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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status
2. The continuation application filed on May 13, 2025, has been received and made of record. There were 1-12 claims in the application of which claim 1 was independent claim. A preliminary amendment was filed on the same date where applicant cancelled claims 1-12 and added independent claim 13 and dependent claim 14 as new claims. Independent claim 13 and dependent claim 14 are further amended on September 15, 2025, and additional claims 15-32 have been added as new claims of which claim 23 is independent claim. Claims 1-12 are cancelled as before. Therefore, claims 13-32 are pending for consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement(IDS) submitted on September 22, 2025, was filed after the mailing date of the continuation application on May 13, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner(Actually “NO” document and/or publication is found in IDS).
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees.
A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form(e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-isclaimer.
5. Claims 13-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of US Patent No. US 12,299,218 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because except for minor wording and insignificant change in terminology, each and every limitations of claims 1-12 of the US published Patent No. US 12,299,218 B2 reads on corresponding limitations of claims 13-32 of the current application 19/206,241. Both the current application and the published patent No. US 12,299,218 B2 disclose active pen-stylus precise eraser used in a graphic display device.
Comparison of claims 13-32 of the current application and claims 1-12 of the US published Patent No. US 12,299,218 B2 is given below: -
19/206,241
US 12,299,218 B2
Claim 23: A method for determining an area of erasure on a screen of a display device, comprising:
receiving user erasure data in an active pen-stylus related to erasing at least a portion of a drawing on the screen of the display device and converting the user erasure data to an electronic erasure data signal;
receiving the electronic erasure data signal in a first pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that processes the electronic erasure data signal and sends the processed electronic erasure data signal to an erasure antenna system, wherein the processed electronic erasure data signal includes orientation data;
transmitting the processed electronic erasure data signal from the erasure antenna system on the active pen-stylus to the display device for erasing at least the portion of the drawing on the screen of the display device,
computing a tilt angle by a graphics display component in the display device that uses the orientation data to determine the area of erasure associated with the portion of the drawing on the screen of the computing device.
Claim 24: The method of claim 23, wherein the erasure antenna system comprises a first antenna and a second antenna, the eraser antenna system proximally located in a rear portion of the active pen-stylus, wherein the first antenna has a different location in the rear of the active pen-stylus than the second antenna, wherein the orientation data relates to an orientation of the first antenna with respect the second antenna.
Claim 25: The method of claim 23, further comprising: erasing the portion of the drawing on the screen of the computing device that corresponds to the area of erasure.
Claim 31: The method of claim 23, further comprising:
receiving in the active pen-stylus user drawing data input related to drawing on the screen of the display device and converting the drawing data to an electronic drawing data signal, wherein the received user drawing data input includes force sensing data;
receiving the electronic drawing data signal in a first pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that processes the electronic drawing data signal and sends the processed electronic drawing data signal to an active pen stylus antenna system; and
transmitting the processed electronic drawing data signal from the active pen-stylus antenna system to the display device for display on the screen.
Claim 1: A method for determining an area of erasure on a screen of a display device, comprising:
receiving in an active pen-stylus user drawing data input related to drawing on the screen of the display device and converting the drawing data to an electronic drawing data signal;
receiving the electronic drawing data signal in a first pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that processes the electronic drawing data signal and sending the processed electronic drawing data signal to an active pen stylus antenna system;
transmitting the processed electronic drawing data signal from the active pen-stylus antenna system to the display device for display on the screen, the active pen-stylus antenna system comprising at least two antennas proximally located in a front portion of the active pen-stylus;
receiving user erasure data related to erasing at least a portion of the drawing on the screen of the display device in the active pen-stylus and converting the user erasure data to an electronic erasure data signal;
receiving the electronic erasure data signal in a second pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that processes the electronic erasure data signal and sending the processed electronic erasure data signal to an erasure antenna system, the eraser antenna system comprising at least two antennas, the eraser antenna system proximally located in a rear portion of the active pen-stylus, wherein a first antenna of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system has a different location in the rear of the active pen-stylus than a second of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system, wherein the processed electronic erasure data signal includes orientation data related to the first antenna and the second antenna of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system;
transmitting the processed electronic erasure data signal from the erasure antenna system on the active pen-stylus to the display device for erasing at least the portion of the drawing on the screen of the display device,
wherein a graphics display component in the display devices uses the received processed electronic erasure data signal to compute a tilt angle between the first of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system and the second of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system to determine the area of erasure associated with the portion of the drawing on the screen of the computing device.
Claim 26 corresponds to claim 7 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2;
Claim 27 corresponds to claim 8 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2;
Claim 28 corresponds claim 9 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2;
Claim 29 corresponds to claim 6 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2;
Claim 30 corresponds to part of claim 10 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2; and
Claim 32 corresponds to part of claim 12 of US patent No. US 12,299,218 B2.
Claims 13-22 recite the same limitations as recited in claims 23-32 but claims are presented in different formats. Therefore, claims 13-22 are also rejection under nonstatutory double patenting rejection as rejected claims 23-32.
7. Claims 13-32 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, and 6-11 of US Patent No. US 12,045,404 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because except for minor wording and insignificant change in terminology, each and every limitation of claims 1, and 6-11 of the US published Patent No. US 12,045,404 B2 reads on corresponding limitation of claims 13-32 of the current application 19/206,241. Both the current application and the published patent No. US 12,045,404 B2 disclose active pen-stylus precise eraser used in a graphic display device.
Comparison of claims 13-32 of the current application and claims 1, and 6-11 of the US published Patent No. US 12,045,404 B2 is given below: -
19/206,241
US 12,045,404 B2
Claim 13: A system for determining an area of erasure in an active pen-stylus, comprising:
an erasure system in the active pen-stylus that receives user erasure data related to erasing portions of a display on a screen of a display device associated with the active pen-stylus;
a pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that receives the user erasure data from the erasure system;
an eraser antenna system proximally located in a rear portion of the active pen-stylus that receives the user erasure data from the pen antenna circuit and transmits the user erasure data to the display device, wherein the user erasure data includes pen orientation data;
wherein a graphics display component in the display device uses the received user erasure data including the pen orientation data to compute a tilt angle to determine the area of erasure associated with the display on the screen of the display device.
Claim 14: The system of claim 13 wherein the eraser antenna system comprises:
a first antenna located in a rear of the active pen-stylus;
a second antenna located in the rear of the active pen-stylus;
wherein the first antenna has a different location in the rear of the active pen-stylus than the second antenna, wherein the pen orientation data includes data related to an orientation of the first antenna with respect to the second antenna that the graphics display component uses to compute the tilt angle.
Claim 19: The system of claim 13, further comprising:
an active pen-stylus system in the active pen-stylus that receives user drawing data related to drawing on the screen of the display device.
Claim 21: The system of claim 19, wherein the active pen-stylus system comprises:
an active pen-stylus antenna system located in a front portion of the active pen-stylus that receives the user drawing data from the pen antenna circuit and transmits the drawing data to the display device for display on the screen.
Claim 1: A system for determining an area of erasure in an active pen-stylus, comprising:
an active pen-stylus system in the active pen-stylus that receives user drawing data input related to drawing on a screen of a display device;
an erasure system in the active pen-stylus, that receives user erasure data input related to erasing portions of a display on the screen of the display device; a pen antenna circuit in the active pen-stylus that receives the user drawing data from the active pen-stylus system and receives the user erasure data from the erasure system;
an active pen-stylus antenna system comprising at least two antennas, the active pen-stylus antenna system proximally located in a front portion of the active pen-stylus that receives user drawing data from the pen antenna circuit and uses the at least two antennas to transmit the drawing data to the display device for display on the screen;
an eraser antenna system comprising at least two antennas, the eraser antenna system proximally located in a rear portion of the active pen-stylus that receives user erasure data from the pen antenna circuit and uses the at least two antennas to transmit the user erasure data to the display device, wherein a first antenna of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system has a different location in the rear of the active pen-stylus than a second of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system, wherein the user erasure data includes orientation data related to the first antenna and the second antenna of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system,
wherein a graphics display component in the display devices uses the received user erasure data to compute a tilt angle between the first of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system and the second of the at least two antennas in the eraser antenna system to determine the area of erasure associated with the display on the screen of the computing device.
Claim 15 corresponds to claim 6 of US patent No. US 12,045,404 B2;
Claim 16 corresponds to claim 7 of US patent No. US 12,045,404 B2;
Claim 17 corresponds to claim 8 of US patent No. US 12,045,404 B2;
Claim 18 corresponds to claim 9 of US patent No. US 12,045,404 B2;
Claim 20 corresponds to claim 10 of US patent No. US 12,045, 404 B2; and
Claim 22 corresponds to part of claim 11 of US patent No. US 12,045,404 B2.
Claims 23-32 recite the same limitations as recited in claims 13-22 but claims are presented in different formats. Therefore, claims 23-32 are also rejection under nonstatutory double patenting rejection as rejected claims 13-22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. Claims 13, 16-20, 23, 25-28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ron et al.(US 2018/0052534 A1) (herein after Ron).
Regarding claim 13, Ron teaches a system(Para-3) for determining an area(surface area, Para-5) of erasure in an active pen-stylus, comprising:
an erasure system in the active pen-stylus(stylus 100, fig.1, Para-38) that receives user erasure data(stroke erase, Para-33) related to erasing portions of a display(computing device 102, fig.1) on a screen of a display device(Para-37) associated with the active pen-stylus(100);
a pen antenna circuit(eraser antenna 110, fig.1, Para-42) in the active pen-stylus(tail end 106 of 100) that receives the user erasure data(Para-33) from the erasure system;
an eraser antenna system(110) proximally located in a rear portion of the active pen-stylus(tail end 106 of 100) that receives the user erasure data(Para-33) from the pen antenna circuit(110) and transmits the user erasure data(Para-42) to the display device(computing device 102), wherein the user erasure data includes pen orientation data(figs.3a-3b, Para-48);
wherein a graphics display component(computing device 102) in the display device(Para-37) uses the received user erasure data(Para-33) including the pen orientation data to compute a tilt angle to determine the area(step 406, fig.4, Para-53) of erasure associated with the display on the screen of the display device(Para-49, 55).
Regarding claim 16, Ron teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the graphics display component increases the area of erasure in direct correlation to an increasing degree of the computed tilt angle(figs.2A&3b)(depends on how the tilt angle is calculated, if one of ordinary skill in the art measures the tilt angle anti-clockwise from computing device 202 as a base surface, contact area increases with response to increasing tilt angle θ).
Regarding claim 17, Ron teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the graphics display component increases the area of erasure in direct proportion to the degree of the computed tilt angle(figs.2A&3b)(depends on how the tilt angle is calculated, if one of ordinary skill in the art measures the tilt angle anti-clockwise from computing device 202 as a base surface, contact area increases with response to increasing tilt angle θ).
Regarding claim 18, Ron teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the graphics display component decreases the area of erasure in inverse proportion to an increasing degree of the computed tilt angle(figs.2A&3b)(depends on how the tilt angle is calculated, if one of ordinary skill in the art measures the tilt angle clockwise from computing device 202 as a base surface, contact area decreases with response to increasing tilt angle θ).
Regarding claim 19, Ron teaches the system of claim 13, further comprising:
an active pen-stylus system(fig.1) in the active pen-stylus (100) that receives user drawing data(text input, Para-31, 37-38) related to drawing on the screen of the display device (Para-37).
Regarding claim 20, Ron teaches the system of Claim 19, wherein the received user drawing data includes pressure sensing data(Para-39).
Claim 23 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 13, since both claims 13 and 23 recite identical claim limitations but in different formats.
Regarding claim 25, Ron teaches the method of claim 23, further comprising: erasing the portion of the drawing on the screen of the computing device that corresponds to the area of erasure(surface area, Para-35).
Claim 26 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 16, since both claims 16 and 26 recite identical claim limitations but in different formats.
Claim 27 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 17, since both claims 17 and 27 recite identical claim limitations but in different formats.
Claim 28 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 18, since both claims 18 and 28 recite identical claim limitations but in different formats.
Claim 30, Ron teaches the method of claim 23, wherein the received user erasure data includes force sensing data(Para-39, Step 406, fig.4, Para-53).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
13. Claims 15, 21, 29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ron et al.(US 2018/0052534 A1) and further in view of Fleck et al.(US 2022/0317788 A1)(herein after Fleck).
Regarding claim 15, RON is not found to teach expressly the system of claim 13, wherein the active pen-stylus receives the user erasure data without the active pen-stylus being in physical contact with the screen of the display device.
However, Fleck teaches an active-type stylus and a sensor control circuit, wherein the active pen-stylus(stylus 16, fig.1, Para-32) receives the user erasure data without the active pen-stylus being in physical contact with the screen of the display device(third control mode, hover state S7, fig.5, Para-73).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to have modified Ron with the teaching of Fleck to include the feature in order to provide an active-type stylus and a sensor control circuit capable of reducing consumption of electrical energy while securing operation response in a configuration in which downlink signals being transmitted from both tip side and tail side.
Regarding claim 21, Ron as modified by Fleck teaches the system of claim 19, wherein the active pen-stylus system comprises: an active pen-stylus antenna system(tip side transmission circuit 38, Fleck) located in a front portion of the active pen-stylus(tip side, stylus 16, fig.4, Fleck) that receives the user drawing data(Para-31, Fleck) from the pen antenna circuit(38) and transmits the drawing data to the display device for display on the screen(Para-31, 37, Ron; Para-31, Fleck) (for motivation see the rejection of claim 15).
Claim 29 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 15, since both claims 15 and 29 recite identical claim limitations but in different formats.
Regarding claim 31, Ron as modified by Fleck teaches the method of claim 23, further comprising:
receiving in the active pen-stylus user drawing data input related to drawing on the screen of the display device(Para-31, Fleck) and converting the drawing data to an electronic drawing data signal, wherein the received user drawing data input includes force sensing data(Para-45, 46, 58, Fleck);
receiving the electronic drawing data signal in a first pen antenna circuit(38) in the active pen-stylus that processes the electronic drawing data signal and sends the processed electronic drawing data signal to an active pen stylus antenna system(pen signal, fig.4, Ron); and
transmitting the processed electronic drawing data signal from the active pen-stylus antenna system to the display device for display on the screen(Para-31; S1, S3, S4, fig.5 and related text, Fleck) (for motivation see the rejection of claim 15).
Allowable Subject Matter
14. Claims 14, 22, 24 and 32 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under nonstatutory double patenting rejection, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
15. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 14 and 24: None of the prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination, fails to provide reasonable motivation to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the system of claim 13 wherein the eraser antenna system comprises: a first antenna located in a rear of the active pen-stylus; a second antenna located in the rear of the active pen-stylus; wherein the first antenna has a different location in the rear of the active pen-stylus than the second antenna, wherein the pen orientation data includes data related to an orientation of the first antenna with respect to the second antenna that the graphics display component uses to compute the tilt angle”.
Claims 22 and 32: None of the prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination, fails to provide reasonable motivation to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the system of claim 21, wherein the active pen-stylus antenna system comprises: a first antenna; a second antenna, wherein the first antenna has a different location in the front of the active pen-stylus than the second antenna, wherein the user drawing data includes orientation data related to the first antenna and the second antenna in the active-pen stylus antenna system, wherein the graphics display component computes a forward tilt angle between the first antenna and the second antenna in the active-pen stylus antenna system to determine an area of marking associated with the display on the computing device controlled by the graphics display”.
Examiner Note
-----
16. The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the references, as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicants fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the references or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1530. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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 on (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.
/MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626