DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 17/922,566 originally filed 10/31/2022. The Request for Continued Examination and Amendment presented on 06/11/2025 which provides amendments to claims 1, 4, 11, and 14, and claims 5-6, 15, 17-18 is hereby acknowledged.
Currently claims 1-4, 7-14, and 16 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/11/2025 has been entered.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts in the Remarks (pg. 6) that amended portions of the claims are not taught in Rosenberg however The Office respectfully disagrees. Paragraphs [0364-0367] expressly discuss “IFSA technology can be used to create curved or flexible sensors in several different ways”. Rosenberg expressly teaches that “a flexible sensor can be laminated onto a curved rigid surface, or it is possible to start with a flat sensor and mold it into/onto a non-flat surface” and “sensors built on a flexible substrate can be directly embedded into the application.”
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted the prior art teaches the claimed invention and will be currently maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powers U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0261380 A1 hereinafter Powers and in view of Rosenberg et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0322674 A1 hereinafter Rosenberg in view of Endo et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0201268 A1 hereinafter Endo in view of Aufderheide U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263483 A1 hereinafter Aufderheide.
Consider Claim 1:
Powers discloses a flexible sensor stack, comprising: (Powers, See Abstract.)
a flexible film comprising a conformal polymer film; and (Powers, [0035], [0051], [0031], “In this configuration a single piece of glass or other non-conductive material is provided as substrate and having ITO or other electrically conductive material grids formed on both sides.” (see also Rosenberg [0364]))
first and second conformal poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) films formed over the flexible film and including sensor traces to provide a flexible touch/pen (T/P) sensor surface, (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
wherein the first conformal PEDOT film comprises a first area having a surface resistance greater than a surface resistance of another area of the first conformal PEDOT film by at least an order of magnitude. (Powers, Fig. 2, See traces and areas where traces are not. See also arguments above.)
Powers while disclosing specifically the layers and specific materials does not however suggest applying them to a non-flat surface and thus does not disclose wherein the flexible sensor stack is bendable to conform to a non-flat attachment surface.
Rosenberg however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to use flexible materials for conforming a touch sensor to a non-flat surface and therefore teaches it was known in the art to have wherein flexible sensor stack is bendable to conform to a non-flat attachment surface, and wherein the flexible sensor stack is built into a conformal cosmetic film product. (Rosenberg, [0364-0367], [0365], “To create a sensor that is permanently curved, a flexible sensor can be laminated onto a curved rigid surface, or it is possible to start with a flat sensor and mold it into/onto a non-flat surface. It is also possible to directly manufacture the sensor electrodes on a curved surface using known techniques such as Laser Direct Structuring (LDS) or by 3D printing using both conductive and insulating materials. In the case of shunt-mode sensors, the force sensing layer can be pre-molded into a curved shape and can be made out of a deformable material such as molded silicone. In this case, force sensing material can be directly deposited onto, or molded into, the force sensing layer. Alternatively, the entire force sensing layer can be made from a flexible/deformable FSM.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a sensor on a non-flat surface as Rosenberg teaches that one may want to place sensors into a flexible phone/tablet, the wrist band of a watch or bracelet, into the sole of a shoe, or into clothing. In these cases, sensors built on a flexible substrate can be directly embedded into the application. They may also be manufactured in a fashion similar to how cloth is manufactured, as described earlier. (Rosenberg, [0366])
Powers and Rosenberg do not expressly suggest wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers and wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Endo however teaches that it was known in the art to provide a flexible PEDOT film having a small thickness wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers. (Endo, [0051], [0087], [0050], “In the panel-type input device 10, each of the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 of the first and second electrode plate 16, 22 is formed by using an electrically conductive polymer (i.e., a conducting polymer). One example of the conducting polymer that can be preferably used for the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 is, e.g., a polythiophene-based conducting polymer as described in JP-A-2005-182737. In particular, in the case where the panel-type input device 10 is configured as a touch panel having a transparent structure, the polythiophene-based polymer is preferred in excellent transparency. Other conducting polymers that can be used in the panel-type input device 10 are polyaniline, polypyrrole, polyethylene dioxythiophene (PEDOT), etc. Thickness of each conductive coat 14, 20 formed from the conducting polymer is not particularly limited, but preferably is in the range of 0.01 .mu.m to 10 .mu.m, and more preferably is in the range of 0.1 .mu.m to 1 .mu.m. If the thickness is less than 0.01 .mu.m, electrical resistance of each conductive coat 14, 20 may become unstable, and if thickness is more than 10 m, adhesiveness relative to each substrate 12, 18 may be degraded.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use thin flexible PEDOT films as these were known in the art in view of Endo to be used for the purpose of has advantages such that a boundary line between the detecting areas and the inoperative area is not visible, and the detecting areas and the inoperative area cannot be visually distinguished, and thus the visibility of a display screen through the panel-type input device is improved. (Endo, [0083])
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo while disclosing that layers be uniformly formed over the generally entire surface of the substrate however does not appear to expressly state the wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Aufderheide however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% and thus teaches wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film. (Aufderheide, [0050], “Conductive layers 260 and 270 preferably have uniform conductivity. In the case of an electrically conductive layer, the sheet resistance of the layer is preferably uniform to within 10%, meaning that the maximum deviation from an average sheet resistance over a distance of 2.5 centimeters is no more than 10%. More preferably, the sheet resistance is uniform to within 2%, even more preferably to within 0.5%, and still even more preferably to within 0.2%.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% as taught by Aufderheide as this was a known technique in the art and would have been used for the purpose of increasing performance of a touch screen. (Aufderheide, [0003])
Consider Claim 2:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 1, wherein the PEDOT films are fabricated to form a projective capacitive sensor array. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 3:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 2, wherein the projective capacitive sensor array is to be controlled by a sigma-delta controller. (Powers, [0054-0066], [0056], “Controller 510 may further include a memory 518, such as a flash memory, configured to store a predetermined set of instructions, such as a computer program. The computer program may incorporate algorithms. A computer, microcontroller or microprocessor 520 is in electrical communication with memory 518 and executes the instructions stored in the memory in a predetermined manner.”)
Consider Claim 4:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 1, wherein the conformal polymer film is a conformal vinyl film. (Aufderheide [0062], “Substrate 525 may be rigid or flexible. The substrate may be polymeric or any type of glass. For example, the substrate may be float glass, or it may be made of organic materials such as polycarbonate, acrylic, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polysulfone, and the like. Alternatively, substrate 525 may include a metal, in which case, the substrate can also be used as the bottom electrode 560.”)
Consider Claim 7:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 1, wherein the flexible film has a thickness in the range of 25-150 micrometers. (Pomposo, [0048], “A pressure sensor was prepared from two flexible sheets of cellulose paper (CP) of 5 cm.times.5 cm of active area and 105 microns of thickness each, coated with a thin layer (1-2 microns) of poly(ethylene-dioxy-thiophene) containing as a polyanion a poly(styrene sulphonic) acid (PEDOT-PSS) deposited by oxidative polymerisation of the ethylene-dioxy-thiophene monomer in water, giving rise to a dispersion with a solid content of 2.5%.”)
Consider Claim 8:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 1, wherein the first conformal PEDOT film is formed over a first surface of the flexible film, and wherein the second conformal PEDOT film is formed over a second surface of the flexible film. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 9:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 8, wherein the second conformal PEDOT film includes projective capacitive row sensor traces for the T/P sensor surface. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 10:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 9, wherein the first conformal PEDOT film includes projective capacitive column sensor traces relative to the projective capacitive row sensor traces of the second conformal PEDOT film. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 11:
Powers discloses a method of forming a flexible sensor stack, comprising: (Powers, See Abstract.)
providing a flexible film comprising a conformal polymer film; (Powers, [0035], [0051], [0031], “In this configuration a single piece of glass or other non-conductive material is provided as substrate and having ITO or other electrically conductive material grids formed on both sides.” (see also Rosenberg [0364]))
forming first and second conformal poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) films over at least one surface of the flexible film; and forming a projective capacitive sensor array in the first and second conformal PEDOT films. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Powers while disclosing specifically the layers and material of the aforementioned layers does not however suggest applying them to a non-flat surface and thus does not disclose to provide a flexible projective capacitive touch/pen (T/P) sensor surface.
Rosenberg however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to use flexible materials for conforming a touch sensor to a non-flat surface and therefore teaches it was known in the art to a flexible projective capacitive touch/pen (T/P) sensor surface, wherein the flexible sensor stack is built into a conformal cosmetic film product. (Rosenberg, [0364-0367], [0365], “To create a sensor that is permanently curved, a flexible sensor can be laminated onto a curved rigid surface, or it is possible to start with a flat sensor and mold it into/onto a non-flat surface. It is also possible to directly manufacture the sensor electrodes on a curved surface using known techniques such as Laser Direct Structuring (LDS) or by 3D printing using both conductive and insulating materials. In the case of shunt-mode sensors, the force sensing layer can be pre-molded into a curved shape and can be made out of a deformable material such as molded silicone. In this case, force sensing material can be directly deposited onto, or molded into, the force sensing layer. Alternatively, the entire force sensing layer can be made from a flexible/deformable FSM.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a sensor on a non-flat surface as Rosenberg teaches that one may want to place sensors into a flexible phone/tablet, the wrist band of a watch or bracelet, into the sole of a shoe, or into clothing. In these cases, sensors built on a flexible substrate can be directly embedded into the application. They may also be manufactured in a fashion similar to how cloth is manufactured, as described earlier. (Rosenberg, [0366])
Powers and Rosenberg do not expressly suggest wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers and wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Endo however teaches that it was known in the art to provide a flexible PEDOT film having a small thickness wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers. (Endo, [0051], [0087], [0050], “In the panel-type input device 10, each of the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 of the first and second electrode plate 16, 22 is formed by using an electrically conductive polymer (i.e., a conducting polymer). One example of the conducting polymer that can be preferably used for the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 is, e.g., a polythiophene-based conducting polymer as described in JP-A-2005-182737. In particular, in the case where the panel-type input device 10 is configured as a touch panel having a transparent structure, the polythiophene-based polymer is preferred in excellent transparency. Other conducting polymers that can be used in the panel-type input device 10 are polyaniline, polypyrrole, polyethylene dioxythiophene (PEDOT), etc. Thickness of each conductive coat 14, 20 formed from the conducting polymer is not particularly limited, but preferably is in the range of 0.01 .mu.m to 10 .mu.m, and more preferably is in the range of 0.1 .mu.m to 1 .mu.m. If the thickness is less than 0.01 .mu.m, electrical resistance of each conductive coat 14, 20 may become unstable, and if thickness is more than 10 m, adhesiveness relative to each substrate 12, 18 may be degraded.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use thin flexible PEDOT films as these were known in the art in view of Endo to be used for the purpose of has advantages such that a boundary line between the detecting areas and the inoperative area is not visible, and the detecting areas and the inoperative area cannot be visually distinguished, and thus the visibility of a display screen through the panel-type input device is improved. (Endo, [0083])
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo while disclosing that layers be uniformly formed over the generally entire surface of the substrate however does not appear to expressly state the wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Aufderheide however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% and thus teaches wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film. (Aufderheide, [0050], “Conductive layers 260 and 270 preferably have uniform conductivity. In the case of an electrically conductive layer, the sheet resistance of the layer is preferably uniform to within 10%, meaning that the maximum deviation from an average sheet resistance over a distance of 2.5 centimeters is no more than 10%. More preferably, the sheet resistance is uniform to within 2%, even more preferably to within 0.5%, and still even more preferably to within 0.2%.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% as taught by Aufderheide as this was a known technique in the art and would have been used for the purpose of increasing performance of a touch screen. (Aufderheide, [0003])
Consider Claim 12:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the method of claim 11, and further comprising: forming the first conformal PEDOT film over a first surface of the flexible film; and forming the second conformal PEDOT film over a second surface opposite the first surface of the flexible film. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 13:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the method of claim 12, and further comprising: forming conductive PEDOT traces in the flexible film for the flexible T/P projective capacitive sensor surface. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 14:
Powers discloses a touch/pen (T/P) sensor, comprising: (Powers, See Abstract.)
a flexible sensor stack including a conformal polymer film and first and second conformal poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) films formed respectively over first and second sides of the flexible film, (Powers, [0035], [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.” (see also Rosenberg [0364]))
wherein the PEDOT films are fabricated into a projective capacitive sensor array to generate analog position information, and a sigma-delta analog-to-digital (A-to-D) controller to control the projective capacitive sensor array and generate digital position information based on the analog position information. (Powers, [0054-0066], [0056], “Controller 510 may further include a memory 518, such as a flash memory, configured to store a predetermined set of instructions, such as a computer program. The computer program may incorporate algorithms. A computer, microcontroller or microprocessor 520 is in electrical communication with memory 518 and executes the instructions stored in the memory in a predetermined manner.”)
wherein the first conformal PEDOT film comprises a first area having a surface resistance greater than a surface resistance of another area of the first conformal PEDOT film by at least an order of magnitude. (Powers, Fig. 2, See traces and areas where traces are not. See also arguments above.)
Powers while disclosing specifically the layers and material of the aforementioned layers does not however suggest applying them to a non-flat surface and thus does not disclose the flexible sensor stack is bendable to conform to a non-flat attachment surface.
Rosenberg however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to use flexible materials for conforming a touch sensor to a non-flat surface and therefore teaches it was known in the art to have a flexible sensor stack that is bendable to conform to a non-flat attachment surface, and wherein the flexible sensor stack is built into a conformal cosmetic film product. (Rosenberg, [0364-0367], [0365], “To create a sensor that is permanently curved, a flexible sensor can be laminated onto a curved rigid surface, or it is possible to start with a flat sensor and mold it into/onto a non-flat surface. It is also possible to directly manufacture the sensor electrodes on a curved surface using known techniques such as Laser Direct Structuring (LDS) or by 3D printing using both conductive and insulating materials. In the case of shunt-mode sensors, the force sensing layer can be pre-molded into a curved shape and can be made out of a deformable material such as molded silicone. In this case, force sensing material can be directly deposited onto, or molded into, the force sensing layer. Alternatively, the entire force sensing layer can be made from a flexible/deformable FSM.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a sensor on a non-flat surface as Rosenberg teaches that one may want to place sensors into a flexible phone/tablet, the wrist band of a watch or bracelet, into the sole of a shoe, or into clothing. In these cases, sensors built on a flexible substrate can be directly embedded into the application. They may also be manufactured in a fashion similar to how cloth is manufactured, as described earlier. (Rosenberg, [0366])
Powers and Rosenberg do not expressly suggest wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers and wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Endo however teaches that it was known in the art to provide a flexible PEDOT film having a small thickness wherein the first and second conformal PEDOT films each have a thickness in the range of 0.1 to 1.0 micrometers. (Endo, [0051], [0087], [0050], “In the panel-type input device 10, each of the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 of the first and second electrode plate 16, 22 is formed by using an electrically conductive polymer (i.e., a conducting polymer). One example of the conducting polymer that can be preferably used for the first and second conductive coats 14, 20 is, e.g., a polythiophene-based conducting polymer as described in JP-A-2005-182737. In particular, in the case where the panel-type input device 10 is configured as a touch panel having a transparent structure, the polythiophene-based polymer is preferred in excellent transparency. Other conducting polymers that can be used in the panel-type input device 10 are polyaniline, polypyrrole, polyethylene dioxythiophene (PEDOT), etc. Thickness of each conductive coat 14, 20 formed from the conducting polymer is not particularly limited, but preferably is in the range of 0.01 .mu.m to 10 .mu.m, and more preferably is in the range of 0.1 .mu.m to 1 .mu.m. If the thickness is less than 0.01 .mu.m, electrical resistance of each conductive coat 14, 20 may become unstable, and if thickness is more than 10 m, adhesiveness relative to each substrate 12, 18 may be degraded.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use thin flexible PEDOT films as these were known in the art in view of Endo to be used for the purpose of has advantages such that a boundary line between the detecting areas and the inoperative area is not visible, and the detecting areas and the inoperative area cannot be visually distinguished, and thus the visibility of a display screen through the panel-type input device is improved. (Endo, [0083])
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo while disclosing that layers be uniformly formed over the generally entire surface of the substrate however does not appear to expressly state the wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film.
Aufderheide however teaches that it was a known technique in the art to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% and thus teaches wherein a variance of sheet resistance over the entire first conformal PEDOT film has a variance of less than or equal to 5% over the entire first conformal PEDOT film. (Aufderheide, [0050], “Conductive layers 260 and 270 preferably have uniform conductivity. In the case of an electrically conductive layer, the sheet resistance of the layer is preferably uniform to within 10%, meaning that the maximum deviation from an average sheet resistance over a distance of 2.5 centimeters is no more than 10%. More preferably, the sheet resistance is uniform to within 2%, even more preferably to within 0.5%, and still even more preferably to within 0.2%.”)
It therefore would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to keep uniformity of the conductive layers to within 5% as taught by Aufderheide as this was a known technique in the art and would have been used for the purpose of increasing performance of a touch screen. (Aufderheide, [0003])
Consider Claim 15:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the T/P sensor of claim 14, wherein the flexible film comprises a conformal polymer film or a flexible glass film. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0035], “As an alternative to glass, the substrate material may include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET). By utilizing a PEDOT coating on both sides of the PET substrate and processing both sides using masks to obtain the grid patterns needed for PCAP touch screens, several advantages may be realized. As compared to ITO, PEDOT is readily available in the U.S., it is environmentally friendly, it has lower cost, lower ohms per Square, higher transitivity, and will not fracture when used on PET in small radiuses.”)
Consider Claim 16:
Powers in view of Rosenberg in view of Endo in view of Aufderheide discloses the flexible sensor stack of claim 1, wherein the first conformal PEDOT film comprises an area having a surface resistance greater than a surface resistance of another area of the first conformal PEDOT film by at least an order of magnitude. (Powers, [0077-0079], [0077], “A further embodiment of the projected capacitance (PCAP) touch screen system, discussed above, is shown in FIGS. 12, 13A and 13B. A touch screen system 700 comprises a substrate 702 having a first side 704 and a second, opposing side 706. Substrate 702 may be made from any suitable material or composite, such as PET. An X-Y grid 708 is formed on substrate 702, a first electrically conductive layer 710 of the grid being disposed on first side 704 and comprising a plurality of "Y" rows numbered 0 through 11 in the figures for the purpose of explanation. A second electrically conductive layer 712 of grid 708 is disposed on second side 706 of substrate 702, generally orthogonally to first layer 710, and forms a plurality of "X" columns likewise numbered 0 through 11 in the figures for the purpose of explanation. A greater or lesser number of rows and columns may be provided. Electrically conductive layers 710 and 712 may include any suitable material, such as PEDOT. The PEDOT may be applied as a coating on both sides of a masked PET substrate, the masks processed to obtain a predetermined grid pattern of rows and columns.”)
Conclusion
Prior art made of record and not relied upon which is still considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is cited in a current or previous PTO-892. The prior art cited in a current or previous PTO-892 reads upon the applicants claims in part, in whole and/or gives a general reference to the knowledge and skill of persons having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention. Applicant, when responding to this Office action, should consider not only the cited references applied in the rejection but also any additional references made of record.
In the response to this office action, the Examiner respectfully requests support be shown for any new or amended claims. More precisely, indicate support for any newly added language or amendments by specifying page, line numbers, and/or figure(s). This will assist The Office in compact prosecution of this application. The Office has cited particular columns, paragraphs, and/or line numbers in the applied rejection of the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within each claim, however other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing a response, should fully consider the cited reference(s) in its entirety and not only the cited portions as other sections of the reference may expand on the teachings of the cited portion(s).
Applicant Representatives are reminded of CFR 1.4(d)(2)(ii) which states “A patent practitioner (§ 1.32(a)(1) ), signing pursuant to §§ 1.33(b)(1) or 1.33(b)(2), must supply his/her registration number either as part of the S-signature, or immediately below or adjacent to the S-signature. The number (#) character may be used only as part of the S-signature when appearing before a practitioner’s registration number; otherwise the number character may not be used in an S-signature.” When an unsigned or improperly signed amendment is received the amendment will be listed in the contents of the application file, but not entered. The examiner will notify applicant of the status of the application, advising him or her to furnish a duplicate amendment properly signed or to ratify the amendment already filed. In an application not under final rejection, applicant should be given a two month time period in which to ratify the previously filed amendment (37 CFR 1.135(c) ).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J JANSEN II whose telephone number is (571)272-5604. The examiner can normally be reached Normally Available Monday-Friday 9am-4pm EST.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached on 571-272-3017. 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.
/Michael J Jansen II/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626