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 § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “one first antenna or at least two first antennas provided at the first substrate” and “one second antenna or at least two second antennas provided at the second substrate,” and subsequently recites “the first antenna and the second antenna are arranged at positions superimposed on each other” and “electromagnetic field coupling between the first antenna and the second antenna.” Where the alternative of “at least two first antennas” (or “at least two second antennas”) is met, it is unclear which of the plural antennas “the first antenna” (or “the second antenna”) refers to, i.e., whether the superimposition and coupling limitations must be satisfied by one, some, or each of the plural antennas. The recitations of “the first antenna” and “the second antenna” therefore lack clear antecedent basis and the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
Regarding claim 6, the claim similarly recites “one first antenna or at least two first antennas” and “one second antenna or at least two second antennas,” and subsequently recites “one of the first antenna or the second antenna comprises a first antenna portion,” “the other of the first antenna or the second antenna comprises a second antenna portion and a third antenna portion,” and “not being superimposed on the first antenna.” For the reasons set forth above with respect to claim 2, the recitations of “the first antenna” and “the second antenna” lack clear antecedent basis when plural antennas are present.
For purposes of examination, “the first antenna” and “the second antenna” are interpreted as referring to at least one of the first antennas and at least one of the second antennas, respectively. Applicant may overcome this rejection by, for example, reciting “at least one first antenna” and thereafter “the at least one first antenna,” or by otherwise clarifying which antenna is required to meet the subsequent limitations.
All dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the claim(s) from which they depend and are similarly rejected for the same reason.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 already requires that, “in each of the first connection state and the second connection state, when the first display is viewed in a plan view, the first antenna and the second antenna are arranged at positions superimposed on each other.” Claim 3 recites that, “in each of the first connection state and the second connection state, at least a part of the first antenna is arranged at a position superimposed on the second antenna.” Any arrangement satisfying claim 2 necessarily satisfies claim 3, and claim 3 is therefore no narrower than claim 2 and does not specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1 and 15 – 23 are allowed.
Claims 2 and 4–14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. Claim 3 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 112(d) set forth in this Office action.
Independent claim 1 recites an electronic device having a first device and a second device that are removably attachable, the first device having a first display and a first connection portion arranged at the first front surface, and the second device having a second display at the second front surface and a second connection portion arranged at the second rear surface, wherein the second connection portion is connectable to the first connection portion in a first direction and in a second direction opposite to the first direction, such that in the first connection state the second rear surface is arranged to cover the first display and in the second connection state the second rear surface is arranged not to cover the first display.
The prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious this combination. In particular, the prior art of record does not teach a second display-bearing device having a rear-surface connection portion that is connectable to a front-surface connection portion of a first display-bearing device in two mutually opposite directions, where the same pair of connection portions yields a stacked state in which the rear of the second device covers the first display and a reversed state in which the rear of the second device does not cover the first display.
Son et al. (US 2019/0004764 A1) is considered the closest prior art. Son discloses a first housing having a first display and a second housing having a second display that are physically separable and communicate wirelessly (see [0039], [0057]), and that are magnetically coupled in an out-folding form in which both displays face outward (see [0098]), an in-folding form in which both displays face inward (see [0099]), and a side-by-side form (see [0100]). Son further describes, with reference to FIG. 13, an arrangement in which the first and second displays are disposed in the same direction such that a rear surface of the first housing 1301 covers a front surface of the second housing 1302. However, Son’s coupling is achieved by cylindrical magnets disposed at the side ends of the housings (see [0039]), not by a first connection portion arranged at the display-bearing front surface of one device and a second connection portion arranged at the rear surface of the other device. Son does not teach that the same rear-surface connection portion is connectable to the same front-surface connection portion in opposite directions to switch between a covering state and a non-covering state.
Jones et al. (US 2011/0143769 A1) discloses a dual display mobile device in which a first device with a first display and a second device with a second display are separable and communicate wirelessly (see [0009], [0043]), with the second device stored within a well of the first device and connected through an electrical connector at the base of the well (see [0024], [0055]–[0056]). The second device is received in a single orientation and does not cover the first display; no reversible connection in opposite directions is taught.
Rothkopf et al. (US 2012/0194448 A1) discloses a cover accessory having a flexible display that attaches magnetically to a tablet device through a hinge (see [0057] – [0058]) and that folds over the top surface of the host device in a closed configuration and unfolds to expose the host display in an open configuration (see [0061]). The cover changes state by pivoting about a single hinge; it is not connected in two opposite directions through front- and rear-surface connection portions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Micev (US 2012/0309462 A1) discloses a screen expansion dock having its own display to which a host smartphone attaches at a back surface or edge.
Oakley (US 2007/0247432 A1) discloses display apparatus having a housing pivotable to cover or expose a second display area.
Beatty et al. (US Patent No 5,233,502) discloses removable, reversible display for a portable computer plugged into one of two sockets to face front or rear.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKIT B DOSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-7863. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri. ~9 - ~5:30.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. 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.
ANKIT B. DOSHI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights