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 11-12 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 11 recites the limitation "the flexible printed circuit board" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 depends on claim 11 and therefore, claim 12 is also rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordby (US 20250390183) in the view of Yoneoka (US 20160188013).
Regarding claim 1: Nordby teach a touch screen handwriting elimination apparatus (Figs. 3, 11-12 teach pen/stylus as a touch screen handwriting elimination apparatus), comprising: a trigger component comprising a trigger portion in contact with a touch screen, and a press portion disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0026, 0078-0079] teach a trigger component 1501 comprising a trigger portion in contact with a touch screen and a press portion 1505 disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion 1501); and a strain component comprising a strain sensing assembly opposite to the press portion, wherein the trigger portion is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly through the press portion, the strain sensing assembly generates an erasure signal corresponding to the press, and the erasure signal is for eliminating handwriting displayed on the touch screen (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0078-0079, 0089-0091] teach a strain component comprising a strain sensing assembly 1509 opposite to the press portion 1505, wherein the trigger portion 1501 is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly 1509, the strain sensing assembly generates an erasure signal for eliminating handwriting displayed).
Nordby does not explicitly disclose the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion.
However, Yoneoka teaches the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion (Figs. 7-12 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach a force sensor structure 22 comprising the strain sensing assembly 31 undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion 24). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nordby’s invention by including above teachings of Yoneoka, because utilizing such strain sensing structure provides accurate force/strain sensing, which is very well-known and widely used in the art, as taught by Yoneoka. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 2: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate and a plurality of strain sensing elements disposed on the strain substrate, wherein the plurality of strain sensing elements are located in a same plane, a plane parallel to the plane in which the plurality of strain sensing elements are located is used as a projection plane, and the plurality of strain sensing elements are evenly arrayed in the projection plane; and a projection of the press portion on the projection plane is located in an outer contour of projections of the plurality of strain sensing elements on the projection plane (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate 26/31 and a plurality of strain sensing elements 33 disposed on the strain substrate 26/31 as claimed; and a projection of the press portion 24 is also located as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 3: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein the strain substrate is of a centrosymmetric structure as a whole; and the press portion is configured as a protrusion structure protruding from the inner side of the trigger portion, a protrusion direction of the protrusion structure is perpendicular to the strain substrate, and a projection point of a geometric center of an end portion of the protrusion structure on the projection plane coincides with a geometric center point of the strain substrate (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach the strain substrate 26/31 is of a centrosymmetric structure as a whole; and the press portion 24 is configured as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 4: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein the strain substrate comprises a plurality of substrate members disposed in pairs, and the plurality of substrate members are evenly arranged around a geometric center point of the strain substrate; and every two strain sensing elements in the plurality of strain sensing elements form a pair of strain sensing elements, wherein at least one pair of strain sensing elements is attached to each substrate member in the plurality of substrate members (Yoneoka in Figs. 11 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach a plurality of areas on the substrate where pair of strain sensing elements 33 are located is interpreted as a plurality of substrate members; and both are disposed as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 5: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein each strain sensing element in the plurality of strain sensing elements is configured as a resistance strain gauge, one pair of resistance strain gauges is attached to each substrate member in the plurality of substrate members, and the pair of the resistance strain gauges on each substrate member is electrically connected to a corresponding pair of auxiliary resistors, to form a Wheatstone bridge circuit (Yoneoka in Figs. 11 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach each strain sensing element 33 is configured as a resistance strain gauge attached to region or substrate member of the substrate 31, and arranged and functioning to form a Wheatstone bridge circuit as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 6: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein each strain sensing element in the plurality of strain sensing elements is configured as a resistance strain gauge, two pairs of resistance strain gauges are attached to each substrate member in the plurality of substrate members, and the two pairs of resistance strain gauges are electrically connected to form a Wheatstone bridge circuit; and the two pairs of resistance strain gauges in each Wheatstone bridge are arranged annularly or side by side (Yoneoka in Figs. 11 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach each strain sensing element 33 is configured as a resistance strain gauge attached to region or substrate member of the substrate 31, and arranged and functioning to form a Wheatstone bridge circuit as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 7: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka teach wherein the strain substrate is configured as a strain steel sheet (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0037] teach the force sensor structure 22 including the strain substrate can be made with steel).
Regarding claim 10: Nordby teaches wherein the handwriting elimination apparatus further comprises a signal transmission component configured to send the erasure signal to an electronic device in which the touch screen is used (Figs. 13-15 and paragraph [0024-0027, 0082-0088] teach the pen further comprises transmitters to send the erasure signal to the touch screen device).
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordby (US 20250390183), in the view of Yoneoka (US 20160188013), and further in the view of Chang (US 20200050340).
Regarding claim 14: Nordby teaches an electronic stylus pen, comprising: a pen barrel and a pen head disposed at one end of the pen barrel, and a pen cap connected to the other end of the pen barrel and is configured to perform an erasure function (Figs. 11-12, 15 and paragraph [0023, 0076-0081, 0090]); wherein the pen cap comprises a handwriting elimination apparatus for a touch screen (Figs. 3, 11-12 teach pen/stylus as a touch screen handwriting elimination apparatus); wherein the handwriting elimination apparatus comprises: a trigger component comprising a trigger portion in contact with the touch screen, and a press portion disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0026, 0078-0079] teach a trigger component 1501 comprising a trigger portion in contact with a touch screen and a press portion 1505 disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion 1501); and a strain component comprising a strain sensing assembly opposite to the press portion, wherein the trigger portion is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly through the press portion, the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion and generates an erasure signal, and the erasure signal is for eliminating handwriting displayed on the touch screen (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0078-0079, 0089-0091] teach a strain component comprising a strain sensing assembly 1509 opposite to the press portion 1505, wherein the trigger portion 1501 is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly 1509, the strain sensing assembly generates an erasure signal for eliminating handwriting displayed).
Nordby does not explicitly disclose the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion; and the pen cap removably connected to the other end of the pen barrel.
However, Yoneoka teaches the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion (Figs. 7-12 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach a force sensor structure 22 comprising the strain sensing assembly 31 undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion 24). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nordby’s invention by including above teachings of Yoneoka, because utilizing such strain sensing structure provides accurate force/strain sensing, which is very well-known and widely used in the art, as taught by Yoneoka. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Furthermore, Chang teaches the pen cap removably connected to the other end of the pen barrel (Figs. 2-3, 7 and paragraph [0028, 0036] teach the pen cap 104 removable connected to the other end of the pen barrel 100). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Nordby and Yoneoka by including above teachings of Chang, because utilizing removable cap is very well-known and widely used in the art, it allows to access the interior components of stylus including battery and other electronics, as taught by Chang. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 15: Combination of Nordby, Yoneoka, and Chang teach wherein the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate and a plurality of strain sensing elements disposed on the strain substrate, wherein the plurality of strain sensing elements are located in a same plane, a plane parallel to the plane in which the plurality of strain sensing elements are located is used as a projection plane, and the plurality of strain sensing elements are evenly arrayed in the projection plane; and a projection of the press portion on the projection plane is located in an outer contour of projections of the plurality of strain sensing elements on the projection plane (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate 26/31 and a plurality of strain sensing elements 33 disposed on the strain substrate 26/31 as claimed; and a projection of the press portion 24 is also located as claimed). See claim 14 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby, Yoneoka, and Chang, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 16: Combination of Nordby, Yoneoka, and Chang teach wherein the strain substrate is of a centrosymmetric structure as a whole; and the press portion is configured as a protrusion structure protruding from the inner side of the trigger portion, a protrusion direction of the protrusion structure is perpendicular to the strain substrate, and a projection point of a geometric center of an end portion of the protrusion structure on the projection plane coincides with a geometric center point of the strain substrate (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach the strain substrate 26/31 is of a centrosymmetric structure as a whole; and the press portion 24 is configured as claimed). See claim 14 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 17: Nordby teaches a touch screen handwriting elimination method (Figs. 3, 11-12 teach pen/stylus as a touch screen handwriting elimination method), comprising: receiving a feedback signal from an electronic device, in which a touch screen is used, that triggers an erasure function of a pen cap (Figs. 13-15 and paragraph [0006, 0072, 0076-0079, 0088] teach two way communication between the electronic device tablet and pen-stylus, receiving signals from the tablet enables erasing functions of the pen); performing detection and sending electrical signal information indicating that a trigger portion receives a force; and determining target pressure information of the pen cap based on the electrical signal information, and sending the target pressure information to the electronic device, for the electronic device to determine, based on the target pressure information, an erasure degree for handwriting displayed on the touch screen, wherein the target pressure information comprises pressure magnitude information of the pen cap (Figs. 13-15 and paragraph [0008, 0076-0079, 0088] teach a trigger portion or cap receives a force and determining level/magnitude of force or pressure and sending it to tablet device to perform erasure degree for handwriting displayed), wherein the erasure function is performed by using the pen cap of an electronic stylus pen comprised a pen barrel and a pen head disposed at one end of the pen barrel, and the pen cap connected to the other end of the pen barrel and is configured to perform an erasure function (Figs. 11-12, 15 and paragraph [0023, 0076-0081, 0090]); wherein the pen cap comprises a handwriting elimination apparatus for a touch screen (Figs. 3, 11-12 teach pen/stylus as a touch screen handwriting elimination apparatus); wherein the handwriting elimination apparatus comprises: a trigger component, wherein the trigger component comprises the trigger portion in contact with the touch screen, and a press portion disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0026, 0078-0079] teach a trigger component 1501 comprising a trigger portion in contact with a touch screen and a press portion 1505 disposed on an inner side of the trigger portion 1501); and a strain component, wherein the strain component comprises a strain sensing assembly opposite to the press portion, wherein the trigger portion is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly through the press portion, the strain sensing assembly under a press force applied by the press portion and generates an erasure signal, and the erasure signal is for eliminating handwriting displayed on the touch screen (Fig. 15 and paragraph [0078-0079, 0089-0091] teach a strain component comprising a strain sensing assembly 1509 opposite to the press portion 1505, wherein the trigger portion 1501 is in contact with the touch screen and receives a force, and presses the strain sensing assembly 1509, the strain sensing assembly generates an erasure signal for eliminating handwriting displayed).
Nordby does not explicitly disclose the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion; and the pen cap removably connected to the other end of the pen barrel.
However, Yoneoka teaches the strain sensing assembly undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion (Figs. 7-12 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach a force sensor structure 22 comprising the strain sensing assembly 31 undergoes deformation under a press force applied by the press portion 24). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Nordby’s invention by including above teachings of Yoneoka, because utilizing such strain sensing structure provides accurate force/strain sensing, which is very well-known and widely used in the art, as taught by Yoneoka. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Furthermore, Chang teaches the pen cap removably connected to the other end of the pen barrel (Figs. 2-3, 7 and paragraph [0028, 0036] teach the pen cap 104 removable connected to the other end of the pen barrel 100). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Nordby and Yoneoka by including above teachings of Chang, because utilizing removable cap is very well-known and widely used in the art, it allows to access the interior components of stylus including battery and other electronics, as taught by Chang. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 18: Combination of Nordby, Yoneoka, and Chang teach wherein the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate and a plurality of strain sensing elements disposed on the strain substrate; and the plurality of strain sensing elements generate a plurality of pieces of electrical signal information based on a press force applied by the press portion, determine the target pressure information of the pen cap based on the plurality of pieces of electrical signal information, and send the target pressure information to the electronic device, for the electronic device to determine the erasure degree based on the target pressure information (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0041-0050] teach the strain sensing assembly comprises a strain substrate 26/31 and a plurality of strain sensing elements 33 disposed on the strain substrate 26/31 as claimed; Figs. 13-15 and paragraph [0008, 0076-0079, 0088] teach the trigger portion or cap receives a force and determining level/magnitude of force or pressure and sending it to tablet device to perform erasure degree for handwriting displayed). See claim 17 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 19: Combination of Nordby, Yoneoka, and Chang teach wherein the plurality of strain sensing elements correspond to N Wheatstone bridge circuits, each Wheatstone bridge circuit outputs one bridge voltage, and the plurality of pieces of electrical signal information are N bridge voltages output by the N Wheatstone bridge circuits (Yoneoka in Figs. 8-13 and paragraph [0048]). See claim 17 rejection for combination reasoning of Nordby and Yoneoka, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 20: Nordby teaches wherein before the feedback signal is received from the electronic device that triggers the erasure function, the method further comprises: sending a trigger signal for enabling the erasure function (Figs. 13-15 and paragraph [0006, 0072, 0076-0079, 0088] teach two way communication between the electronic device tablet and pen-stylus, receiving signals from the tablet enables erasing functions of the pen).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordby (US 20250390183), in the view of Yoneoka (US 20160188013), and further in the view of Peretz (US 20180052531).
Regarding claim 11: Combination of Nordby and Yoneoka do not explicitly disclose wherein the handwriting elimination apparatus further comprises a sensing electrode forming the press portion, and when the handwriting elimination apparatus comprises the flexible printed circuit board, the sensing electrode is electrically connected to a second part of the flexible printed circuit board.
However, Peretz teaches wherein the handwriting elimination apparatus further comprises a sensing electrode forming the press portion, and when the handwriting elimination apparatus comprises the flexible printed circuit board, the sensing electrode is electrically connected to a second part of the flexible printed circuit board (Figs. 2-5 and paragraph [0019-0029] teach a sensing electrode 204 forming the press portion electrically connected to a second part of the FPC 110). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Nordby and Yoneoka, by including above teachings of Peretz, because such structure allows the system to accurately detect pressure/force, as taught by Peretz. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 12 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIT CHATLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1610. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 5712707230. 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.
/AMIT CHATLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Prosecution Insights