CTNF 18/992,198 CTNF 76604 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This Office Action is made in response to applicant’s papers filed on 01/08/2025. Claims 1-18 are currently pending in the application. An action follows below: Notice to Applicant(s) Since some U.S. applications are not properly translated from the foreign applications due to, e.g., incorrect gramma, missed punctuations, and etc., it is in the best interest of the patent community that applicant, in his/her normal review and/or rewriting of the disclosure, especially claims and, to take into consideration these editorial situations and make changes as necessary, in order to avoid at least unnecessary 112 issue(s). Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the feature, “ wherein the [[single]] excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises two different signals, one being a first excitation signal and another being a second excitation signal ” in claims 2 and 16 , must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. As per claim 1, this claim recites limitations, “ the controller is configured to determine whether the touch position information is in the virtual function region , and control the waveform generator to generate an excitation signal and output the excitation signal to the waveform processor if the touch position information is in the virtual function region ” in lines 6-9. Since the touch position information is mere non-physical coding data and the virtual function region is a physical region, it is considered that the above underlined limitations are not clearly defined. In addition to claim 1, this claim further recites a limitation, “ the processed signal ” in lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In addition to claim 1, this claim further recites a limitation, “ the piezoelectric driver is configured to generate deformation to drive the touch panel to vibrate ” in last two lines. The term “deformation” is defined as the action or process of changing in shape or distortion, especially through the application of pressure, at least by the Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Since it is not clear which element (e.g., the piezoelectric driver itself, the touch panel, or other element) is deformed or changed in shape so as to drive the touch panel to vibrate, it is considered that the above underlined limitations are not clearly defined. As per claims 2-14, these claims are therefore rejected for at least the reason set forth in claim 1. In addition to claim 4, this claim further recites a limitation, “ the first drive signal has an amplitude amplification between 2 times and 30 times compared to the amplitude of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator .” Since an amplitude amplification is a mere product of amplifying and does not have any unit in measurement and the amplitude of the first excitation signal is a maximum value of the excitation signal, i.e., the amplitude amplification of a signal and the amplitude of a signal are in two different categories, the amplitude amplification of the first drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal are in two different categories and are not compared with each other, thereby rendering this claim is not clearly defined. In addition to claim 10, this claim further recites a limitation, “ the frequency amplification circuit .” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As per claim 15, see the rejection of claim 1 for similar limitations. As per claims 16-18, these claims are therefore rejected for at least the reason set forth in claim 15. 07-30-01 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. 07-31-01 Claims 2-9 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As per claim 2, this claim recites limitations, “ wherein the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises a first excitation signal and a second excitation signal, and a wavelength of the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator is within an audio band ,” which include features, “ wherein the single excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises (i) a first excitation signal and a second excitation signal being separate from the first excitation signal or (ii) a combined excitation signal of a first excitation signal and a second excitation signal, and a wavelength of the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator is within an audio band ,” which were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The original disclosure, specifically pages 11-12 of the specification, explicitly discloses: “… In the present embodiment, during the first period , the waveform processor 102 is used to amplify the amplitude of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator 1011 to generate a first drive signal , and the piezoelectric driver 103 is excited by the first drive signal to generate a low-frequency vibration reminder; and during the second period , the waveform processor 102 used to amplify both the frequency and the amplitude of the second excitation signal generated by the waveform generator 1011 to generate a second drive signal , and the piezoelectric driver 103 is excited by the second drive signal to generate a surface haptic reminder … ” Further, the original disclosure explicitly discloses two distinct waveforms , one of the first drive signal shown in Fig. 4A and another of the second drive signal shown in Fig. 4B. See the above drawing objection as failing to show “ the [[single]] excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises two different signals, one being a first excitation signal and another being a second excitation signal .” Based on the above-discussed disclosure, the original disclosure discloses the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator being a first excitation signal during a first period or the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator being a second excitation signal during a second period. However, the original disclosure, including the original claim 2, does not explicitly disclose in detail “ the single excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises (i) a first excitation signal and a second excitation signal being separate from the first excitation signal or (ii) a combined excitation signal of a first excitation signal and a second excitation signal ,” as required by the above underlined limitations, so as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Note that there is no drawing to show a combination of the waveform of the first and second drive signals and a combination of the waveform of the first and second excitation signals, as required by the above features of the above underlined limitations. Moreover, in order to satisfy its burden under the written description requirement, a patent application must disclose the full scope of the claim. Univ. of Rochester v. G.D. Searle & Co., 358 F.3d 916, 920 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (The purpose of the written description requirement is to “ensure that the scope of the right to exclude, as set forth in the claims, does not overreach the scope of the inventor’s contribution to the field of art as described in the patent specification.”). Accordingly, the original disclosure does not contain such description and details regarding to the above underlined limitations of this claim, so as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As per claims 2-9, these claims are therefore rejected for at least the reason set forth in claim 2. As per claim 16, see the rejection of claim 2 for similar limitations. As per claims 17-18, these claims are therefore rejected for at least the reason set forth in claim 16. Notice to Applicant(s) Examiner notes that the specification is not the measure of invention. Therefore, limitations contained therein can’t be read into the claims for the purpose of avoiding the prior art. See In re Sporck, 55 CCPA 743, 386 F.2d 924, 155 USPQ 687 (1968). Further, the names/ terms of the features/elements used in the pending application or pending claims may be different from the names/terms of the matching features/ elements of the prior arts; however, the matching features/ elements of the prior arts contain all characteristics/ functions of the features/elements DEFINED by the pending claims. Note that in order to avoid confusion, the below citations in the below rejection(s) are mere one or more places in the reference to disclose the "claimed" limitation(s) and/or are directed to one or more of embodiments disclosed by the cited reference(s). In other words, the “claimed” features/limitations may be read in other places in the reference or other embodiments of the reference. In order to better understand how the claimed limitations are taught by the reference(s), a review of the entire reference(s) is suggested by the examiner. Applicant is reminded a prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention as not all relevant paragraphs may have been cited in the rejection. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) . 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. FIRST SET OF REJECTIONS : 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3, 5, 6 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Robert et al. ( US 9,753,541 B1; hereinafter Robert .) As per claim 1, Robert discloses a haptic feedback apparatus ( see at least Figs. 1A, 2A, 5I, 5J, 13; Col. 13:9-13, disclosing an electronic device [100/1300] ) comprising: a controller ( see at least Fig. 1A, disclosing a controller including at least elements [102, 104, 110, 161 and more]; further see at least Fig. 13, disclosing a controller including at least element 1308 ,) a waveform processor ( see at least Fig. 1A or 1C, disclosing a waveform processor including at least an element 163 ,) a piezoelectric driver ( see at least Fig. 1A/ 1C; Col. 23:24-31, disclosing a piezoelectric driver including element 167 ,) a touch panel ( see at least Fig. 1A, 2A, and 5I, disclosing a touch panel including element 112 ,) and a virtual function region ( see at least Fig. 5I, 5J, disclosing a user interface region 520, as a virtual function region ,) wherein: the controller comprises a waveform generator ( see at least Figs. 1A, 1C, disclosing the controller comprising a waveform generator including at least elements [133, 161, 110] ;) the touch panel is configured to detect touch position information of user interaction and output the touch position information to the controller ( see at least Figs. 1A, 5I, 5J; Col. 21:50-60; Col. 51:58-64; also see Fig. 13; Col. 97:51-59 ;) the controller is configured to determine whether the touch position information is in the virtual function region, and control the waveform generator to generate an excitation signal and output the excitation signal to the waveform processor if the touch position information is in the virtual function region ( see at least Figs. 1A, 1C; 5I, 5J; Col. 35:6-31, disclosing the controller configured to determine whether the touch position information is in the user interface region as the virtual function region, and controlling the waveform generator [133, 161] to generate an excitation signal and output the excitation signal to the waveform processor if the touch position information is in the user interface region, so as to provide tactile outputs ;) the waveform processor is configured to amplify the excitation signal and output the processed signal to the piezoelectric driver ( see at least Fig. 1C; Col. 38:4-40, disclosing the waveform processor including the amplifier 163 configured to amplify the excitation signal and output the amplified/processed signal to the element 167 of the piezoelectric driver ;) and the piezoelectric driver is configured to receive the processed signal and generate deformation to drive the touch panel to vibrate ( see at least Fig. 1C; Col. 23:32-42 .) As per claim 2, Robert discloses: wherein the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises a first excitation signal or a second excitation signal, and a wavelength of the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator is within an audio band ( see at least Figs. 1A, 1C; Col. 35:6-31, disclosing the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator [133, 161] comprising a first/ second excitation signal; further see at least Col 1:47-52; Col. 14:63-67; Col. 35:6-31, disclosing the haptic feedback including audio feedback, thereby rendering a wavelength of the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator being within an audio band .) As per claim 3, Robert discloses: wherein the waveform processor comprises: an amplitude amplification circuit; and the amplitude amplification circuit is provided between the waveform generator and the piezoelectric driver, and is configured to output a drive signal after amplifying an amplitude of the first excitation signal, and output the drive signal to the piezoelectric driver ( see the discussion in the rejection of claim 1 for the waveform generator and the piezoelectric driver; further see at least Figs. 1C, 4F, 4G; Col. 14:9-24; Col. 38:4-40, disclosing the waveform processor comprising the amplifier 163 including an amplitude amplification circuit provided between the waveform generator and the piezoelectric driver and configured to output a drive signal after amplifying an amplitude of the first excitation signal, and output the drive signal to the piezoelectric driver .) As per claim 5, Robert discloses: wherein the drive signal comprises a first drive signal, a frequency of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and a frequency of the first drive signal are between 50 Hz and 500 Hz, and the frequency of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and the frequency of the first drive signal are the same ( see at least Figs. 4F, 4G, Col. 48:25-28, disclosing the frequency between 60 HZ and 400 Hz .) As per claim 6, Robert discloses: wherein the waveform processor further comprises: a frequency amplification circuit; and the frequency amplification circuit connects the waveform generator and the amplitude amplification circuit, and the frequency amplification circuit is configured to output the first excitation signal after amplifying a frequency of the second excitation signal generated by the waveform generator, and output the first excitation signal to the amplitude amplification circuit ( see the discussion in the rejection of claim 1 for the waveform generator and the piezoelectric driver and the discussion in the rejection of claim 3 for the amplitude amplification circuit; further see at least Figs. 1C, 4F, 4G; Col. 14:9-24; Col. 38:4-40, disclosing the waveform processor comprising the amplifier 163 including a frequency amplification circuit connecting the waveform generator and the amplitude amplification circuit, and configured to output the first excitation signal after amplifying a frequency of the second excitation signal generated by the waveform generator, and output the first excitation signal to the amplitude amplification circuit .) As per claim 12, Robert discloses: wherein the haptic feedback apparatus comprises a cover plate, and the piezoelectric driver is provided on the cover plate ( see at least Fig. 2A, disclosing the electronic device, as the haptic feedback apparatus, comprising a housing including a bottom cover plate and enclosing a plurality of elements shown in at least Figs. 1A and 1C and including the piezoelectric driver discussed in the rejection of claim 1, thereby rendering the piezoelectric driver provided on the bottom cover plate .) As per claim 13, Robert discloses: wherein the virtual function region comprises a virtual function pattern region disposed on a cover plate, the virtual function pattern region is provided with one or more virtual function patterns, and the virtual function pattern comprises at least one of following patterns: a key, a progress bar, and a dial ( see at least Figs. 5I, 5J, disclosing the user interface region 520, as the virtual function pattern region, disposed on a bottom cover plate of the housing or any plate/ layer/ substrate disposed below the touch screen 112, the user interface region 520 provided with one or more virtual function patterns, such as keys of virtual keyboard menu icons [524-526] and more, and the virtual function pattern comprises a key; further see any of Figs. 5A-5H showing the virtual function pattern comprises a progress bar .) As per claim 14, Robert discloses: wherein the haptic feedback apparatus further comprises a display module, which comprises a display panel, and the display panel is used for displaying a human-computer interaction interface containing the virtual function region. As per claims 15-18, since these method claims are similar to the apparatus claims 1-3 and 6, see the discussion in the rejections of claims 1-3 and 6 for similar limitations . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert . Regarding to claim 4, due to the above rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and a further consideration, it is assumed that an amplitude amplification of the first drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal are in the same category in order to perform a comparison between these two elements. As per claim 4, Robert discloses the drive signal comprising a first drive signal having an amplitude amplification adjustable and the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and having an amplitude amplification adjustable ( see at least Fig. 1C; Col. 14:14-24; Col. 38:4-40 .) Accordingly, Robert discloses all limitations of this claim except for the particular range of the amplitude amplification, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while Robert may not exemplify the particular range of the amplitude amplification, so as to render “an amplitude amplification of the first drive signal being between 2 times and 30 times compared to the amplitude of the first excitation signal,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the Robert apparatus having the particular range of the amplitude amplification, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of Robert obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 7, Robert discloses a frequency of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit being adjustable, the frequency of the second excitation signal being adjustable, and various different frequencies with various gains ( see at least Figs. 4F, 4G and the corresponding description; Col. 14:14-24; Col. 15:11-35; Col. 38:4-40 .) Accordingly, Robert discloses all limitations of this claim except for the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while Robert may not exemplify the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, so as to render “ a frequency of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit is m times the frequency of the second excitation signal; wherein in is any value from 2 to 10 ,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the Robert apparatus having the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of Robert obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 8, Robert discloses the drive signal comprising a second drive signal having an adjustable amplitude, the adjustable amplitude of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit (see the rejection of claim 6 for the frequency amplification circuit; further ( see at least Fig. 1C; Col. 14:14-24; Col. 38:4-40 .) Accordingly, Robert discloses all limitations of this claim except for the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while Robert may not exemplify the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, so as to render “ an amplitude of the second drive signal is n times the amplitude of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit, wherein n is any value from 2 to 30 ,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the Robert apparatus having the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of Robert obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 9, Robert discloses frequencies of the first excitation signal and the second drive signal output by the frequency amplification circuit, but is silent to frequencies of the first excitation signal and the second drive signal output by the frequency amplification circuit are greater than 20 kHz. Official Notice is taken that both the concept and the advantages of utilizing the frequencies of the first excitation signal and the second drive signal to match the resonance frequency of the piezoelectric driver, which is greater than 20 kHz to reduce the cost and/or power consumption are well-known and expected in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to utilize the frequencies of the first excitation signal and the second drive signal to match the resonance frequency of the piezoelectric driver, which is greater than 20 kHz, so as to reduce the cost and/or power consumption. As per claim 10, Robert discloses the amplifier [163] including a frequency amplification circuit configured to adjust, set, or change the frequency of the tactile outputs ( see at least Figs. 1C, 4F, 4G; Col. 14:9-24; Col. 15:4-35 ,) but is silent to the frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, as claimed. Official Notice is taken that both the concept and the advantages of utilizing a frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, to reduce the cost are well-known and expected in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to utilize the frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, in the apparatus of Robert, so as to reduce the cost. As per claim 11, Robert discloses the waveform generator comprising an audio controller/chip ( see the discussion in the rejection of claim 1 for the waveform generator; further see Col. 35: 6-31, disclosing an audio controller/chip 110 configured to output the excitation signal for generating audio signals and waveforms for tactile feedback including audio feedback (see at least Col. 5:49-50) .) Robert is silent to the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal. Official Notice is taken that both the concept and the advantages of utilizing the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal to maintain the frequency characteristics of high-frequency carrier while its amplitude determined by the strength of the modulated signal are well-known and expected in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to utilize the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal in the apparatus of Robert, so as to maintain the frequency characteristics of high-frequency carrier while its amplitude determined by the strength of the modulated signal, as generally known and expected in the art. SECOND SET OF REJECTIONS : 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. ( WO 2023/039759 A1; see the corresponding US 2024/0184366 A1 for the following citations; hereafter Yang ) in view of Kim et al. ( US 2020/0150768 A1; hereinafter Kim .) As per claim 1, Yang discloses a haptic feedback apparatus ( see at least Figs. 6, 7; a haptic reproduction device ) comprising: a controller ( see at least Figs. 6,7, disclosing a controller [602/700] ,) a waveform processor, a piezoelectric driver ( see at least Figs. 3A, 6; ¶ 69, disclosing a haptic reproduction module 603 including a piezoelectric driver; also see ¶¶ 105-106 ,) and a touch panel ( see at least Figs. 3A-3C, 6; ¶ 55, disclosing a touch display substrate/panel 1031/601 ,) wherein: the haptic feedback apparatus further comprising a virtual function region ( see at least Fig. 2; ¶ 54, a virtual functional area ,) the controller comprises a waveform generator ( see at least 4A-5B; ¶¶ 23-25, 64, 92-98, disclosing the controller comprising a waveform generator generating and providing excitation signals having various waveforms, such as sine wave, square wave, triangular wave waveforms ;) the touch panel is configured to detect touch position information of user interaction and output the touch position information to the controller ( see at least Figs. 1, 5; ¶¶ 100-101 ;) the controller is configured to determine whether the touch position information is in the virtual function region, and control the waveform generator to generate an excitation signal and output the excitation signal as the drive signal to the waveform processor haptic reproduction module if the touch position information is in the virtual function region ( see at least Figs. 1, 5; ¶¶ 100-104 ;); the waveform processor is configured to amplify the excitation signal and output the processed signal to the piezoelectric driver; and the piezoelectric driver is configured to receive the processed signal the drive signal and generate deformation to drive the touch panel to vibrate ( see at least Fig. 1, 6; ¶ 102-106 .) Accordingly, Yang discloses all limitations of this claim except for a waveform processor and limitations associated with the waveform processor, as claimed. However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses the haptic feedback apparatus ( see Fig. 7d ) comprising a controller [740] comprising a waveform generator generating excitation signals having various waveforms, such as sine waves, triangular waves, square waves, etc. ( see ¶ 93 ); a waveform processor receiving the excitation signal, amplifying the excitation signal, and output the processed signal to drive the actuator/driver [770] ( see Fig. 7d; ¶ 92-93, disclosing a waveform processor comprising elements [751-753, 761, 762] ,) thereby rendering the haptic device/apparatus at least changing an operation time, a frequency, and an amplitude of each generated wave, thereby generating various haptic stimuli ( see at least ¶ 92: last 4 lines .) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to modify the apparatus of Yang to include a waveform processor, in view of the teaching in the Kim reference, to improve the above modified apparatus of the Kim reference for the predictable result of capable of changing an operation time, a frequency, and an amplitude of each generated wave, thereby at least generating various haptic stimuli. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 2, the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: wherein the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator comprises a first excitation signal and/or a second excitation signal, and a wavelength of the excitation signal generated by the waveform generator is within an audio band ( see Kim at least ¶ 45: “… For example, when the input signal 130 is an audio signal, the haptic control signal providing apparatus 110 may generate a haptic control signal corresponding to an audio bit pattern of the audio signal …” As per claim 3, the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: wherein the waveform processor comprises: an amplitude amplification circuit; and the amplitude amplification circuit is provided between the waveform generator and the piezoelectric driver, and is configured to output a drive signal after amplifying an amplitude of the first excitation signal, and output the drive signal to the piezoelectric driver ( see Kim at least ¶ 93 .) As per claim 4, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders the drive signal comprising a first drive signal having an amplitude amplification adjustable and the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and having an amplitude amplification adjustable ( see Kim at least ¶ 93 .) Accordingly, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim except for the particular range of the amplitude amplification, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while the above modified Yang in view of Kim may not exemplify the particular range of the amplitude amplification, so as to render “an amplitude amplification of the first drive signal being between 2 times and 30 times compared to the amplitude of the first excitation signal,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim having the particular range of the amplitude amplification, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 5, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: wherein the drive signal comprises a first drive signal, a frequency of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and a frequency of the first drive signal are between 50 Hz and 500 Hz, and the frequency of the first excitation signal generated by the waveform generator and the frequency of the first drive signal are the same ( see Yang “… exemplarily, when the frequency of a second signal is about 200 Hz, the vibration of a touch substrate is as shown in Fig. 3c, and at this time, the touch substrate resonates along a short side; and when the frequency of the second signal is about 500 Hz, the vibration of the touch substrate is as shown in Fig. 3d, and at this time, the touch substrate resonates along a long side …” .) As per claim 6, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: wherein the waveform processor further comprises: a frequency amplification circuit; and the frequency amplification circuit connects the waveform generator and the amplitude amplification circuit, and the frequency amplification circuit is configured to output the first excitation signal after amplifying a frequency of the second excitation signal generated by the waveform generator, and output the first excitation signal to the amplitude amplification circuit ( see Kim at least ¶ 93 .) As per claim 7, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: a frequency of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit being adjustable, the frequency of the second excitation signal being adjustable, and various different frequencies with various gains ( see Kim at least ¶¶ 92-93 .) Accordingly, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim except for the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while the above modified Yang in view of Kim may not exemplify the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, so as to render “ a frequency of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit is m times the frequency of the second excitation signal; wherein in is any value from 2 to 10 ,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim having the particular range of the sizes of the frequency of the first excitation signal and the frequency of the second excitation signal, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 8, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: the drive signal comprising a second drive signal having an adjustable amplitude, the adjustable amplitude of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit ( see Kim at least ¶¶ 92-93 .) Accordingly, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim except for the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, as claimed. However, a change in size was judicially recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968 (CCPA 1965); In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523 (CCPA 1961); In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); and In re Reven, 156 USPQ 679 (CCPA 1968) . Therefore, while the above modified Yang in view of Kim may not exemplify the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, so as to render “ an amplitude of the second drive signal is n times the amplitude of the first excitation signal output by the frequency amplification circuit, wherein n is any value from 2 to 30 ,” as presently claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to make the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim having the particular value of “n” or particular sizes/ values of the amplitude of the second drive signal and the amplitude of the first excitation signal, as desired as claimed, in accordance with a particular application. Accordingly, the above modified apparatus of the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders all limitations of this claim. As per claim 9, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: wherein frequencies of the first excitation signal and the second drive signal output by the frequency amplification circuit are greater than 20 kHz ( see Yang ¶ 61: “Exemplarily, the first signal may be a high-frequency signal (e.g., the frequency of the first signal may be 23.7 KHz) … (e.g., the frequency of the second signal may be 200 Hz) .) As per claim 10, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obviously renders: the amplifiers [761, 762] including a frequency amplification circuit configured to adjust, set, or change the frequency of the tactile outputs ( see Kim at least ¶¶ 92-93 ,) but is silent to the frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, as claimed. Official Notice is taken that both the concept and the advantages of utilizing a frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, to reduce the cost are well-known and expected in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to utilize the frequency amplification circuit comprising a frequency doubling circuit comprising a multiplier circuit, in the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim, so as to reduce the cost. As per claim 11, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obvious renders the feature of obtaining an excitation signal on the basis of an audio signal ( see Kim at least ¶¶ 48-49, disclosing the content of extracting a haptic signal on the basis of an audio input signal, i.e., disclosing the feature of obtaining an excitation signal on the basis of an audio signal .) The above modified Yang in view of Kim Robert is silent to use an audio chip to generate an audio signal and the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal. Official Notice is taken that both the concept and the advantages of utilizing an audio chip to generate an audio signal for simplifying the manufacture and the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal for maintaining the frequency characteristics of high-frequency carrier while its amplitude determined by the strength of the modulated signal are well-known and expected in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to utilize an audio chip to generate an audio signal and the excitation signal being an envelope-modulated carrier signal, in the above modified apparatus of Yang in view of Kim, so as to simplify the manufacture and to maintain the frequency characteristics of high-frequency carrier while its amplitude determined by the strength of the modulated signal, as generally known and expected in the art. As per claim 12, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obvious renders: wherein the haptic feedback apparatus comprises a cover plate, and the piezoelectric driver is provided on the cover plate ( see Yang at least Fig. 3A-3B, disclosing a top surface of the element 1031, as the claimed cover plate and the piezoelectric driver [1032] provided on the cover plate .) As per claim 13, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obvious renders: wherein the virtual function region comprises a virtual function pattern region disposed on a cover plate, the virtual function pattern region is provided with one or more virtual function patterns, and the virtual function pattern comprises at least one of following patterns: a key, a progress bar, and a dial ( see Yang at least Figs. 2, 3A, 3B, disclosing the virtual function region comprises a virtual function pattern region disposed on a cover plate [as a top surface of the element 1031], the virtual function pattern region is provided with one or more virtual function patterns, and the virtual function pattern comprises a key or a progress bar, shown in Fig. 2 .) As per claim 14, the above modified Yang in view of Kim obvious renders: wherein the haptic feedback apparatus further comprises a display module, which comprises a display panel, and the display panel is used for displaying a human-computer interaction interface containing the virtual function region ( see Yang at least Fig. 6 disclosing a display module as a display panel used for displaying a user interface containing a virtual functional area .) As per claims 15-18, since these method claims are similar to the apparatus claims 1-3 and 6, see the discussion in the rejections of claims 1-3 and 6 for similar limitations. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jimmy H Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-7675. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6PM. 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Jimmy H Nguyen/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 2 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 3 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 4 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 5 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 6 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 7 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 8 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 9 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 10 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 11 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 12 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 13 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 14 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 15 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 16 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 17 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 18 Art Unit: 2626 Application/Control Number: 18/992,198 Page 19 Art Unit: 2626
Prosecution Insights