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 .
Double Patenting
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-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,535,981 B2 in view of Min et al (PGPUB 2021/0247805 A1).
Current Application – Claim 1
U.S. Patent 12,535,981 B2 – Claim 1
An electronic device comprising: a housing including a first housing part and a second housing part rotatably coupled with the first housing part;
An electronic device comprising: a housing including a first housing part and a second housing part rotatably coupled with the first housing part;
a first display disposed in a front surface of the housing;
a first display defining at least a portion of a front side of the housing;
a second display disposed in at least a portion of a rear surface of the first housing part;
a second display defining at least a portion of a rear side of the first housing part;
at least one sensor disposed in the housing; at least one processor comprising processing circuitry; and memory comprising one or more storage media, storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to:
at least one sensor disposed in the housing; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry; and memory comprising one or more storage media, storing instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to:
display, on the first display, a first screen corresponding to an application in an unfolded state of the housing;
while the housing is in a second folded state in which the first housing part and the second housing part are partially folded with respect to each other, obtain data using the at least one sensor;
identify a state of the housing changed from the unfolded state to a partial folded state and an orientation of the housing using the at least one sensor;
based on an identification that the orientation of the housing is in a first range, display, on the second display, a second screen corresponding to the application in a first orientation; and
based on the data being out of a threshold range, display, on the second display, a screen in a first orientation; and
based on an identification that the orientation of the housing is in a second range different from the first range, display, on the second display, the second screen corresponding to the application in a second orientation opposite to the first orientation.
based on the data being within the threshold range, display, on the second display, the screen in a second orientation opposite to the first orientation.
The patent application does not specifically teach the limitation, “display, on the first display, a first screen corresponding to an application in an unfolded state of the housing” and the second screen corresponding to the application in a first orientation or a second orientation.
Further, The patent application teaches the limitation, “while the housing is in a second folded state in which the first housing part and the second housing part are partially folded with respect to each other, obtain data using the at least one sensor”. In other words, the patent application only teaches the housing is in a second folded state rather than “changed from the unfolded state to a partial folded state”, which requires the starting state to the end state of the housing as required by Applicant’s claim.
Min (Figs. 3B, 9, 10) teaches,
display, on the first display (sub-display 383), a first screen (i.e. screen on sub-display 383) corresponding to an application (application, i.e. the application as shown in Fig. 9 is showing a face of a person) in an unfolded state (state 901) of the housing (Fig. 9, ¶ 118: i.e. sub-display 383, ¶ 153, 154: i.e. detect orientation of the displays),
identify a state of the housing changed from the unfolded state to a partial folded state (i.e. state 901 to state 902 shows fully open state to partially folded state as shown in the figure) and an orientation (orientation) of the housing using the at least one sensor (i.e. motion sensor, acceleration sensor, gyro sensor)(¶ 154: i.e. sensors, ¶ 217: i.e. state change from fully open state to the folded state).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by incorporating Min’s method of determining application mode based on the fold angle state and the orientation state with the teaching of the claimed invention, so as to improve the convenience of the user using the application execution screens based on the orientation and angle of the display device (¶ 235, 254).
Similar discussion applies to claim 11 of current application and claim 11 of the patented application.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Applicant’s claimed invention regards an electronic device with a first display and a second display in the front and rear surface of the housing. The electronic device is capable of controlling the orientation of the screen corresponding to an application based on identifying a state of the housing changed from the unfolded state to a partial folded state and an orientation of the housing. Regarding this, Applicant specifically claims the limitation, “display, on the first display, a first screen corresponding to an application in an unfolded state of the housing; identify a state of the housing change from the unfolded state to a partial folded state and an orientation of the housing using the at least one sensor; based on an identification that the orientation of the housing is in a first range, display, on the second display, a second screen corresponding to the application in a first orientation; and based on an identification that the orientation of the housing is in a second range different from the first range, display on the second display, the second screen corresponding to the application in a second orientation opposite to the first orientation”.
Examiner conducted a search to find the prior arts that would teach these limitations but could not find them. Followings are the most relevant prior arts from the search.
Min et al (PGPUB 2021/0247805 A1) – Min teaches varying the display mode based on the fold state and the orientation. However, Min does not specifically teach the first orientation and the second orientation, which is the opposite orientation of the first orientation, based on the identification based on the state of the housing changed from the unfolded state to a partial folded state.
Peng (PGPUB 2022/0308638 A1) – Peng teaches the opening and closing angle of the foldable screen in a non-folded state with mapping the different angles with motion data. Peng does not specifically teach the opposite orientation with the specific conditions discussed above.
Zhang (PGPUB 2022/0413553 A1) – Zhang teaches the foldable screen detecting the angle and orientation of the screens but does not specifically teach opposite orientations with the specific conditions as discussed above.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGHYUK PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7359. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00AM - 6:00 M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chanh Nguyen can be reached on ((571) 272-7772. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/SANGHYUK PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
