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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asano (CN113327818).
Regarding claim 1, Asano teaches an operating device comprising: an operating unit 12 placed apart from a substrate 18, the operating unit being pressed and operated by a user; a first elastic member 11 placed in abutment on the substrate and the operating unit between the substrate and the operating unit, the first elastic member having a spaced portion 112 formed apart from the substrate, the first elastic member deforming so that the spaced portion moves toward the substrate as a result that the operating unit is pressed and operated; an electroconductive second elastic member 16 on a surface facing the substrate of the spaced portion of the first elastic member, the second elastic member abutting on the substrate and deforming as a result that the operating unit is pressed and operated and the spaced portion moves toward the substrate; an electrode 17 provided on the substrate, the electrode generating capacitance with the second elastic member; and a detecting unit detecting the capacitance generated on the electrode and accepting an operation corresponding to a detected value of the capacitance (Figs. 1-9 and paragraph 6 of page 5 of the enclosed translation).
Regarding claim 2, Asano teaches the operating device wherein the second elastic member 16 is configured to abut on the substrate 18 as a result that the operating unit 12 is pressed and operated and the spaced portion 112 of the first elastic member moves toward the substrate (Fig. 7), and deform as a result that the operating unit is then further pressed and operated and the spaced portion further moves toward the substrate (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Asano teaches the operating device wherein the second elastic member 16 is formed of a metal leaf spring (paragraphs 14-15 of page 4 of the enclosed translation) and is configured so that the leaf spring deforms as a result that the operating unit 12 is pressed and operated in a state where the second elastic member abuts on the substrate (Figs. 1-9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asano in view Soma (US. Pat. 7,166,813).
Regarding claim 4, Asano does not teach the shape of the second elastic member. However, Soma teaches an operating device comprising: an operating unit 26 placed on a substrate 17, the operating unit being pressed and operated by a user; a first elastic member 25 placed in abutment on the substrate and the operating unit between the substrate and the operating unit, an electroconductive second elastic member 22 on a surface facing the substrate of the spaced portion of the first elastic member; wherein the second elastic member is formed in a dome shape opening toward the substrate (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the shape of the elastic member, since the particular claimed configuration is just one of numerous configurations a person of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing mating surfaces.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asano in view of Mittleman (US20130299331).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Asano does not teach the detecting unit accepts at least two different operations. However, Mittleman teaches a similar operating device that comprises a detecting unit or controller 330 that accepts at least two operations in accordance with the detected value of the capacitance (paragraphs 6, 30), as required by claim 5; wherein the detecting unit accepts at least two different operations in accordance with whether or not the detected value of the capacitance exceeds a preset threshold value (paragraphs 6, 30), as required by claim 6. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Mittleman in the switch device of Asano to provide a multi-stage switch that capable of accepting different operations at different points in the stroke.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination, the claimed device wherein the detecting unit detects the capacitance in a state where the user is close to or in contact with the operating unit and the second elastic member does not abut on the substrate, the capacitance in a state where the second elastic member abuts on the substrate, and the capacitance in a state where the second elastic member abuts on the substrate and then deforms, as being distinct from each other, and accepts operations different from each other in accordance with the detected values detected as being distinct from each other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED M SAEED whose telephone number is (571)270-7976. The examiner can normally be reached 10-8pm.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/AHMED M SAEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
