DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In an amendment filed 03/17/2026, claims 1 and 22 have been amended. Currently, claims 1-22 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-13 and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneda et al. (US 20190171303 A1), further in view of Steinmark et al. (US 20200026368 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kaneda teaches an electronic pen core body, comprising: a front end portion configured to project outward from an opening on one end side in an axial direction of a tubular casing of an electronic pen, (figs. 1A, 3A: tube casing 2, stylus 1, opening 21, front end portion 42. Para 61-62, 74)
wherein the part of the front end portion is configured to come into contact with an input surface when the electronic pen performs an indication input on the input surface. (Para 58. Stylus operating on the touch screen 200D)
However Kaneda does not teach and a plurality of projections and depressions provided along a circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body and/or along an axial direction of the electronic pen core body, in at least a part of the front end portion, and wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface
However Steinmark teaches a plurality of projections and depressions provided along a circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body and/or along an axial direction of the electronic pen core body, in at least a part of the front end portion. (Para 12-13. Fig 1C shows channel 112 which is the depression, and the projections are the areas that is outside the channel.)
And wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface. (Para 8, 12-13. Please note that the projections would touch the input surface, and the depression would touch the input surface indirectly through the projections)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda with Steinmark to teach a plurality of projections and depressions provided along a circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body and/or along an axial direction of the electronic pen core body, in at least a part of the front end portion, and wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface in order to improve the user input experience of when operating the stylus on a touchscreen.
Regarding claim 2, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are formed by a plurality of grooves provided in at least the part of the front end portion. (Para 12-13. Fig 1C shows channel 112 which are the grooves, and the projections are the areas that is outside the channel.)
Regarding claim 3, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 2,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of grooves are provided in a plural number along the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body and/or along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body. (Para 12-13. Fig 1C shows channel 112 which are the grooves, and the projections are the areas that is outside the channel. The groves are along the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body and/or along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body)
Regarding claim 4, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 3,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein a partition wall is provided between the plurality of grooves provided along the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body, and a surface of the partition wall, which is continuous with a peripheral side surface of the front end portion of the electronic pen core body, is provided with the projections and depressions along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body. (Fig 1C shows the outside edge circle along the channel 112 and 110 as the partition wall.)
Regarding claim 5, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 3,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of grooves are provided at equal intervals along the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body. (Para 13. Fig. 1C. the grooves are at equal interval and symmetrical.)
Regarding claim 6, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 2,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein a circumferential width of each of the plurality of grooves gradually increases from a front end to a rear end of the front end portion along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body. (Figs. 1A and 1C. the grooves circumference width increases going up the front end)
Regarding claim 7, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 2,
However Kaneda and Steinmark do not teach wherein a circumferential width of each of the plurality of grooves is unchanged from a front end to a rear end of the front end portion along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body.
However Steinmark further teaches the grooves can be of a variety of patterns. (Para 13. Channel 112 can be of a variety of patterns)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda with Steinmark to teach wherein a circumferential width of each of the plurality of grooves is unchanged from a front end to a rear end of the front end portion along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body in order to provide a writing experience that simulates a pen-and-paper feel by trying out different shapes of grooves.
Regarding claim 8, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 2,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of grooves are provided along the circumferential direction, and partition walls are provided between two adjacent grooves of the plurality of grooves, and at least one partition wall is discontinued so as not to join the rest of the partition walls on a foremost end side of the front end portion of the electronic pen core body such that the two adjacent grooves on either side of the at least one partition wall form a single continuous groove. ((Fig 1C shows the outside edge circle along the channel 112 and 110 as the partition wall. One of the channel 112 is formed of two grooves with no partition wall inbetween).
Regarding claim 9, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are provided by a plurality of step portions defined along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body in at least the part of the front end portion. (Fig. 1C shows step between the channels 112 going up to the projections which is the areas outside the channels 112)
Regarding claim 10, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 9,
And Steinmark further teach wherein the plurality of step portions defined along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body are divided into a plurality of step sub-portions in the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body. (Fig. 1C shows the step in each channel 1C is divided into three step sub-portions)
Regarding claim 11, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 9,
However Kaneda and Steinmark do not teach wherein the plurality of step portions defined along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body are divided into a plurality of step sub-portions by a plurality of dividing grooves provided in the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body.
However Steinmark further teaches the grooves can be of a variety of patterns. (Para 13. Channel 112 can be of a variety of patterns)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda with Steinmark to teach wherein the plurality of step portions defined along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body are divided into a plurality of step sub-portions by a plurality of dividing grooves provided in the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body in order to provide a writing experience that simulates a pen-and-paper feel by trying out different patterns such as adding channels within each channel.
Regarding claim 12, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 9,
And Steinmark further teaches wherein the plurality of step portions defined along the axial direction of the electronic pen core body are divided into a plurality of step sub-portions by a plurality of dividing walls provided in the circumferential direction of the electronic pen core body. (Fig. 1C shows the step in each channel 1C is divided into three step sub-portions defined by the walls in three sides)
Regarding claim 13, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 12,
However Kaneda and Steinmark do not teach wherein at least one dividing wall of the plurality of dividing walls is discontinued so as not to join the rest of the dividing walls on a foremost end side of the front end portion of the electronic pen core body.
However Steinmark teaches However Steinmark further teaches the grooves can be of a variety of patterns. (Para 13. Channel 112 can be of a variety of patterns)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda with Steinmark to teach wherein at least one dividing wall of the plurality of dividing walls is discontinued so as not to join the rest of the dividing walls on a foremost end side of the front end portion of the electronic pen core body in order to provide a writing experience that simulates a pen-and-paper feel by trying out different patterns such as by have a wall island in a channel that is not connected to other walls.
Regarding claim 17, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Kaneda further teaches comprising: a core body main body portion coupled to the front end portion in the axial direction of the electronic pen core body, (Para 72-73. Fig. 1A. shows a core body main body portion 4 coupled to the front end portion in the axial direction of the electronic pen core body)
wherein the electronic pen core body main body portion is in a rod shape having a uniform diameter, and a maximum diameter of the front end portion is larger than the uniform diameter of the electronic pen core body main body portion. (Para 73. Fig. 1A shows core body main body part 4 has smaller diameter than 2a.)
Regarding claim 18, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Kaneda further teaches comprising: a core body main body portion coupled to the front end portion in the axial direction of the electronic pen core body, wherein the front end portion and the electronic pen core body main body portion are formed integrally with each other of a same material. (Para 238. One integral body 4G’1 with the same material)
Regarding claim 19, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Kaneda further teaches comprising: a core body main body portion coupled to the front end portion in the axial direction of the electronic pen core body, wherein the front end portion and the electronic pen core body main body portion are formed of different materials. (Para 93. Core body 4 is different in material from the front end portion 44.)
Regarding claim 20, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Kaneda further teaches comprising: a core body main body portion coupled to the front end portion in the axial direction of the electronic pen core body, wherein the electronic pen core body main body portion includes a core rod formed of conductive metal or conductive non-metal material. (Para 61, 73. Fig. 1A: core body 4+ferrite core 6 is the electronic pen core body main body portion with ferrite core 6)
Regarding claim 21, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And wherein the front end portion includes a tapered shape portion that is tapered toward a front end. (Para 15. Fig. 1A shows curved shaped with tapered toward a front end)
Regarding claim 22, Kaneda teaches an electronic pen comprising: a casing having an opening on a pen tip side as one end side in an axial direction, and having an internal hollow portion communicating with the opening; (figs. 1A, 3A: tube casing 2, stylus 1, opening 21, front end portion 42. Para 61-62, 74)
a pen pressure detecting portion disposed in the internal hollow portion of the casing; (Para 62-63. Pressure detection portion 3)
and a core body having, on one end side in the axial direction, a front end portion capable of projecting outward from the opening on the pen tip side of the casing, and having another end side in the axial direction to be fitted to the pen pressure detecting portion, (Para 62-63. Core body 4+ferrite core 6)
and wherein the part of the front end portion is configured to come into contact with an input surface when the electronic pen performs an indication input on the input surface. (Para 58. Stylus operating on the touch screen 200D)
However Kaneda does not teach wherein a plurality of projections and depressions are provided along a circumferential direction of the core body and/or along the axial direction of the core body, in at least a part of the front end portion of the core body, and wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface.
However Steinmark teaches wherein a plurality of projections and depressions are provided along a circumferential direction of the core body and/or along the axial direction of the core body, in at least a part of the front end portion of the core body. (Para 12-13. Fig 1C shows channel 112 which is the depression, and the projections are the areas that is outside the channel.)
And wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface. (Para 8, 12-13. Please note that the projections would touch the input surface, and the depression would touch the input surface indirectly through the projections)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda with Steinmark to teach wherein a plurality of projections and depressions are provided along a circumferential direction of the core body and/or along the axial direction of the core body, in at least a part of the front end portion of the core body, and wherein the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic pen is tilted relative to the input surface in order to improve the user input experience of when operating the stylus on a touchscreen.
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneda et al. (US 20190171303 A1), in view of Steinmark et al. (US 20200026368 A1), further in view of Weber (US 20110162894 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Kaneda and Steinmark already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 1,
And Steinmark further teaches the front end portion is made of polyoxymethylene (POM). (Para 12)
However Kaneda and Steinmark do not teach wherein at least recessed portions of the plurality of projections and depressions are covered by a member of a material softer than a material of the front end portion.
However Weber teaches wherein at least recessed portions of the plurality of projections and depressions are covered by a member of a material softer than a material of the front end portion. (Para 27. Rubber or silicone is softer than POM).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda and Steinmark with Weber to teach wherein at least recessed portions of the plurality of projections and depressions are covered by a member of a material softer than a material of the front end portion in order to in provide a better writing experience by trying out different tip material combinations.
Regarding claim 16, Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 14,
However Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber do not teach wherein particles harder than an elastomer are mixed in the member of the material softer than the material of the front end portion.
However Steinmark teaches additive of polytetrafluoroethylene as lubricating material. (Para 14. Polytetrafluoroethylene is harder than elastomer)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber with the additional teaching of Steinmark by adding polytetrafluoroethylene in silicone or rubber as taught by Weber in order to provide a better writing experience by trying out different tip material combinations.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneda et al. (US 20190171303 A1), in view of Steinmark et al. (US 20200026368 A1), in view of Weber (US 20110162894 A1), further in view of Zhong et al. (US 20240370164 A1)
Regarding claim 15, Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber already teach the electronic pen core body according to claim 14,
However Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber do not teach wherein the front end portion of the electronic pen core body is formed of non-crystalline resin.
However Zhong teaches wherein the front end portion of the electronic pen core body is formed of non-crystalline resin. (Para 218. Tip can be made of polycarbonate which is a non-crystalline resin)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kaneda, Steinmark and Weber with Zhong to teach wherein the front end portion of the electronic pen core body is formed of non-crystalline resin in order to in provide a better writing experience by trying out different tip materials.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-9, applicant alleged that “However, Steinmark does not teach or suggest a configuration in which the plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface ata plurality ofpoints when the electronic pen is orthogonally tilted relative to the input surface andwhen the electronic pen is perpendicularto the inputsurface. For example, in the configuration shown in Figure 1 C of Steinmark, a contact occurs at a single point (i.e., at the center of the polymeric core structure 110) when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface.
On the other hand, the present application discloses such a configuration, as shown in Figures 2A and 2B reproduced below for example, that a plurality of projections and depressions contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is positioned perpendicular to the input surface by way of edges the recessed hole 103 and when the electronic pen is tilted by way of the edges of the partition walls 102.
Thus, Applicant respectfully submits that Steinmark fails to teach or suggest an electronic pen core body in which a plurality of projections and depressions are configured to contact the input surface at a plurality of points when the electronic pen is perpendicular to the input surface and when the electronic penis tilted relative to the input surface, as set forth in amended claim 1.”
Examiner finds the argument not persuasive. In this case, as shown in paragraphs 12-13 and Fig 1C of Steinmark, channel 112 which is the depression, and the projections are the areas that is outside the channel, and the projections would touch the input surface, and the depression would touch the input surface indirectly through the projections.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7596. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
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.
/HANG LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626