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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed November 6th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-13 remain pending in the application.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9-10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Svajda (United States Patent Application Publication 20100245289 A1), hereinafter Svajda.
Regarding claim 1, Svajda teaches an electronic device ([0039] touch input and optical proximity sensing system 10), comprising:
a display screen (Fig. 1; [0040] a touch input device 20);
a transmitter, disposed on a non-display side of the display screen, and configured to transmit a first optical signal and a second optical signal to the display screen, wherein transmittance of the first optical signal passing through the display screen is greater than that of the second optical signal passing through the display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] LEDs 24 and 26);
a receiver, disposed on the non-display side of the display screen, and configured to receive the first optical signal and the second optical signal (Fig. 1-3; [0040] receiver 22); and
a processor, connected to the receiver, and configured to determine a calibration coefficient according to the second optical signal received by the receiver and a second reference background noise, and determine a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise, wherein the first reference background noise is a theoretical value of the first optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen, and the second reference background noise is a theoretical value of the second optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen (Fig. 10-11; [049] The reflectance measurements are transferred to a processor for calculation of position and gesture recognition; [0069] One of skill in the art will recognize that within the sensor circuitry 200 presented in this example, DCACC 107 continuously operates to remove normal changes in the background ambient light. Only transient changes produce an output. Output only occurs when there is a difference between the DC correction signal and the input signal. An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.).
Regarding claim 4, Svajda teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to calculate, according to the first optical signal received by the receiver and the calibrated first reference background noise, a variation of the first optical signal received by the receiver, and determine, according to the variation, whether an object approaches the display screen ([0071] FIG. 12 is a control flow diagram illustrating one example of a process 250 in the controller 108 of FIG. 10 that performs motion detection and touch screen activation suitable for use with the touch screen and optical proximity sensing systems shown in FIGS. 1-9. When process 250 is initiated in controller 108, motion detection begins, step 252, such as in the manner described above with respect to FIGS. 10-11).
Regarding claim 5, Svajda teaches the electronic device according to claim 1, further comprising:
a middle frame, wherein the display screen is disposed on the middle frame (Fig. 1-9); and
a printed circuit motherboard, disposed on the non-display side of the display screen, wherein the transmitter and the receiver are respectively disposed between the display screen and the printed circuit motherboard, and a light-shielding material piece is disposed on outer peripheries of the transmitter and the receiver (Fig. 10; [0060] Opaque barriers are preferably positioned between LEDs 392, 394 and photodiode receiver 390 to reduce crosstalk.).
Regarding claim 6, Svajda teaches a background noise calibration method, performed by an electronic device, wherein the method comprises:
controlling a transmitter to transmit a first optical signal and a second optical signal from a non-display side of a display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] LEDs 24 and 26);
controlling a receiver to receive the first optical signal and the second optical signal from the non-display side of the display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] receiver 22);
determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise ([0069] An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.); and
determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise ([0069] An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.),
wherein transmittance of the first optical signal passing through the display screen is greater than that of the second optical signal passing through the display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] LEDs 24 and 26); and
wherein the first reference background noise is a theoretical value of the first optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen, and the second reference background noise is a theoretical value of the second optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen (Fig. 10-11; [0069] One of skill in the art will recognize that within the sensor circuitry 200 presented in this example, DCACC 107 continuously operates to remove normal changes in the background ambient light. Only transient changes produce an output. Output only occurs when there is a difference between the DC correction signal and the input signal. An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.).
Regarding claim 9, Svajda teaches the method according to claim 6, further comprising: calculating a variation of the received first optical signal according to the received first optical signal and the calibrated first reference background noise, and determining, according to the variation, whether an object approaches the display screen ([0071] FIG. 12 is a control flow diagram illustrating one example of a process 250 in the controller 108 of FIG. 10 that performs motion detection and touch screen activation suitable for use with the touch screen and optical proximity sensing systems shown in FIGS. 1-9. When process 250 is initiated in controller 108, motion detection begins, step 252, such as in the manner described above with respect to FIGS. 10-11).
Regarding claim 10, Svajda teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform a background noise calibration method ([0049] The reflectance measurements are transferred to a processor for calculation of position and gesture recognition), wherein the method comprises:
controlling a transmitter to transmit a first optical signal and a second optical signal from a non-display side of a display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] LEDs 24 and 26);
controlling a receiver to receive the first optical signal and the second optical signal from the non-display side of the display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] receiver 22);
determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise ([0069] An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.); and
determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise ([0069] An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.),
wherein transmittance of the first optical signal passing through the display screen is greater than that of the second optical signal passing through the display screen (Fig. 1-3; [0040] LEDs 24 and 26); and
wherein the first reference background noise is a theoretical value of the first optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen, and the second reference background noise is a theoretical value of the second optical signal received by the receiver when no object approaches the display screen (Fig. 10-11; [0069] One of skill in the art will recognize that within the sensor circuitry 200 presented in this example, DCACC 107 continuously operates to remove normal changes in the background ambient light. Only transient changes produce an output. Output only occurs when there is a difference between the DC correction signal and the input signal. An advantage of this method of reflectance measurement is that resolution is limited by the "shot noise" of PD 105, provided a low noise photo amplifier is used. Circuitry 200 exhibits low noise for the DC ambient correction current source if a moderately large PMOS is used for P1 and an appropriate degeneration resistor is used at its Vdd source. The integrator capacitor on the gate of P1 removes most of the noise components of TCA 202.).
Regarding claim 13, Svajda teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 10, wherein the method further comprises: calculating a variation of the received first optical signal according to the received first optical signal and the calibrated first reference background noise, and determining, according to the variation, whether an object approaches the display screen ([0071] FIG. 12 is a control flow diagram illustrating one example of a process 250 in the controller 108 of FIG. 10 that performs motion detection and touch screen activation suitable for use with the touch screen and optical proximity sensing systems shown in FIGS. 1-9. When process 250 is initiated in controller 108, motion detection begins, step 252, such as in the manner described above with respect to FIGS. 10-11).
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 2-3, 7-8, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Svajda in view of Agarwal et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20190162820 A1), hereinafter Agarwal.
Regarding claim 2, Svajda teaches the electronic device according to claim 1,
Svajda fails to teach the device wherein the processor is further configured to use a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient.
However, Agarwal teaches the device wherein the processor is further configured to use a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient ([0030] The determination that the target 22 has been detected may also include a determination that some aspect of the signal from the sensor 18 is above a detection-threshold so that, for example, the signal-to-noise ratio is sufficient for reliable calibration of the sensor 18.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Regarding claim 3, Svajda teaches the electronic device according to claim 1,
Svajda fails to teach the device wherein the processor is further configured to use a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise.
However, Agarwal teaches the device wherein the processor is further configured to use a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise ([0019] In one embodiment, controller 28 determines a correction-factor 40 (i.e. a calibration-coefficient) in accordance with a determination that a detected-attribute 32 of the target 22 differs from the expected-attribute 38 by more than a correction-threshold 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the calibrated noise level from the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Regarding claim 7, Svajda teaches the method according to claim 6,
Svajda fails to teach the method wherein the determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise comprises: using a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient.
However, Agarwal teaches the method wherein the determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise comprises: using a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient ([0030] The determination that the target 22 has been detected may also include a determination that some aspect of the signal from the sensor 18 is above a detection-threshold so that, for example, the signal-to-noise ratio is sufficient for reliable calibration of the sensor 18.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Regarding claim 8, Svajda teaches the method according to claim 6,
Svajda fails to teach the method wherein the determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise comprises: using a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise.
However, Agarwal teaches the method wherein the determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise comprises: using a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise ([0019] In one embodiment, controller 28 determines a correction-factor 40 (i.e. a calibration-coefficient) in accordance with a determination that a detected-attribute 32 of the target 22 differs from the expected-attribute 38 by more than a correction-threshold 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the calibrated noise level from the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Regarding claim 11, Svajda teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 10,
Svajda fails to teach the method wherein the determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise comprises: using a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient.
However, Agarwal teaches the method wherein the determining a calibration coefficient according to the received second optical signal and a second reference background noise comprises: using a ratio of the second optical signal received by the receiver to the second reference background noise as the calibration coefficient ([0030] The determination that the target 22 has been detected may also include a determination that some aspect of the signal from the sensor 18 is above a detection-threshold so that, for example, the signal-to-noise ratio is sufficient for reliable calibration of the sensor 18.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Regarding claim 12, Svajda teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 10,
Svajda fails to teach the method wherein the determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise comprises: using a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise.
However, Agarwal teaches the method wherein the determining a calibrated first reference background noise according to the calibration coefficient and a first reference background noise comprises: using a product of the calibration coefficient and the first reference background noise as the calibrated first reference background noise ([0019] In one embodiment, controller 28 determines a correction-factor 40 (i.e. a calibration-coefficient) in accordance with a determination that a detected-attribute 32 of the target 22 differs from the expected-attribute 38 by more than a correction-threshold 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Svajda to comprise the calibrated noise level from the signal to noise ratio calibration coefficient similar to Agarwal, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating a calibration method to reduce the incoming level of noise in an object detector.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 6th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument applicant has made regarding that one signal is greater than another, the examiner notes that the claims, as written, maintain that the transmitted light, that passes through the display glass, constitute one signal that is greater than the other. As the transmitted light is measured in figures 1-3 include one signal that is greater than the other, further reference on in the paragraph of the disclosure [0040] cited in the previous rejection, the LEDs are seen as indeed reading on the limitation. While the prior art does not speak on the amplitude of the signal prior to its emission, the immediate application is also silent on the specific operation of the transmitter in this regard, and absent of a regulator prior to transmission that controls the emission of the signals, or of reference to the signal power’s strength being considered prior to the detection which also occurs in relation to the transmitted signal passing through the display glass, the prior art is maintained as reading on the broadest reasonable interpretation of this claim limitation.
Further, regarding the argument made in relation to the signal processing and noise correction, the claim limitations, as written, describe a correction parameter designed for the use of removal of background noise in a system where no object is present in either receiver. The prior art of Svajda discloses calibrating for the noise generated in the presence of no object, and monitors the changes in the background noise. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, as written, these amount to the same process in the independent claim. Further distinction of the claim limitations over the prior art are not made in the independent claim and cannot be read under in the examination of the first claim, as such the prior art rejection is maintained in this Final Rejection.
Conclusion
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 ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 8:00-5:00 PST.
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, ROBERT HODGE can be reached at (571)272-2097. 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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights