, price, and functionality).
Knoppert and Yang do not explicitly teach wherein the solid state keyboard device is operable to cause one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators to generate the haptic output at the user interaction layer in response to an alert, warning or error condition of a host device.
However, Benkreira teaches wherein the solid state keyboard device is operable to cause one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators to generate the haptic output at the user interaction layer in response to an alert, warning or error condition of a host device incorporating or using the solid state keyboard device (see col. 78 lines 9-45, col. 12 lines 15-54. The user computing device 101 may include a virtual keyboard, usable by a touch screen. Haptic feedback may be used to alert the user of the user computing device 101 of errors as soon as an error is made or with specified latency, such as, e.g., time-based or event-based latency definitions).
Knoppert, Yang and Benkreira are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Benkreira’s teachings, since it would have improved the keyboard by efficiently and effectively notifying a user of an error. It would have also improved error detection techniques for more intelligent, context-sensitive detection, and improved notification systems and methods to more effectively. Based on such technical features, further technical benefits become available to users and operators of these systems and methods (Benkreira, col. 4 lines 32-48).
Regarding Claim 51, Knoppert, Yang and Benkreira teach the solid state keyboard device of claim 50.
Knoppert further teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the haptic output comprise one or more of: an amplitude; a frequency; a duration; and a duty cycle (see para. [0044], para. [0062]-[0063]. para. [0065], para. [0089]para. [0137]. The controller may apply a series of voltage pulses to the piezo electric element 220, via the contact foil 210, causing the piezo element 220 to vibrate, pulse, or move between its upward warped, downward warped, or neutral positions over a preset time period. The controller may set the cycle of movement, pulsing, and intensity of the piezo element 220 movement by adjusting the amplitude, polarity, pulsing, or waveform of the haptic control signal provided to a piezo electric element 220. The controller in another example may set the duration of such a haptic response by adjusting the period of haptic response, or the duration of time between detection of the keystroke and deflection of the piezo element 220).
Benkreira further teaches wherein one or more parameters of the haptic output are variable according to the alert, warning or error condition of the host device (see col. 78 lines 9-45, col. 12 lines 15-54. The haptic feedback engine 140 may vary the haptic event pulse patterns of the haptic feedback pattern 107 based on a type of error according to the error type classification. Thus, the length and number of pulses may be customized to represent to the user the type of error detected, such as, e.g., error type, error severity, or both. For example, more pulses may indicate a potential error that is more egregious, while variations to duration, pitch, amplitude, etc. of each pulse may indicate the type of the error, e.g., a grammatical type, vocabulary, or other type according to the error characterization as described above).
Knoppert, Yang and Benkreira are related to input devices, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the solid state keyboard disclosed by Knoppert and Yang with Benkreira’s teachings, since it would have improved the keyboard by efficiently and effectively notifying a user of an error. It would have also improved error detection techniques for more intelligent, context-sensitive detection, and improved notification systems and methods to more effectively. Based on such technical features, further technical benefits become available to users and operators of these systems and methods (Benkreira, col. 4 lines 32-48).
Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gandolfo (US 20200218867 A1) in view of Arellano et al. (US 20210397802 A1, hereinafter referenced as Arellano).
Regarding Claim 53, Gandolofo teach a keyboard comprising (Note: When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation the recitation of “keyboard” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02):
Gandolfo teaches a plurality of haptic actuators (see Fig. 4a, ultrasonic transducers 213 and 312), wherein the plurality of haptic actuators is operable as an ultrasonic transmitter array and/or an ultrasonic sensor array (see Figs. 2-4A, para. [0022]-[0024]. A second set of ultrasonic transducers (213) placed under the cover glass (101) along two of the four screen edges in order to provide haptic feedback to the end-user. Illustrated by FIG. 4a, ultrasonic transducers for fingerprint sensing (105), haptic feedback (213) and movement recognition/3D positioning (312) are jointly implemented and all connected (111) to the multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller (104)—the phased array of ultrasonic transducers used for fingerprint scanning (105) being centralised in one location.); and
a single integrated circuit (see Fig. 4A, multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller (104), para. [0024]) comprising:
“circuitry” configured to receive a signal from one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators (see Figs. 3-4, para. [0023]-[0024]. The multi-function ultrasonic set controller (104) is connected (111) to one air-coupled ultrasonic transducer (312) placed under the cover glass (101) for movement recognition (inc. proximity sensing, gesture and respiration/breathing monitoring) through time-of-flight and velocity measurements of a nearby object (313) within field of view—ultrasonic generated waves (314) bouncing off obstacles in their path and detected back by the same piezoelectric membranes running in a microphone mode Movement recognition/3D positioning (air-coupled ultrasonic transducer) (312) are jointly implemented and all connected (111) to the multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller (104)); and
output driver circuitry, wherein the output driver circuity is configured to supply a haptic drive signal to one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators (see Fig. 4a, para. [0022], para. [0024]. The multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller (104) is connected (111) to a second set of ultrasonic transducers (213) placed under the cover glass (101) along two of the four screen edges in order to provide haptic feedback to the end-user. The transverse standing waves (214) created as a result are amplitude-modulated, thus conveying the surface roughness of a displayed image through friction modulation—higher vibration leading to lower friction. Different spatial frequency can further be used for the emulation of different textures. Haptic feedback (213) and movement recognition/3D positioning (312) are jointly implemented and all connected (111) to the multi-function ultrasonic sensor controller (104)).
Gandolfo does not explicitly teach the circuitry is a force-sensing front end circuitry configured to receive a signal.
However, Arellano teaches the circuitry is force-sensing front end circuitry configured to receive a signal (see para. [0025], para. [0060], para. [0064]-[0065], para. [0067]-[0073], Fig. 6. The finger hover may be detected by beamforming ultrasonic pressure waves through the display module. one or more processors receive, via the pressure wave module, at least one response pressure wave in response to the beamformed ultrasonic pressure waves. FIG. 6 illustrates detecting the finger hover based on beamformed pressure waves. The one or more processors detect a finger hover above the display module based on the at least one response pressure wave).
Gandolfo and Arellano are related to devices with ultrasonic sensing, thus one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of modifying the device disclosed by Gandolfo with Arellano’s teachings, since it would have improved the use of ultrasonic pressure wave such that a finger hover may be detected at greater distances above the display module. Such techniques may involve beamforming ultrasonic pressure wave through different portions of the display module, providing for a better received signal strength associated with pressure waves reflected off of a hovering finger and allowing the finger to be detected at greater distances above the display module (see Arellano, para. [0060]).
Additional Rejection
Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebefords (US 20210162457 A1).
Regarding Claim 53, a keyboard comprising (Note: When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation the recitation of “keyboard” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02):
Ebefords teaches a plurality of haptic actuators (see Figs. 1a-2, Figs. 6-8, para. [0040]-[0042], para. [0054]. The system 100 comprises an array of acoustic micromachined ultrasonic transducer, MUT, elements 210.sub.1 . . . i. The array of acoustic MUT elements 210.sub.1 . . . i may be a two dimensional array comprised on a planar surface, e.g. as shown in FIG. 1. The controller 120 may configured to control each of the two or more acoustic MUT elements 210 to emit the modulated ultrasonic signal 220 at a frequency within a frequency spectrum configured to produce a human perceivable sensory stimuli, so as to produce human perceivable sensory feedback if sensed by a human sensory organ at the common focal point 230), wherein the plurality of haptic actuators is operable as an ultrasonic transmitter array and/or an ultrasonic sensor array (see Figs. 1a-2, Figs. 6-8, para. [0040]-[0042], para. [0054]. The system 100 comprises an array of acoustic micromachined ultrasonic transducer); and
a circuit (see Fig. 2, controller 120, para. [0042], para. [0045], para. [0059]) comprising:
force-sensing front end circuitry configured to receive a signal from one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators (see Fig. 2, para. [0058]-[0060], para. [0092], para. [0112]. An analogue frontend block 122 configured to constitute a first interface towards the acoustic MUT elements 210.sub.1 . . . i. The analogue frontend block 122 may be implemented in an analogue circuit, more preferably in an application specific integrated circuit, ASIC. Wherein the MUT 200 is to be used not only for emitting ultrasonic signals, but also for recognizing whether there is an object in its vicinity, at least one of the acoustic MUT elements 210 of the MUT 200 may be configured to detect entry and exit of an object in a field of detection of the at least one acoustic MUT element 210; generate a detection signal SRx indicative of the detected entry and exit to a transducer controller 120; and send the detection signal SRx to a controller 120 being communicably coupled to the array of acoustic MUT elements 210 and being configured to identify a gesture based on the detection signal SRx); and
output driver circuitry, wherein the output driver circuity is configured to supply a haptic drive signal to one or more of the plurality of haptic actuators (see Fig. 2, para. [0045], para. [0049], para. [0051]-[0054], para. [0060], para. [0091]., para. [0103] , para. [0112]. The controller 120 is configured to control each of the two or more acoustic MUT elements 210 to emit a modulated ultrasonic signal 220 by, for each of the two or more acoustic MUT elements 210, generating a respective drive signal STx. The drive signal may also comprise voltages and/or currents needed to enable the two or more acoustic MUT elements to operate. The controller is further configured to, still for each of the acoustic MUT elements 210, send the respective STx to the acoustic MUT element 210. The controller 120 may be configured to control the two or more acoustic MUT elements 210 of the array to emit respective modulated ultrasonic signals 220 towards multiple common focal points 230.sub.1 . . . k. An example is shown in FIG. 8, wherein the system 100 is used in an HMI to enable a user to receive tactile feedback stimulation on a thumb 701 at a first common focal point 2301 and tactile feedback stimulation on an index finger 702 at a second common focal point 2302. By adding further common focus points 230 and/or swiftly switching between numerous common focus points, enabled thanks to the high frequency of the respective carrier wave 221, according to embodiments herein, a great number of feedback points, or even the sensory experience of touching a surface or three-dimensional volume, in air, may be achieved. To enable the sensory experience of touching a surface or three-dimensional volume, in air, multiple common focus points 230 are needed).
In another embodiment, Ebefors teaches the circuit is a single integrated circuit (see para. [0061], para. [0133]-[0134]. In different embodiments, the blocks of the controller 120 may be implemented in the form of several discrete parallel connected electrical components, or with some or all blocks implemented as a single component. By combining several blocks in one component, for example in an embodiment wherein only one or two ASICS comprise all of the blocks of the controller 120, the total size of the system 100 will be no more than one or a couple of centimeters in length and width respectively, which enables use in devices such as displays, mobile phones, smart television apparatuses, etc. At the same time, the number of available channels is substantially higher than what is enabled by existing non-miniaturized ultrasonic technologies. All of the process steps, as well as any sub-sequence of steps, described with reference to FIG. 10 above may be controlled by means of a programmed data processor. The carrier may be an integrated circuit in which the program is embedded, the integrated circuit being adapted for performing, or for use in the performance of, the relevant processes).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized the obviousness of combining several blocks in one component, for example only one ASICS comprise all of the blocks of the controller, since the total size of the system will be no more than one or a couple of centimeters in length and width respectively, which enables use in devices such as displays, mobile phones, smart television apparatuses, etc. (see para. [0061]).
Moreover, combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness.” Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 IVELISSE MARTINEZ QUILES whose telephone number is (571)270-7618. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM 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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at 571-272-3017. 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.
/IM/Examiner, Art Unit 2626
/TEMESGHEN GHEBRETINSAE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2626 6/29/26
Prosecution Insights