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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 19 and 20 are amended.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims, filed 01/30/2026, are accepted
Applicant's arguments filed 01/30/2026 have been reviewed and fully considered.
With regard to rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §103 over obvious
combination of prior art, based on further consideration and search as necessitated by
amendments, Examiner finds arguments are not persuasive.
Specifically, Applicant presents concerns (Remarks, Pg. 1, II.) regarding application of improper hindsight, and the need to determine differentiation of claimed invention over prior art by considering the claimed invention “as a whole” when in view of prior art, when forming a prima facie case for obvious combination(s) that would result, with a reasonable expectation of success, at the claimed invention. Examiner has strictly adhered to these guidelines, as found in MPEP 2142.
Applicant arguments, with focus on independent claims 1, and 9, (Remarks, Pg. 10-11) rejected over obvious combination of prior art by SHEN (US 20120293455) and CHUANG (US 20210247634), address concern that SHEN in view of CHUANG fails to teach the combination of features recited in independent claims 1 and 9 as currently amended. However, Examiner notes amended language, particularly additions to independent claims 1 and 9, require further search and evaluation to ascertain whether or not the claimed invention is distinguishable over prior art. Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks highlighting Applicant’s perspective of differences between references cited in previous office action and claims as currently amended. (Remarks, Pg. 11-12) Specifically, Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks that neither SHEN nor CHUANG does not teach using a time between the time point at which a first signal is applied to a device under test and a second time point at which a second signal that is a response to a first signal is detected. Likewise, amended claim language necessitates further search and evaluation to determine if the claimed invention is distinguishable over prior art.
Based on new search and evaluation, as necessitated by amendments, Examiner finds claims as currently amended are not distinguishable over prior art available before effective filing date of the claimed invention. Detailed response addressing Applicant arguments, with attention to claim interpretation, reasoning, and rationale as applied to establish prima facie case of obviousness in determination that the claimed invention does not distinguish over prior art is presented below with new grounds of rejection as necessitated by amendment.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can
be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-12, 14-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over SHEN (US 20120293455 A1) in view of JOHNSON (US 20170023632 A1), and further in view of SHI (Shi, et al., “A new algorithm for wire fault location using time-domain reflectometry,” IEEE Sensors J., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1171–1178, Apr. 2014)
With respect to Claims 1 and 9, and SHEN teaches:
An electronic apparatus comprising: (SHEN is in same technical field, [0004]: “Techniques are described for testing a capacitive touch panel for the presence or absence of short circuits and open”; SHEN teaches electronic testing device, FIG. 8, element 800, with [0050]: “FIG. 8 illustrates a test system 800 coupled to the touch panel 100 undergoing testing”, with further description of test system [0051-53].)
a communication interface configured to communicate with a measuring device;(SHEN teaches communication interface with measurement tools, FIG. 8, with [0053]:”During the test setup, the test system 800 is coupled to the touch panel 100”; and communication with external measuring device, see [0054] “communication between modules in the test system 800 of FIG. 8 can be wired, wireless, or some combination thereof”)
memory storing instructions; (SHEN teaches use of memory, FIG. 8, “memory 820”with [0050].)
and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the communication interface and the memory, (SHEN teaches implementation of standard computational components, including processor, FIG. 8, “processor 810”, with [0050]: “test system 800…including a processor 810 and a memory 820…processor 810 provides processing functionality for the test system”; where processor is coupled with memory and communication interface, [0051]: “memory 820 may be integral with the processor 810”)
wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic apparatus to:
transmit a control signal requesting the measuring device to apply a first signal to a transparent electrode sheet connected to the measuring device, to the measuring device, (SHEN teaches connections, as above; SHEN teaches execution of instruction, sending drive signal, and connection to measurement device, FIGs.1, 8, with [0053]: “test system 800 is coupled to the touch panel 100…interfaces with the touch screen controller (TSC) 150 (see also FIG. 1) to control the drive lines 110, read the sense lines 120, and process the signals on the sense lines 120, e.g., via the test module 830. During the first stage of the test, the test module 830 may cause the touch panel 100 to be operated in accordance with process (method) 300 of FIG. 3 (e.g., by furnishing instructions to control operation of the TSC 150), so that shorts or opens may be detected.”; Examiner interprets “transmit a control signal” as analogous to reference of “control drive lines” to mean initiate measuring process by sending signal to touch panel, FIG. 3 and FIG. 7; Abstract: “During a first stage of testing, drive lines of the touch panel are sequentially driven”)
receive, from the measuring device, a first time point at which the first signal is applied to the transparent electrode sheet, a second time point at which a second signal is acquired by the measuring device, and a waveform of the second signal, (SHEN teaches detection of time between first and second signal enablement, Claim 20; SHEN teaches acquisition of waveform, FIG. 2A with [0031]: “circuit model 200 of the drive line 110B drive voltage into the drive element 115B is V (e.g., where V represents the amplitude of the voltage waveform)”)
identify whether a defect exists in the transparent electrode sheet based on the first time point and the second time point (SHEN teaches comparison of time of first signal and time of second signal for detection of short, Claims 13 and 20; and
based on a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify that a defect exists in the transparent electrode sheet. (SHEN teaches analysis of voltage signals to determine short or open circuit, [0023]: “Different voltages on the sense lines indicate the occurrence of shorts and opens. In the second stage, any shorts between adjacent sense lines are detected”; and FIG. 4, with [0041]: “includes an amplifier 405A with a positive terminal connected to a reference voltage VREF”, where voltages are compared to determine presence or absence of shorts depicted in FIGS. 4, 5A, and 5B.)
SHEN does not teach:
a communication interface configured to communicate with an impedance measuring device;
transmit a control signal requesting the impedance measuring device to apply a first signal to a [conductor] connected to the impedance measuring device, to the impedance measuring device,
receive, from the impedance measuring device, a first time point at which the first signal is applied to the transparent electrode sheet, a second time point at which a second signal, reflected from the [conductor] as a response to the first signal, is acquired by the impedance measuring device, and a waveform of the second signal,
identify whether a defect exists in the [conductor] based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point, and the waveform of the second signal, and
based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify that a defect exists in the [conductor].
JOHNSON teaches:
a communication interface configured to communicate with an impedance measuring device; (JOHNSON is in same technical field, [0002]: “relates generally to a system and method for performing electronic testing on a set of electric cables. In one embodiment, the invention provides a testing platform for automated quality testing of a complex electric wire harness assembly”; Examiner considers JOHNSON as pertinent prior art, related to detection of abnormalities in wiring, specifically in a wiring harness, analogous to grid as taught by SHEN, above, and recited in claimed invention in at least [0120]; JOHNSON teaches general methods for application of Time Domain Reflectometry (TDR) techniques for cable testing, measuring impedance, Abstract, for measurement of impedance, [0009]: “TDR precisely measures the reflected pulse amplitude and round trip time producing waveform data that represents time verses impedance”; JOHNSON teaches using electronic device attached to an impendence measuring device, FIG.3, element 152 “Controller Memory”, with [0077]: “Tester 150 has TDR test circuitry 161 that has at least one TDR engine 163, and in many cases will benefit by having several additional TDR engines”;
transmit a control signal requesting the impedance measuring device to apply a first signal to a [conductor] connected to the impedance measuring device, to the impedance measuring device, (JOHNSON teaches control signal to begin cable testing process, [0074]: “Tester 150 has a controller or processor 152 that has a computer display 154, a printer, and user inputs 156…processor 152 acts to manage the overall harness test, accept inputs from the user”; JOHNSON teaches generation of first signal, [0045]: “TDR has a timing generator that is constructed to generate a periodic launch pulse to excite a cable under test”.)
and receive, from the impedance measuring device, a first time point at which the first signal is applied to the [conductor], a second time point at which a second signal, reflected from the [conductor] as a response to the first signal, is acquired by the impedance measuring device, and a waveform of the second signal,(JOHNSON teaches use of time between first and second waveform to determine distance to or location of a defect, [0009]: “TDR precisely measures the reflected pulse amplitude and round trip time producing waveform data that represents time verses impedance”; and [0011], equation, with [0014]: “TD is the time delay in seconds.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify SHEN to include, an impedance measuring device as the external measuring device, and the steps of transmitting a control signal requesting the impedance measuring device to apply a first signal to a line, to receive from the impedance measuring device, a first time point at which the first signal is applied, a second time point at which a second signal, reflected from the [conductor] as a response to the first signal, is acquired by the impedance measuring device, and a waveform of the second signal, such as that of JOHNSON, because this would result in a more robust measurement of electrical disfunction in a transparent screen. While JOHNSON is directed to implanting the techniques in a conventional wired harness, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to combine the known and trusted impedance measurement techniques to expand the capabilities system described by SHEN which relies on capacitive measurement and analysis.
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON, as taught above, does not teach:
identify whether a defect exists in the [conductor] based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point, and the waveform of the second signal, and
based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify that a defect exists in the [conductor].
SHI teaches:
identify whether a defect exists in the [conductor] based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point, and the waveform of the second signal, (SHI teaches general method of implementing TDR with impedance measurements to determine abnormalities in conductive materials, Abstract: “domain reflectometry (TDR) attenuation and dispersion of the reflected signal limit the reachable accuracy for wire faults location”, and Pg.1175, Col.1, “wave can be reflected whenever a signal traveling in a cable line encounters an impedance discontinuity”, with Eq. (20); Examiner interprets “defect” as analogous to presence of “impedance continuity”, as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.; SHI teaches analysis of time between first and second signal for locating defect, Pg. 1175, Col. 1, “distance d between a reflection and injection points can be calculated by d = v·t/2, where υ is the velocity of the signal propagation into the cable and t is the time interval between the incident and reflected signals (time of flight)”; SHI teaches evaluation of waveforms, Pg. 1175, Fig.s 3-7. ; Examiner notes SHI is not directed specifically to the technical area of analysis of a transparent sheet, but is directed to a related technology of determination of the presence and location of a defect along a conductive path using TDR and measurement of impedance and time signals. Examiner asserts that the reference is analogous, as “reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor” (See MPEP 2141.01(a)). Because instant application recites use of a cable grid, one of ordinary skill would view SHI as a relevant resource to solve a problem of determining defect/fault in a conductive path, Examiner finds the reference to be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem being addressed by Applicant, supported by Applicant’s specification in at least [0057].)
based on an elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify that a defect exists in the [conductor]. (SHI teaches comparison to an expected value for time and voltage, Pg. 1174, Col.s 1-2 § IV. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP, where incident parameters are set for comparison with reflected signal; SHI further teaches use of a transfer function for comparative analysis based on expected values, PG. 1175, Col.2.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON as taught above, to include, using evaluation of elapsed time between a first and second signal, and the waveform of the second signal, including comparison with an expected value for evaluation of the time difference and voltage difference, such as that of SHI, because it provides a way to implement the TDR method into the system and method of SHEN as modified by JOHNSON to improve the sensitivity. One of ordinary skill would understand the known method of TDR and its ability to improve accuracy and reliability for detection and location of electrical anomalies by doing waveform and time difference analysis as taught for general applications by SHI.
With respect to Claims 2 and 10, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based the first time point and the second time point, identify that a defect exists in the transparent electrode sheet. (SHEN teaches execution of instruction, sending drive signal, and connection to measurement device, as above, FIGs.1, 8, with [0053]; SHEN teaches comparison of time of first signal and time of second signal for detection of short, Claims 13 and 20)
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being outside a predetermined time range, identify that a defect exists.
SHI further teaches:
based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being outside a predetermined time range, identify that a defect exists. (SHI teaches. as above, time between injection and reflected waveforms for defect identification, Pg.1175, Col.1, and Eq. (20); SHI teaches evaluation of time difference to determine defect using optimization methods, including predetermined values, Pg. 1173, Cols.2 – 1174, Col. 1, Eq. (12)-(13).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention further modify SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON as taught above, to include evaluation of elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being outside a predetermined time range to identify that a defect exists, such as that of SHI because this adds another way to identify any electrical anomaly in an electrode system, in a non-destructive way, using impedance measuring instruments connected externally to a transparent electrode structure, as taught by SHEN modified by JOHNSON. One of ordinary skill would understand that combining the general method as taught by SHI with the methos and system of SHEN as modified by JOHNSON to use impedance measurements would result with a reasonable expectation of success in a more robust, accurate and efficient evaluation of the transparent electrode without added cost or time.
With respect to Claims 3 and 11, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches:
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on a voltage magnitude of the second signal being outside a predetermined voltage range, identify that a defect exists in the transparent electrode sheet. (SHEN teaches voltage detection, as above [0023] and comparison with reference voltage, FIG. 4, with [0041])
With respect to Claims 4 and 12, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches:
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify that at least some of the plurality of lines are shorted to a ground. (SHEN teaches, as above, difference in voltage between two points compared with a predetermined value to identify a fault in a screen grid, “Example Implementation” with [0023]: “shorts between drive lines are detected by sequentially driving each drive line, allowing the others to float, and reading the sense lines. Different voltages on the sense lines indicate the occurrence of shorts and opens. In the second stage, any shorts between adjacent sense lines are detected and, optionally, located”; SHEN teaches identification of at least some of a plurality of lines are shorted, [0004]: “Techniques are described for testing a capacitive touch panel for the presence or absence of short circuits and open circuits in its drive and sense lines…signals on the enabled sense lines are read to indicate whether the enabled sense lines are shorted to adjacent sense lines…second stage can be repeated, switching the roles of the alternate sense lines, to determine the actual locations of short and/or open circuits.”)
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify a line shorted to a ground.
SHI further teaches:
based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify a line shorted to a ground. (SHI teaches comparison to an expected value for time and voltage, Pg. 1174, Col.s 1-2 § IV. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP, where incident parameters are set for comparison with reflected signal; SHI further teaches use of a transfer function for comparative analysis based on expected values, PG. 1175, Col.2.; SHI specifically teaches evaluation of short circuit based on time and voltage difference, Fig. 3-4 with Pg. 1174, Col. 2, “Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 show the TDR trace of an open circuit at the end point of a 10 m coaxial cable with 50 Ω characteristic impedance and a short circuit”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, to include using the technique of evaluating elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point being less than a predetermined time and a voltage magnitude of the second signal being less than a predetermined value, identify a line shorted to a ground, such as that further disclosed by SHI because it would add an efficient and quick way to determine a ground fault based on an easily observed decrease in time (and corresponding decrease in impedance. In addition one of ordinary skill would see this method taught by SHI to the method and system of SHEN as modified by JOHNSON as an obvious way to use the negative polarity caused by a short circuit defect to readily identify a short and take action to avoid further damage to a device.
With respect to Claims 6 and 14, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches:
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to obtain a location of the defect existing in the transparent electrode sheet based on the first time point and the second time point. (SHEN teaches as above, Claim 1, measurement of a signal at two different, known points identified by location on a line grid, FIG. 1 with [0029] and FIG. 3 with [0021]; and signal detection, FIG. 2A with [0031]; SHEN teaches a test signal applied to identified intersections of grid lines to determine presence of fault in a touch screen. Details in “Example Implementation” beginning in [0023].)
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
obtain a location of the defect based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point.
SHI further teaches:
obtain a location of the defect based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point. (SHI teaches, as above, time between injection and reflected waveforms for defect identification, Pg.1175, Col.1, and Eq. (20); SHI teaches evaluation of time difference to determine defect using optimization methods, including predetermined values, Pg. 1173, Cols.2 – 1174, Col. 1, Eq. (12)-(13).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, to include obtaining a location of the defect based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point, such as that further disclosed by SHI because using the evaluative methods of SHI, based in TDR would be a way to improve the reliability of the method and system of SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI above. The method taught by SHI provides additional sensitivity and accuracy using impedance based measurements of JOHNSON as combined with the method and system of SHEN to evaluate a transparent electrode.
With respect to Claims 7 and 15, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches:
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to: acquire a similarity between the waveform of the second signal and a predetermined waveform; (SHEN teaches evaluation of waveform, see [0021]: “techniques may be implemented as a test having two or more test stages (e.g., a first test stage and a second stage)…first stage of the test, some drive lines…sequentially driven…while the other drive lines are floated…resulting signals on the sense lines are acquired to indicate whether the driven drive line is shorted to an adjacent drive line, is an open circuit, is coupled to a sense line that is an open circuit, or has neither shorts nor opens”; refer to FIG. 2A and [0031]: “circuit model 200 of the drive line 110B drive voltage into the drive element 115B is V (e.g., where V represents the amplitude of the voltage waveform)” and [0032]: “testing process…compares signal values to first, second, and third predetermined ranges, instead of to exact values”)
based on the similarity being less than the predetermined value, identify that a defect exists in the transparent electrode sheet; (SHEN teaches comparison with expected value, see above [0032]: “comparison with predetermined ranges”)
and based on the similarity being greater than or equal to the predetermined value, identify that there is no defect in the transparent electrode sheet. (As above, SHEN teaches comparison with expected value, see above [0032]: “comparison with predetermined ranges”)
With respect to Claim 17, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 9.
SHEN further teaches:
the transparent electrode sheet includes an upper electrode sheet and a lower electrode sheet. (SHEN teaches a capacitive touch screen layered structure, [0003]: “touch panel generally includes an insulator, such as glass, coated with a transparent conductor”, and [0026] “One or more capacitive touch panels 100 can be included with a touch screen assembly…may include a display screen, such as an LCD screen, where the sensor layer and the drive layer are sandwiched between the LCD screen and a bonding layer, e.g., with a protective cover such as glass”; Examiner interprets “electrode sheet” as analogous to reference “sensor layer”.)
With respect to Claims 18, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claim 9.
identifying a type of the defect based on the waveform of the second signal. (SHEN teaches, as above, waveform analysis for fault determination, [0023], FIG. 2A with [0031]; Examiner interprets “based on waveform of second signal” to be analogous to SHEN using time dependent voltage test signals, i.e., waveforms in comparative analysis of a test signal and a received signal for defect detection. Examiner further notes SHI also teaches defect type based on TDR analysis of waveform, Pg. 1175, Fig.s 3-4, traces of open and short circuit waveforms. )
With respect to Claims 19, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claim 6.
the location of the defect existing in the transparent electrode sheet is based on a line of the transparent electrode sheet (SHEN teaches location of fault in transparent sheet, based on analysis of electrical behavior or electrode grid in sheet, [0021]: “first stage of the test, some drive lines…sequentially driven…while the other drive lines are floated…resulting signals on the sense lines are acquired to indicate whether the driven drive line is shorted to an adjacent drive line, is an open circuit, is coupled to a sense line that is an open circuit, or has neither shorts nor opens”)
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
the location of the defect is based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance.
SHI further teaches:
the location of the defect is based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance. (SHI teaches defect location based on impedance measurements and time difference between incident and reflected waveform, as above, using general implementation of TDR with impedance measurements to determine abnormalities in conductive materials, Abstract, and Pg.1175, Col.1, “wave can be reflected whenever a signal traveling in a cable line encounters an impedance discontinuity”, with Eq. (20)); Examiner interprets “defect” as analogous to presence of “impedance continuity”, as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.; SHI teaches analysis of time between first and second signal for locating defect, Pg. 1175, Col. 1, “distance d between a reflection and injection points can be calculated by d = v·t/2, where υ is the velocity of the signal propagation into the cable and t is the time interval between the incident and reflected signals (time of flight)”; SHI teaches evaluation of waveforms, Pg. 1175, Fig.s 3-7. ; …)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, to include the process of finding the location of the defect based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance, such as that further disclosed by SHI because this would be a way to effectively and efficiently implement the TDR method to improve the method and system of SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI with increased sensitivity. Combining the method of SHI with a system outfitted to measure impedance, waveform and time, would improve overall ability to accurately detect and locate an electrical abnormality in a transparent electrode structure without additional connections using a non-destructive measurement.
With respect to Claims 20, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claim 14,
SHEN further teaches:
the location of the defect existing in the transparent electrode sheet is based on a line of the transparent electrode sheet based on first time point and the second time point (SHEN teaches detection of defect in transparent electrode students using analysis of conductive lines in the sheet, as above, Claims 13 and 20.)
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
the location of the defect is based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance.
JOHNSON further teaches:
the location of the defect is based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance.( JOHNSON teaches use of time between first and second waveform to determine distance to or location of a defect, as above [0009] and [0011], equation, with [0014])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, to include locating a defect based on a calculated impedance of a line based on the elapsed time between the first time point and the second time point and a length of the line based on the calculated impedance, such as that further disclosed by JOHNSON because this is a way to implement the reliability of TDR into the system and method as taught by SHEN, and modified as above by JOHNSON and SHEN to make use of impedance measures. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of using the known and proved TDR method to produce a sensitive and accurate method and system to determine type and location of defects or electrical anomaly in a transparent electrode sheet.
Claims 5, 13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and SHI, and further in view of CHEN (US 20210247634 A1) and KAMI (JP 2005208345 A).
With respect to Claims 5 and 13, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN further teaches:
instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to identify a defect is present in the transparent electrode sheet (SHEN teaches, as above,
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, does not teach:
based on a rise time of the second signal being greater than a predetermined time, identify that a foreign material is present in the transparent electrode sheet or a degree of compression between the transparent electrode sheet and another transparent electrode sheet is outside a predetermined range.
CHEN teaches:
based on a rise time of the second signal being greater than a predetermined time, identify that defect is present in the transparent electrode sheet (CHEN is in same technical field, directed to transparent electrode of display device, Abstract: “a display device and a test method of the display substrate are disclosed”; CHEN teaches standard components for control operational instruction for testing, FIG.9 with [0159]: “display substrate 100 is tested under the control of the main control circuit 200…a central processor unit.”; CHEN teaches detection using rise time at voltage measurement points, FIG. 2A-B, and FIG.3 with [0069]: “steepness of the rising edge of a voltage signal 571 extracted from the first position 5121 of the second test wire 512 is greater than the steepness of the rising edge of a voltage signal 572 extracted from the third position 5123 of the second test wire 512…as shown in FIG. 3, the rise time of the voltage signal extracted from the first position 5121 of the second test wire 512 is about 162 microseconds, the rise time of the voltage signal extracted from the third position 5123 of the second test wire 512 is about 224 microseconds”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system and apparatus of SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, as taught above, to include wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on a rise time of the second signal being greater than a predetermined time, identify that [measurement] is outside a predetermined range, such as that of CHEN it would be an effective way to use the system and method disclosed by SHEN modified by JOHNSON and SHI, which uses time-dependent voltage probes to determine the existence of various defect types, to provide additional verification of disfunction in a circuitry for a transparent electrode. One of ordinary skill would understand that using comparative analysis of both timing and voltage values, including specifically comparative evaluation rise time of voltage probe signals and received signals between two different points on a transparent screen electrode would provide a more reliable and accurate means for determining defect location and type.
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, and further modified by CHEN, as taught above, does not teach:
identify that a foreign material is present in the transparent electrode sheet or a degree of compression between the transparent electrode sheet and another transparent electrode sheet is outside a predetermined range.
Nevertheless, KAMI teaches:
identify that a foreign material is present in the transparent electrode sheet or a degree of compression between the transparent electrode sheet and another transparent electrode sheet is outside a predetermined range. (Translated copy provided with previous office action.; KAMI is in same technical field, [0001]: “electro-optical device, a method for manufacturing the electro-optical device, and an electronic apparatus” and [0003]: “an inspection is performed to determine whether there is a formation defect or a short circuit due to contact with foreign matter in each of the electrode pattern and the wiring pattern”; KAMI teaches detection of foreign object in layered material, see [0049]: “the formation of defects between adjacent scanning electrodes can be reduced by performing an electrical property inspection in the display area. The occurrence of a short circuit due to the contact of a foreign object can be easily detected”; Examiner interprets “identifying that a foreign material is present” as analogous to reference language of “occurrence of a short circuit due to the contact of a foreign object”.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI, and further modified by CHEN, as taught above, to include identifying that a foreign material is present in the transparent electrode sheet or a degree of compression between the transparent electrode sheet and another transparent electrode sheet, such as that of KAMI because this would be understood as an important characterization for ensuring function and quality in a layered transparent electrode structure. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantage of using key electrical metrics that would indicate a foreign object or foreign matter in a layered transparent electrode structure in order to prevent poor performance or lack of function. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantageous addition taught by KAMI to result in a more rigorous quality analysis of a transparent screen electrode structure.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and SHI, and further in view of YANG (US 20180188186 A1).
With respect to Claims 8 and 16, SHEN, in view of JOHNSON and further in view of SHI, teaches limitations of claims 1 and 9.
SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI as taught above, does not teach:
a display, wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on a defect being identified to exist in the transparent electrode sheet, control the display to display information on the defect.
YANG teaches:
further comprising: a display, wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on a defect being identified to exist in the transparent electrode sheet, control the display to display information on the defect. (YANG is in same technical field, [0002]: “relates to an inspection apparatus and an inspection method…for inspecting a defect in an encapsulation layer included in an organic light-emitting display apparatus”; YANG teaches defect detection using executed instructions and processor, FIG. 4 and [0015]: “detecting a defect of the inspection object”; YANG teaches display of detection process outcome on display, [0097]: “detection unit 248 may include a display unit that displays determination results”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify SHEN, , as modified by JOHNSON and SHI as taught above, to include a display, wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, further cause the electronic apparatus to, based on a defect being identified to exist in the transparent electrode sheet, control the display to display information on the defect, such as that of YANG because this would be understood as an efficient way package a system and method for defect determination in a transparent electrode and quickly provide feedback to a user or other system for making decisions regarding next steps to address the defect. One of ordinary skill would understand the advantage of integrating a defect detection system and displaying the results on a display of a transparent electrode itself (as in a touch screen or display panel), particularly during manufacturing and quality testing as an efficient way to be informed in real time about any quality issues, and to have information about in-situ defect mapping on the apparatus under test. One of ordinary skill would see the advantage of combining this step as taught by YANG to improve the system as taught by SHEN, as modified by JOHNSON and SHI as taught above, as a logical and practical way to efficiently be informed about potential defect/faulty in a transparent layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, in addition to references included in previous office actions:
BARTLING (US 20120271580 A1) - teaches touch screen, with line electrodes using TDR with impedance measurements to locate a fault.
SOHN (US 20190293706 A1) – teaches TDR reflected wave processing apparatus used to detect abnormalities of a cable and positions of abnormalities, with modified frequency domain TDR for higher precision and accuracy.
NIE (CN 109932614 A) – teaches time reflectance impedance measurements for determining fault in electric cable (translation provided).
SHIN (KR 20100101372 A) - teaches method for testing touch sensor pad using voltage response using time differences (translation provided). ; translated copy into OC/Foreign copy into OC
CHEN (WO 2018072660 A1) – teaches use of TDR using terahertz frequencies for detection of faults based on time difference between initial and reflected pulses (translation provided).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONI D SAUNCY whose telephone number is (703)756-4589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/TONI D SAUNCY/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857