DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
1. Applicant’s Response to Election / Restriction Requirement filed December 29, 2025 is received and entered.
2. Applicant elected Group III, Species K, directed to FIG. 7 and claims 1, 5 – 9, and 11 – 12, without traverse.
3. Claims 2 – 4, 10, and 13 – 20 are withdrawn due to Applicant’s election. Claims 1, 5 – 9, and 11 – 12 are pending and are under examination in this action.
4. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1 and 5 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. Pub. 2014/0240245).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches: a display apparatus (FIG. 1; paragraph [0025]; display device 10) comprising:
a display panel including a hover sensing part (FIGS. 1, 8; paragraphs [0025], [0065], [0066]; UI unit 11 / 101 includes a display unit 103 [display panel] and sensor unit 102. Sensor unit 102 senses a user’s hovering movement that is apart from the UI unit 11 / 101 by a predetermined distance); and
a vibration element (FIG. 8; paragraph [0070]; tactile feedback unit 104 provides tactile feedback via vibration of a micro vibration actuator),
wherein the vibration element outputs ultrasonic waves to a hover sensing position of an object above the display panel, which is sensed by the hover sensing part (FIG. 8; paragraph [0072]; tactile feedback unit 104 creates ultrasonic waves at an area at which hovering movement is sensed [hover sensing position] as detected by the sensor unit 102).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose: the vibration element includes a plurality of vibration elements.
However, Kim explicitly states that tactile feedback is generated at specific areas in which a hover position is detected (paragraph [0072]).
Accordingly, it is implied that there are multiple micro vibration actuators dispersed relative to the display surface in order to provide location specific tactile feedback.
Additionally, it was well-known and conventional in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to include a plurality of vibration elements in a display device to provide tactile feedback.
Moreover, please see MPEP §2144.04(VI)(B) which refers to case law that has held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In this case, since location specific feedback is provided to a user via the disclosure of Kim, the utilization a plurality of vibration elements has a predictable results.
Kim fails to explicitly disclose: the vibration elements are disposed at a rear surface of the display panel.
However, Kim explicitly states that display unit 103 and sensor unit 102 may be integrated into a single unit (paragraph [0068]).
Accordingly, it is implied that the tactile feedback unit 104 is separate and apart from the display unit 103. Since these elements are separate, and display content is provided on an upper surface of the display unit 103, it is implied that the tactile feedback unit 104 is disposed beneath a rear surface of the display unit 103.
Additionally, it was well-known and conventional in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention for vibration elements that provide tactile feedback in a display device are disposed beneath a display panel.
Moreover, please see MPEP §2144.04(VI)(C) which refers to case law that has held that the particular placement of a claimed element is an obvious matter of design choice absence functional modification of the device.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to merely fill in the gaps of Kim to locate the tactile feedback unit 104 behind a rear surface of the display unit 103.
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches: wherein at least one of the plurality of vibration elements includes a first vibration generator that outputs the ultrasonic waves
a vibration element (FIG. 8; paragraphs [0070], [0072]; tactile feedback unit 104 creates ultrasonic waves via a micro vibration actuator [first vibration generator]).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose: a second vibration generator that outputs sound waves in an audible frequency range.
However, it was well-known and conventional in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention for a display device, such as the smart phone disclosed by Kim (paragraph [0024]), to include speakers for outputting audible sound waves, i.e., vibrations in the audible range.
Additionally, it was well-known and conventional in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention for such a display device to include speakers on a rear face thereof, i.e., disposed beneath a rear surface of a display panel. Evidence for this well-known and conventional teaching may be found in paragraph [0044] of Kang et al. (U.S. Pub. 2018/0035923).
Moreover, please see MPEP §2144.04(VI)(C) which refers to case law that has held that the particular placement of a claimed element is an obvious matter of design choice absence functional modification of the device.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to merely fill in the gaps of Kim, when incorporating the well-known and conventional teachings of a speaker, to simply rearrange the location of the speaker to be beneath a rear surface of the display panel.
Such a modification to Kim requires nothing more than acknowledging the implication that the device thereof includes a speaker, and that such speakers are known and obviously arranged beneath a display panel.
Regarding claim 6, Kim fails to explicitly disclose: wherein an area of the first vibration generator is smaller than an area of the second vibration generator.
However, please see MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A) which refers to case law that has held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions . . . and . . . the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently”, then “the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art”.
In other words, where the only difference between claimed subject matter and the prior art are dimensions that have no impact on functionality, then the dimensions are merely a matter of engineering design choice.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to configure the area of the first vibration generator to be smaller than the area of the second vibration generator as a mere matter of engineering design choice having no impact on the functionality of the device of Kim.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 7 – 9 and 11 – 12 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A LUBIT whose telephone number is (571)270-3389. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, ~6am - 3pm.
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.
/RYAN A LUBIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626