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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura (US 2010/0164886).
As to claim 1, Nakamura teaches an input device, comprising:
a switch (switches 13, fig. 1);
a communication interface to communicate with the information processing apparatus ([0041] the driver 113c determines whether a control process, which is determined in accordance with the combinational operation (i.e. a combination of simultaneously executed operations) between an operation on the touch pad 16a and an operation on the touch pad 16b, is preset in the touch pad control data 113d. If this control process is preset, the driver 113c outputs a corresponding control code. The CPU 111 executes the control process which corresponds to the control code that is output from the driver 113c);
a plurality of touchpads (16a and 16b, fig. 1); and
circuitry (the laptop in fig. 1 has different circuitries),
wherein, when a combination of operations on the plurality of touchpads is received, the circuitry identifies a code corresponding to the combination of the operations on the plurality of touchpads and outputs the identified code to an information processing apparatus via the communication interface ([0041], figs. 7-14).
As to claim 2, Nakamura teaches the input device, further comprising a housing (computer main body 11, fig. 1) provided with the plurality of touchpads (16a and 16b, fig. 1), wherein the housing does not have a display (fig. 1 illustrates that computer main body 11 does not include a display).
As to claim 3, Nakamura teaches the input device, wherein the circuitry is configured to: distinguish operations on the plurality of touchpads (touch pads 16a and 16b in figs. 7-14) based on at least one of operation direction, duration of contact, frequency of contact, area of contact, or a number of contact areas on the plurality of touchpads (touch pads 16a and 16b in figs. 7-14); and output a code corresponding to the distinguished operations on the plurality of touchpads to the information processing apparatus via the communication interface ([0052] in accordance with the control code from the driver 113c, the OS 113a executes control processes such as a scroll function control, an image enlargement/reduction function control, a sound volume/luminance function control and an audio playback function control, see figs. 7-14 and the corresponding paragraphs).
As to claim 6, Nakamura teaches the input device, wherein each of the plurality of touchpads is arranged on at least one of a left side, a right side, a front side, and a back side of the input device (see pads 16a and 16b at the front side).
As to claim 7, Nakamura teaches a control method, comprising: when a combination of operations on a plurality of touchpads is received ([0041] the combinational operation (i.e. a combination of simultaneously executed operations) between an operation on the touch pad 16a and an operation on the touch pad 16b), identifying a code corresponding to the combination of the operations on the plurality of touchpads ([0041] the driver 113c determines whether a control process, which is determined in accordance with the combinational operation (i.e. a combination of simultaneously executed operations) between an operation on the touch pad 16a and an operation on the touch pad 16b, is preset in the touch pad control data 113d. If this control process is preset, the driver 113c outputs a corresponding control code. The CPU 111 executes the control process which corresponds to the control code that is output from the driver 113c) and outputting the identified code to an information processing apparatus via a communication interface ([0041], figs. 7-14).
As to claim 8, Nakamura teaches a non-transitory recording medium storing a plurality of instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, causes the processors to perform a method ([0097]), the method comprising :
when receiving a combination of operations on a plurality of touchpads ([0041] the combinational operation (i.e. a combination of simultaneously executed operations) between an operation on the touch pad 16a and an operation on the touch pad 16b), identifying a code corresponding the combination of the operations on the plurality of touchpads ([0041] the driver 113c determines whether a control process, which is determined in accordance with the combinational operation (i.e. a combination of simultaneously executed operations) between an operation on the touch pad 16a and an operation on the touch pad 16b, is preset in the touch pad control data 113d. If this control process is preset, the driver 113c outputs a corresponding control code. The CPU 111 executes the control process which corresponds to the control code that is output from the driver 113c) and outputting the identified code to an information processing apparatus via a communication interface ([0041], figs. 7-14).
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.
2. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2010/0164886) in view of Li (US 2017/0123516).
As to claim 4, Nakamura does not teach receiving a combination of operations on the plurality of touchpads and an operation on the switch as claimed.
However, Li teaches the input device, wherein when receiving a combination of operations on the plurality of touchpads and an operation on the switch ([0130] the user may use the thumb 902 to press down on the thumb button 105, and meanwhile swipe both the index finger 903 and middle finger 904 upward or downward across the index touch pad and middle touch pad, so as to increase or decrease the 3-D view angle, [0143], [0307]), the circuitry identifies a code corresponding to the combination of the operations on the plurality of touchpads and the operation on the switch-and outputs the identified code to the information processing apparatus ([0102] finger operations on the two buttons/touch pads of controller 800 and on the three buttons/touch pads of controller 100 may generate control commands and instructions in similar manners) via the communication interface ([0136] the computing device 1604 may need a wireless communication module or hardware (e.g., a wireless dongle) for establishing wireless connections with the controller 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nakamura to teach, a combination of operations on the plurality of touchpads and an operation on the switch, as suggested by Li. The motivation would have been in order to provide “integrated user interface for the user to interact with various computing devices, and thus enhances user experience” ([0056]).
3. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2010/0164886) in view of Li (US 2017/0123516) and further in view of Yamamoto (US 2014/0152573).
As to claim 5, Nakamura does not teach the input device as claimed.
However, Li teaches the input device further comprising a memory to store the code corresponding to combination of operations ([0211] processor system 2602 may implement machine instructions stored in a memory system, such as software for analyzing input information and accordingly controlling various peripherals. In at least one embodiment, processor system 2602 may collect and analyze input data from buttons, touch pads, motion sensors, and/or microphone of the controller 100, and translate the input data into control commands) on the plurality of touchpads as mapping information ([0130] the user may use the thumb 902 to press down on the thumb button 105, and meanwhile swipe both the index finger 903 and middle finger 904 upward or downward across the index touch pad and middle touch pad, so as to increase or decrease the 3-D view angle).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nakamura to teach, a memory to store the code corresponding to combination of operations on the plurality of touchpads, as suggested by Li. The motivation would have been in order to provide “integrated user interface for the user to interact with various computing devices, and thus enhances user experience” ([0056]).
Nakamura combined with Li does not teach a plurality of mapping tables and changing the mapping table as claimed.
However, Yamamoto teaches wherein
PNG
media_image1.png
14
5
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the mapping information includes a plurality of mapping tables, and the circuitry is configured to change a mapping table currently used to one of other mapping tables in response to receiving a mapping table change request ([0028] The key input management module 33 has a touch key determination module 37 which determines the kind of the SW key 11 which is touched on the touch screen 10, and a mapping change module 38 which changes the HW key mapping tables 34a, 34b, . . . to be used, [0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nakamura and Li to teach, a plurality of mapping tables and changing the mapping table, as suggested by Yamamoto. The motivation would have been in order to improve operability and user interaction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMEN W BOGALE whose telephone number is (571)270-1579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:AM-6: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 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.
/AMEN W BOGALE/Examiner, Art Unit 2628
/NITIN PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2628