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 Objections
2. Claims 25 and 32 are objected to because of the following informalities:
1) In claim 1, replace the recitation “determining a distance of said device relative to an object” (on the last line) with --determine a distance of the object relative to the device”;
2) In claim 21, delete the redundant recitation “being used” before recitation “being compared to” on line 14;
3). In Claims 25 and 32, the claims should be dependent upon the sensor claim of claim 21, not the method claim of claim 1;
4) In claim 30, recitation “the angle of the capacitance modifying member” lacks antecedent basis.
5) In claim 32, delete “wherein the method includes a step of” (on line 3), since no method is claimed in claims 32.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
In claim 1, the recitation of “determining the distance of an object” (on line 2); or “determine a distance of said device relative to an object” (on the last line) are not clear. According to [0032] to [0034] and Figures 4-6 of the current specification, only a touch/proximity event is detected. No specific “distance of an object” or “distance of said device” are determined.
In claim 2, the recitation of “configuring capacitive coupling between said transmitter electrodes and said grounded structures and capacitive coupling between said at least one receiver electrode and said grounded structures to compensate for weak coupling between said grounded structures and a surrounding electrical earth by having said grounded structures in sensing range” is unclear, since “said grounded structures” (on lines 2-5) lacks antecedent basis, because the grounded structures recitation has been removed from the amended claim.
3) In claim 22, the recitation of “the layout of the mutual capacitance sensing electrode is designed to have an increased capacitive coupling to said ground structures by having said ground structures in sensing range” is unclear, since “said grounded structures” (on line 3) lacks antecedent basis, or no grounded structures is claimed in claim 21;
Claims 3-5 and 26-28 are rejected for their dependence upon the rejection claim, claim 1.
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 1-6 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.
In claim 1, the recitation of “determining the distance of an object” (on line 2); or “determine a distance of said device relative to an object” (on the last line) are not clear. According to [0032] to [0034] and Figures 4-6 of the current specification, only a touch/proximity event is detected. No specific “distance of an object” or “distance of said device” are determined;
In claim 2, the recitation of “configuring capacitive coupling between said transmitter electrodes and said grounded structures and capacitive coupling between said at least one receiver electrode and said grounded structures to compensate for weak coupling between said grounded structures and a surrounding electrical earth by having said grounded structures in sensing range” is unclear, since “said grounded structures” (on lines 2-5) lacks antecedent basis, because the grounded structures recitation has been removed from the amended claim;
3) In claim 22, the recitation of “the layout of the mutual capacitance sensing electrode is designed to have an increased capacitive coupling to said ground structures by having said ground structures in sensing range” is unclear, since “said grounded structures” (on line 3) lacks antecedent basis, or no grounded structures is claimed in claim 21;
Claims 3-5 and 26-28 are rejected for their dependence upon the rejection claim, claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 2, 5, 21-23, 25, 28 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
KR20160033799A.
As for claim 1, KR20160033799A discloses (see Figs. 1-3, 7-11) a method for determining the distance of an object, said object being a user or a metallic object (i.e., sensing the proximity or touch by a user on the touch screen panel 10 in Fig. 1), by an electronic circuitry, said circuitry comprising at least one receiver electrode (e.g., see the array of receiver electrodes RX0—Rx2), a first transmitter electrode (Tx0, Tx1) and a second transmitter electrode (Tx2), and wherein the method comprises the following steps:
obtaining a first differential mutual capacitance value by driving the first (Tx1) and second transmitter electrodes (Tx2) out of phase with each other (obtain first mutual capacitance values by using the driving unit 110 to drive the two Tx lines 180 degree out of phase as shown in Figs. 1 and 2); starting with the first transmitter at a high level and the second transmitter at a low level and then reversing polarities of the first and second transmitters (see the opposite high and low drive signals in Figs. 1 and 2);
thereafter restarting the measurement and obtaining a second differential mutual capacitance value by driving the first and second transmitter electrodes out of phase with each other, starting with the second transmitter at a high level and the first transmitter at a low level and then reversing polarities of the first and second transmitters (i.e., obtaining another mutual capacitance values at a different location by driving the two transmitters with the opposite driving signals; see Fig. 2);
subtracting the first differential mutual capacitance value from the second differential mutual capacitance value to find a differential output amplitude value (e.g., output voltages representing the mutual capacitance value changes are subtracted, see the description of Fig. 2 and [0033]—[0036]; also see the subtractor 126 in Fig. 5 and Figs. 7-8; [0058]—[0061]) and
comparing said differential output amplitude value to a predetermined threshold
to determine a distance of said device relative to an object (i.e., the output voltage is compared with a threshold voltage level, and the output voltage higher than a threshold voltage indicate a touch has occurred, and the touch position or distance can be estimated accordingly, see the description of threshold used in Fig. 11 and [0069]—[0070]).
As for claim 21, it is the apparatus claim corresponding to the rejected method claim. It is rejected for the same reason as stated above for the rejection of the method claim, claim 1.
As for claims 2, 22 and 23, KR20160033799A discloses the method/sensor of claims 1 and 21, which includes the steps of configuring capacitive coupling between said transmitter electrodes and said grounded structures and capacitive coupling between said at least one receiver electrode and said grounded structures to compensate for weak coupling between said grounded structures and a surrounding electrical earth by having said grounded structures in sensing range of said first and second transmitter electrodes and said at least one receiver electrode and of configuring mutual capacitive couplings between the at least one receiver electrode and said first and second transmitter electrodes to increase said mutual capacitance coupling at least by design of electrode layout (i.e., the electrodes layout of the touch screen panel 10 is used/configured to compensate for weak coupling, or to increase the mutual capacitance coupling by the specific design of the electrode layout shown in Fig. 1 and 2 in KR20160033799A).
As for claims 5 and 25, KR20160033799A discloses the method/proximity sensor of claims 1 and 21, wherein said distance/proximity sensing is performed without a baseline or long-term average value (i.e., no baseline or long-term average value is used to determine the touch/proximity event in KR20160033799A).
As for claims 28 and 31, KR20160033799A discloses the method/proximity sensor of claims 1 and 21, wherein the differential measurements are used to register a touch/proximity event (i.e., the touch/proximity of the touch panel 10 in Figs. 1-3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 26 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR20160033799A.
As for claims 26 and 29, KR20160033799A discloses the method/proximity sensor of claims 1 and 21, as discussed above.
KR20160033799A does not specifically disclose wherein the first transmitter electrode, the second transmitter electrode and the at least one receiver electrode are positioned to shield the first transmitter electrode’s capacitive coupling to the at least one receiving electrode from the second transmitter electrode’s capacitive coupling to the at least one receiving electrode.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KR20160033799A to position the first and second transmitter electrode opposing each other, for the purpose of providing the desired shielding effect from predetermined direction/position when the proximity/touch sensor is used in other applications that may require such shielding protection from a specific direction/position.
Claims 3 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR20160033799A, in view of Ogirko (U. S. Pub. 2021/0226626).
As for claims 3 and 32, KR20160033799A discloses the method/proximity sensor of claims 1 and 21, as discussed above.
KR20160033799A does not specifically disclose wherein said device further comprises an inductor and circuitry to measure changes in inductance of said inductor, and wherein the method includes a step of using the measured inductive changes to determine whether the object is a metallic object.
Ogirko discloses that it is conventional in the art to measure changes in inductance of a inductor to determine whether an object is ferrous and non-ferrous metal object (See [0015]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KR20160033799A to incorporate the use of a conventional inductive sensor, as taught by Ogirko, for the purpose of differentiating between different types of objects, such as ferrous and non-ferrous metal object proximate the touch panel (see [0015]).
Claims 4, 24, 27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR20160033799A, in view of Hsu et al. (U. S. Patent 11,051,758).
As for claims 4, 24, 27 and 30, KR20160033799A discloses the method/proximity sensor of claims 1 and 21, as discussed above.
KR20160033799A does not specifically disclose wherein said device is one of: a fitness tracker;
a smart watch; a set of earbuds or earphones; a set of headphones; and a health monitor device; or calculating the angle relative to the capacitance modifying member using the multiple differential capacitance measurement.
Hsu et al. discloses a conventional capacitive wear state determining sensor or smart watch (100 in Fig. 1, 3, 11), wherein electrodes can be provided in a plurality of angle regions, and the wear state determining circuit can determine a normal state or an error state based on the measured capacitance measurement.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KR20160033799A to incorporate the differential capacitance proximity sensor in a smart watch, as taught by Hsu et al., for determining the proximity or wear state of the smart watch with reduced random noise with differential sensing (see [0061] in KR20160033799A).
In addition, the person of ordinary skill in the art would also find it obvious to calculate an angle relative to the capacitance modifying member, for the purpose of determining if the smart watch is worn in a proper or improper manner that may be dependent upon a specific angle relative to the user(col. 6, lines 30-60 in Hsu et al.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5, 21-32 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection applied in the current office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY HE whose telephone number is (571)272-2230. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am--5:00pm.
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, Huy Phan can be reached on (571) 272-7924. 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.
/AMY HE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858