DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
2. 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
“…the at least one input module comprises a second interface having a transceiver corresponding to the transceiver of the base station…
…wherein the at least one input module further comprises a further interface having a further transmitter and a further receiver arranged at an edge of the at least one input module in a manner that the base station is configured to detect the configuration of the at least one input module by its interface.” (Claim 1).
(Please see Response to Arguments for detail).
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 § 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claim(s) 1-2, 13, 15, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629).
Regarding Claim 1, (Currently Amended)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
a system for providing an input ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. graphical pointer) for a computing device ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. computing system), comprising:
a base station ([0050], FIG. 3, i.e. local computing device 230), wherein the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) comprises a first interface having a transceiver ([0050], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 240); and
at least one input module ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. mobile device 204; [0074], FIG. 9, i.e. mobile device 204 … left, right and the scroll wheel as mouse buttons and a pointer centering) for connection to ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. transmit that graphical pointer data … over a wireless communications signal to a local computing device) the base station, wherein the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)) comprises a second interface having a transceiver ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 210) corresponding to the transceiver of the base station,
wherein the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is configured to detect configuration ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. configured to sense orientation of the mobile device) of the at least one input module in a manner that the transceiver of the base station is engaged with ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. transmit that graphical pointer data via the wireless transceiver 210 over a wireless communications signal to a local computing device … and a wireless transceiver 240 configured to receive the graphical pointer data) the transceiver of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)),
wherein the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)) further comprises a further interface having a further transmitter and a further receiver ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 210 (please note that a transceiver would have a transmitter and a receiver)) arranged at an edge (FIG. 3, i.e. top edge as shown by the figure(s)) arranged at an edge (FIG. 3, i.e. top edge as shown by the figure(s)) of the at least one input module in a manner that the base station is configured to detect the configuration ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. configured to sense orientation of the mobile device) of the at least one input module by its interface (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 2, (Currently Amended)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1,
wherein the transceiver of the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is a receiver ([0050], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 240 (please note that a transceiver would have a receiver)) and the transceiver of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is a transmitter ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 210 (please note that a transceiver would have a transmitter)),
wherein the first interface of the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) further comprises a transmitter ([0050], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 240 (please note that a transceiver would have a transmitter)) and the second interface of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)) further comprises a receiver ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. wireless transceiver 210 (please note that a transceiver would have a receiver)),
wherein the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is further configured to detect configuration ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. configured to sense orientation of the mobile device) of the at least one input module in a manner that the transmitter of the base station is engaged with ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. transmit that graphical pointer data via the wireless transceiver 210 over a wireless communications signal to a local computing device … and a wireless transceiver 240 configured to receive the graphical pointer data) the receiver of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 13, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1, wherein the configuration of the at least one input module comprises position and orientation ([0048], FIG. 3, i.e. mobile device's controller captures the device orientation updates and maps the angles to X-Y positions) of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Regarding Claim 15, (Currently Amended)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
a method ([0011], FIG. 3, i.e. method of controlling from a mobile device a graphical pointer) implemented in the system of claim 1, comprising:
detecting, by the base station, configuration ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. configured to sense orientation of the mobile device) of the at least one input module in a manner that the transceiver of the base station is engaged with ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. transmit that graphical pointer data via the wireless transceiver 210 over a wireless communications signal to a local computing device … and a wireless transceiver 240 configured to receive the graphical pointer data) the transceiver of the at least one input module.
Regarding Claim 21, (Currently Amended)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
a non-transitory computer readable medium storing computer program ([0027], FIG. 2, i.e. computer program) comprising instructions ([0027], FIG. 2, i.e. executable instruction) and a processor to cause the system of claim 1 (i.e. please see above citation(s)) to detect, by the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)), configuration ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. configured to sense orientation of the mobile device) of the at least one input module in a manner that the transceiver of the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is engaged with ([0049], FIG. 3, i.e. transmit that graphical pointer data via the wireless transceiver 210 over a wireless communications signal to a local computing device … and a wireless transceiver 240 configured to receive the graphical pointer data) the transceiver of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
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 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.
4. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629) in view of Hourmand et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20090098504).
Regarding Claim 7, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the receiver of the base station comprises a reed switch and the transmitter of the at least one input module comprises a magnet in a manner that the receiver of the base station is engaged with the transmitter of the at least one input module, thereby closing the reed switch.
In the same field of endeavor, Hourmand et al. teach
wherein the receiver of the base station ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. block 100) comprises a reed switch ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. reed switch 160) and the transmitter of the at least one input module ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. sub-block 200) comprises a magnet ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. magnet 240) in a manner that the receiver of the base station is engaged with ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. probe must be brought to close proximity of the base unit) the transmitter of the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)), thereby closing the reed switch ([0028], FIG. 3, i.e. so that the reed switch 160 is close).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with Hourmand et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit and a base unit utilizing reed switch coupling to magnet to effectively and wirelessly transfer data in at close proximity (Hourmand et al.’s [0028]).
5. Claim(s) 8-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629) in view of HARAN et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20240085995).
Regarding Claim 8, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the receiver of the base station comprises a capacitive sensing receiver and the transmitter of the at least one input module comprises a capacitive sensing transmitter in a manner that the receiver of the base station is engaged with the transmitter of the at least one input module, thereby causing a capacitive change between the capacitive sensing receiver and transmitter.
In the same field of endeavor, HARAN et al. teach
wherein the receiver of the base station ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. host device 20) comprises a capacitive sensing receiver ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. signal receiver (SRx) 250) and the transmitter of the at least one input module ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. stylus 10) comprises a capacitive sensing transmitter ([0054], FIG. 4, i.e. signal transmitter (DTx) 150) in a manner that the receiver of the base station is engaged with ([0054], FIG. 4, i.e. converts the detected force or pressure to an output signal … and communicates the output signal RP to a digitizer (not shown) at the host device 20) the transmitter of the at least one input module, thereby causing a capacitive change ([0017], FIG. 4, i.e. sensing methods based on changes in the capacitive coupling) between the capacitive sensing receiver and transmitter (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with HARAN et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit and a base unit utilizing capacitive changes to effectively and wirelessly provide location of an input device (HARAN et al.’s [0017]).
Regarding Claim 9, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the base station is further configured to pair with the at least one input module, and wherein, after pairing, the base station is configured to wirelessly communicate with the at least one input module.
In the same field of endeavor, HARAN et al. teach
wherein the base station ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. host device 20) is further configured to pair with ([0047], FIG. 4, i.e. when pairing the stylus 10 with the host device 20) the at least one input module ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. stylus 10), and wherein, after pairing, the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)) is configured to wirelessly communicate with ([0051], FIG. 4, i.e. wireless communication unit 170 is configured to communicate with the host device 20) the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with HARAN et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit and a base unit utilizing pairing between them to correctly and wirelessly identify an input device for communication with a host (HARAN et al.’s [0051]).
Regarding Claim 11, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the at least one input module comprises a built-in wirelessly or wired chargeable battery.
In the same field of endeavor, HARAN et al. teach
wherein the at least one input module ([0062], FIG. 4, i.e. stylus 10) comprises a built-in wirelessly or wired chargeable battery ([0051], FIG. 4, i.e. battery may be rechargeable).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with HARAN et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit comprising a rechargeable battery to effectively provide power for an input device (HARAN et al.’s [0051]).
6. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629) in view of Files et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 10719145).
Regarding Claim 12, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the at least one input module comprises a factory default identifier, and a user customizable identifier is addable to the at least one input module.
In the same field of endeavor, Files et al. teach
wherein the at least one input module (Col. 22, Ln. 5-25, FIG. 5, i.e. active pen 102) comprises a factory default identifier (Col. 22, Ln. 5-25, FIG. 5, i.e. such IDs may be assigned (or allocated) to the computing devices and active pens at the time of their manufacture), and a user customizable identifier is addable to (Col. 22, Ln. 5-25, FIG. 5, i.e. application may allow a user to select a screen ID and/or a pen ID) the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with Files et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit comprising a manufacturing ID and user select ID to effectively provide identification for an input device by default and customization (Files et al.’s Col. 22, Ln. 5-25).
7. Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629) in view of Cooper (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20020008690).
Regarding Claim 14, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the system according to claim 1.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
wherein the transmitter of the at least one input module is configured to send an interrupt to the base station to start polling for the at least one input module.
In the same field of endeavor, Cooper teaches
wherein the transmitter ([0094], FIG. 21B, i.e. RF field of a reader (transceiver); [0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. transponder 2400) of the at least one input module ([0069], FIG. 11-12, i.e. input device a radio frequency identification (RFID) reader 1142) is configured to send an interrupt ([0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. switch 2405 interrupts the signal) to the base station ([0070], FIG. 11-12, i.e. RFID tag 1248/binder 1200) to start polling ([0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. response provided to the polling transceiver) for the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with Cooper teaching input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit and a base unit utilizing interrupt polling to effectively and correctly provide position of an input device (Cooper’s [0105]).
Regarding Claim 16, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
the method according to claim 15.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. do not explicitly teach
sending by the transceiver of the at least one input module, an interrupt to the base station to start polling for the at least one input module.
In the same field of endeavor, Cooper teaches
sending by the transceiver ([0094], FIG. 21B, i.e. RF field of a reader (transceiver); [0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. transponder 2400) of the at least one input module ([0069], FIG. 11-12, i.e. input device a radio frequency identification (RFID) reader 1142), an interrupt ([0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. switch 2405 interrupts the signal) to the base station to start polling ([0104], FIG. 23-24, i.e. response provided to the polling transceiver) for the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. teaching method sensing an input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with Cooper teaching method sensing an input device comprising radio communication between a remote unit and a base unit utilizing interrupt polling to effectively and correctly provide position of an input device (Cooper’s [0105]).
8. Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MOMCHILOV et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20220413629) in view of Cooper (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20020008690) and Morris et al. (US Patent/PGPub. No. 20060035590).
Regarding Claim 17, (Original)
MOMCHILOV et al. and Cooper teach
the method according to claim 16.
However, MOMCHILOV et al. and Cooper do not explicitly teach
sending, by the base station, an interrupt to the at least one input module to inquire for an identifier of the at least one input module.
In the same field of endeavor, Morris et al. teach
sending, by the base station ([0162], FIG. 1-3, i.e. host wireless unit 112), an interrupt ([0162], FIG. 1-3, i.e. PS/2 interrupt) to the at least one input module to inquire for an identifier ([0118], FIG. 1-3, i.e. device ID is dynamically generated … and communicated to the host wireless unit 112) of the at least one input module ([0118], FIG. 1-3, i.e. keyboard/mouse wireless unit 114, 116).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention’s effective date was filed to combine MOMCHILOV et al. and Cooper teaching method sensing an input device comprising radio communication between a remote and a base unit with Morris et al. teaching method sensing an input device comprising radio communication between a input unit and a base unit utilizing interrupt with identifier to effectively and wirelessly pair input to host for communication (Morris et al.’s [0118]).
Regarding Claim 18, (Original)
the method according to claim 17,
MOMCHILOV et al. teach
further comprising:
assigning, by the base station (i.e. please see above citation(s)), location ([0059], FIG. 1-3, i.e. initial location) and orientation information ([0059], FIG. 1-3, i.e. initial orientation) to the at least one input module (i.e. please see above citation(s)).
Response to Amendment
9. Applicants’ Response to the Non-Final Office Action, 02/18/2026, has been entered and made of record. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 15, and 21 is/are amended, Claim(s) 3, 20, and 22 is/are cancelled. Thus, Claim(s) 1-2, 4-19, and 21 is/are pending in this application.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claim(s) 4-6, 10, and 19 is/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.
11. The reasons for allowance have been set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 02/18/2026.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
12. Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On P. 9-12 corresponding to the currently amended Claim 1 (which was the original Claim 3 that’s canceled), applicant argues that MOMCHILOV et al. do not teach the subject matter of “wherein the at least one input module further comprises a further interface having a further transmitter and a further receiver arranged at an edge arranged at an edge of the at least one input module in a manner that the base station is configured to detect the configuration of the at least one input module by its interface.” However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees because:
A. The additional amendment “wherein the at least one input module further comprises … the at least one input module by its interface.” of Claim 1’s (the same original Claim 3’s recitation) refers back to the ONLY ONE “at least one input module” that is ONE and ONLY the SAME input module in contrast to applicant’s argument and original specification of TWO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT INPUT MODULES.
B. The Examiner’s interpretation that the “second interface of the at least one input module” and “further in interface of the at least one input module” is the SAME because:
i. The above recitation explicitly recites ONE and ONLY interface, “at least one input module” in which the Examiner originally interpreted “second interface of the at least one input module” and “further in interface of the at least one input module” is the SAME repeated recitation of the ONE and ONLY interface.
ii. Applicant submits that “at least one input module” as TWO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT INTERFACES, “FIRST INPUT MODULE 120” AND “SECOND INPUT MODULE 130” according to the original specification and drawing [0093] and FIG. 5.
iii. The original specification and drawings neither explicitly disclosed ONE interface comprises multiple interfaces, transceivers, receivers, and transmitter nor COMBINATION OF INTERFACES are possible modification.
iv. Claim 1’s amendment (original Claim 3’s) recites ONE and ONLY interface while the argument and original specification/drawing clearly disputes and discloses TWO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT INTERFACES.
v. Therefore, the Examiner interprets the above recitation as shown above and rejects accordingly.
vi. To overcome the above Objection and Rejection please explicitly recites different interfaces, for example, “a system … comprising: … first input module … second input module …”
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claim(s) 4-6, 10, and 19 is/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.
14. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The reasons for allowance have been set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 02/18/2026.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 VINH TANG LAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-3704. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nitin K Patel can be reached at (571) 272-7677. 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.
/VINH T LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights