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 § 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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 94-97, 99, 100-102, 104-106 and 111-113 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Chiang et al. (US 2013/0135211) in view of Liimatta et al. (US 20220252471).
Claims 94, 96-97, 99, 105, 111 and 113, Chiang discloses a system comprising: a keyboard
(Abstract, Figs. 1-7) comprising: a plurality of keys; a touch sensor (39 Fig. 5) for detecting the touch of a
user on the keys (Abstract); wherein a keypress relating to the keys is detected using the touch sensor
([0025]). The system inherently comprises a controller capable of detecting a touch input using the
touch sensor, detecting a keypress relating to the keys using the touch sensor, and distinguishing
between a touch input and a keypress (The keyboard uses an identical projection area to perform keying
and touch operation, which avoids the inconvenience for a user when using both a keyboard and a
touchpad in the prior art. See Abstract).
Chiang further discloses integrating a pair of contacts into the touch sensor for detecting the
keypress relating to the keys (A skilled person in the art can integrate one pair of contacts into a capacity
sensing circuit according to the formation mechanism of the capacity sensing circuit. [0025]. The pair of
contracts 362 become a capacity sensor.) The controller inherently determines a direction of a change in
the local electric field measured by the touch sensor (Abstract and [0025]. Touch sensor 38 (Fig. 5).
Chiang does not explicitly disclose detecting a touch input and a keypress input based on a
change in a local electric field.
However, Liimatta discloses detecting a touch input and a press input
based on a change in a local electric field, and distinguishing between a touch input and a press input
based a magnitude of the local electric field measured by a touch/press sensor (Abstract, Figs. 4a1-4d1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the application use Liimatta's touch/press sensor features in the invention of Chiang to improve the
touch sensor structures of Chiang.
Claim 95, Chiang discloses each key is associated with a conductive coating, wherein each
conductive coating is arranged such that when said key is pressed the corresponding coating moves
relative to the touch sensor so as to cause a change in a local electric field ([0025]).
Claim 100, Chiang discloses a transmittal mechanism (342, 3423 Fig. 5) of a corresponding key.
Chiang does not explicitly discloses arranging a coating on the transmittal mechanism. However, it is
considered a matter of obvious design choice to arrange a coating on Chiang's transmittal mechanism
because it does not provide any unexpected results and solve any problems.
Claim 101, Chiang discloses a conductive coating/electrode ([0025]).
Claim 102, Chiang discloses the touch sensor is arranged so that each key impacts the touch
sensor when said key is depressed (Fig. 5), and the touch sensor is arranged so that a conductive coating
(contacts 362, Fig. 5) associated with a key impacts the touch sensor when said key is depressed
(Contacts 363 impact each other when a key is depressed. [0025]).
Claim 104, Chiang discloses the touch sensor being a capacitive touch sensor (See Abstract). The
controller and the capacitive touch sensor inherently determine at least one of a duration of a change
measured by the touch sensor, and a rate of a change measured by the touch sensor.
Claim 106, the controller of Chiang inherently drives a signal for another component such as
light source 746 (Fig. 6) of the keyboard in dependence on a signal relating to the touch sensor.
Claim 112, Chiang discloses the system being a computer device ([0004]).
Claim(s) 98 and 107-110 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang
et al. (US 2013/0135211) in view of Liimatta et al. (US 20220252471) as applied to claim 94 above, and
further in view of Cho (US 20200012354).
Claims 98 and 107-110, Chiang does not disclose determining a mode of the keyboard.
However, Cho discloses determining a mode of a keyboard ([0004], [0008], Fig. 2) and switching the
keyboard between a plurality of modes based on a user input (([0004], Fig. 4), and determining whether
an input relates to a mode switching input and/or determining whether an input relates to a function in
the current mode (([0004], [0008], Fig. 2). The list of possible modes includes a pointer, touch keypress
modes ([0004], [0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the application to incorporate Cho's mode determination into Chiang's invention because it
allows Chiang's invention to generate different modes in the system.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because
the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for
any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that Chiang does not disclose or suggest a unified sensor capable of distinguishing between touch and keypress inputs based on electric field characteristics. It is respectfully clear that “unified” sensor is not claimed.
Applicant argued that “In short, LIIMATTA discloses a touch sensor that is arranged to deform in response to a user's touch. This is a radically different type of touch sensor to the touch sensor provided by CHIANG (that is arranged to detect a touch on a set of keys that does not cause any deformation of the touch sensor.” It is respectfully submitted that both references are from the same field. Liimatta was cited to teach the idea of having “detecting a touch input and a keypress input based on a change in a local electric field.” This is not different from Chiang because also Chiang differentiates between touch and key-press.
It is respectfully submitted that Applicant Cannot show non-obvious by attacking references individually whereas here the rejections are based on combination of references> In re Keller, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kyowski et al. (US 2016/0070379) teaches capacitive touch keyboard and touch sensor.
Wang Zhi-an CN 203552179 Teaches touch keyboard to enter both key-press and pointer entries.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMR A AWAD whose telephone number is (571)272-7764. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
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.
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621