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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 (figs 1-9) in the reply filed on 12/16/25 is acknowledged. Applicant submits that claims 1-7 read on elected Group 1. Claims 8-10 are withdrawn.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites, “ … one end of the rotating block is fixedly connected to the cross arm or the fastening piece, and the other end of the rotating block is rotatably connected to the fastening piece or the cross arm; or, the fastening piece is movably clamped on the cross arm, one end of the rotating block is fixedly connected to the display screen or the fastening piece, and the other end of the rotating block is rotatably connected to the fastening piece or the display screen ....” – which as written, is replete with so many alternative configurations (as denoted by “or”) that the scope of the claim is unclear. Applicant uses so many “or” statements that the claim fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention. The claim is rejected as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 12,259,749 to Ye et al.
Regarding claim 1, Ye ‘749 discloses a rotatable-screen splitter, comprising a display screen 50, a connecting portion 53, a cross arm 15 and a mainboard 12, wherein the display screen 50 is connected to the connecting portion 53, the connecting portion 53 is connected to the cross arm 15, and the cross arm 15 is connected to the mainboard 12; the connecting portion 53 comprises a fastening piece 532 and a rotating block 533, and the fastening piece 532 is connected to the rotating block 533; the fastening piece 532 is movably clamped on the display screen 50, one end of the rotating block 533 is fixedly connected to the cross arm 15 [or the fastening piece], and the other end of the rotating block 533 is rotatably connected to the fastening piece 532 [or the cross arm; or, the fastening piece is movably clamped on the cross arm, one end of the rotating block is fixedly connected to the display screen or the fastening piece, and the other end of the rotating block is rotatably connected to the fastening piece or the display screen]. The unaddressed alternative limitations are in brackets. The examiner has applied the broadest and most reasonable interpretation in light of the above 112 rejections.
Regarding claim 4, Ye ‘749 discloses, wherein the mainboard 12 comprises a support plate 30, a second groove 124 is formed in a back side, corresponding to the support plate 30, of the mainboard 12, and the support plate 30 is rotatably fixed in the second groove 124 (figs. 6, 10, 11 – note hinge between plate 33 and 34).
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, 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.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12,259,749 to Ye et al. in view of US 20240288901 to GU.
Regarding claim 5, Ye ‘749 teaches the rotatable-screen splitter including a rotating block 533 and a support plate 30. Ye ‘749 also teaches that the mounting plate is usually installed on the rear wall of the display of a laptop by magnetic attraction (col. 1, lines 18-20). Thus to place a magnetic substance on either the rotating block or support plate and in a groove 124 on the mainboard 12 would be an obvious modification that is known and supported in the art.
In fact, GU ‘901 teaches adding a magnetic substance to numerous parts of the display assembly in order to support certain parts relative to other parts (para 0011, 0034, 0035).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotating block, support plate and/or a groove in the mainboard of Ye ‘749 with a magnetic substance as taught in GU ‘901 in order to support certain parts relative to other corresponding parts in order to offer more stability for the display assembly.
So that Ye ’749, as modified, teaches, wherein a first magnetic substance (as taught in GU ‘091) is arranged on the rotating block 533 or the support plate 30; a third groove 124 is formed in a front side of the mainboard 12, and a third magnetic substance (taught in GU ‘091) is arranged in the third groove 124 or on a protrusion.
Regarding claim 6, Ye ‘749, as modified, discloses, wherein at least two said display screens 50 are arranged, protrusions 533 are arranged on back sides of the display screens 50, second magnetic substances (as taught in GU ‘901) are arranged on front sides of the display screens 50, and the second magnetic substances (as taught in GU ‘901) at corresponding positions of the display screens 50 have opposite magnetic polarities or have only one magnetic polarity; third grooves 123 are formed in a front side of the mainboard 12, and the protrusions 533 (portion that enters slots 123 – col. 9, line 45-col. 10, line 19) are movably clamped in the third grooves 123.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 12,259,749 to Ye et al. in view of US 2017/0123456 to Chung et al.
Regarding claim 7, Ye ‘749 teaches the rotatable-screen splitter including a display screen 50.
Chung ‘456 teaches a display including a speaker 14, a three-way toggle switch (para 0018 – three distinct operation modes – Wi-Fi only, Bluetooth only, Wi-Fi Bluetooth) and three TYPE-C interfaces (para 0026).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Ye ‘749 to include a speaker, a three-way toggle switch and three TYPE-C interfaces as taught in Chung ‘456 so as to support a compact display assembly having certain features on the display, relative to the screen splitter device, per user preference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 3 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and may be used in subsequent office action rejections, as applicable. The list of supports is as follows: US-11416024-B2 OR US-12455597-B2 OR US-11953942-B2 OR US-11627675-B2 OR US-11543858-B2 OR US-11899497-B1 OR US-11573596-B2 OR US-9395757-B2 OR US-9441782-B2 OR US-11122702-B1 OR US-6532146-B1 OR US-11815953-B2 OR US-10168739-B1 OR US-11487328-B1 OR US-10817020-B1 OR US-5768096-A OR US-20210405702-A1 OR US-20220129038-A1 OR US-20250036161-A1 OR US-20240061470-A1 OR US-20090122474-A1 OR US-20090090825-A1 OR US-20070084978-A1 OR US-20030043087-A1 OR US-20100124006-A1 OR US-20220253101-A1 OR US-20240324119-A1 OR US-20210134130-A1 OR US-20200301481-A1 OR US-20200278722-A1 OR US-20240241537-A1 OR US-20220075417-A1 OR US-20110298690-A1 OR US-20120047785-A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONICA E MILLNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7507. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:00pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/MONICA E MILLNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632