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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species E, drawn to Fig. 7, in the reply filed on 10/24/2024 is acknowledged.
It is noted by the Examiner that the features of claim 5 are not presently shown in Fig. 7, to which the elected species is drawn. Claim 5 recites “two or more touch driving periods are included in one display frame period… and the second mode includes a shorter touch driving period than the first mode”. Although Fig. 7 shows that a second mode’s touch driving period is shorter than a sum of multiple touch driving periods of a first mode, the touch driving period of the second mode appears in Fig. 7 to be no shorter than any individual touch driving period of the first mode.
Claim(s) 5-7 and 9-13 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/24/2024.
Allowable Subject Matter
Applicant is advised that the Notice of Allowance mailed 02/02/2026 is vacated. If the issue fee has already been paid, applicant may request a refund or request that the fee be credited to a deposit account. However, applicant may wait until the application is either found allowable or held abandoned. If allowed, upon receipt of a new Notice of Allowance, applicant may request that the previously submitted issue fee be applied. If abandoned, applicant may request refund or credit to a specified Deposit Account.
Claims 21-22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 14-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al (US 20150378499, hereinafter D1) in view of Ju et al (EP 3422160 A1, hereinafter D2).
As recited in independent claim 1, D1 shows a touch display device (see Fig. 3), comprising: a display panel 100 including a plurality of touch electrodes 110; a touch driving circuit (“The ROIC may be provided in the data driver 300, or the ROIC and the data driver may be provided in one chip” [0054]) configured to: operate in a first mode (see Touch Active mode in Fig. 4) and a second mode (see Touch Idle mode in Fig. 4) according to a touch sensing type (“an idle driving mode for determining the presence of a touch input and an active driving mode for detecting a touch input position” [0057]), and detect a touch presence (in Touch Idle mode) or a touch position (in Touch Active mode) based on a touch sensing signal received (“the touch controller receives a feedback signal based on the touch scan signal for sensing a touch and a feedback signal (i.e., sensing data) based on the touch scan signal for detecting a touch input position from the plurality of electrodes, and determines whether the panel 100 is touched or detects a touch input position” [0063]) from the plurality of touch electrodes 110; and a timing controller (“a timing of each of the display driving mode and the touch driving mode may be controlled according to a control signal output from the timing controller” [0064]) configured to: operate the touch driving circuit 300 in the first mode (Touch Active mode), and operate the touch driving circuit 300 in the second mode (Touch Idle mode), wherein the touch driving period of the second display frame (see one group of touch pulses in Touch Idle mode) for the second mode (Touch Idle mode) is different than the touch driving period of the first display frame (see two groups of touch pulses in Touch Active mode) for the first mode (Touch Active mode), or the second display period of the second display frame for the second mode is different than the first display period of the first display frame for the first mode (It is noted by the Examiner that the limitations “the touch driving period of the second display frame for the second mode is different than the touch driving period of the first display frame for the first mode, or the second display period of the second display frame for the second mode is different than the first display period of the first display frame for the first mode” are recited in the alternative, such that the claim is satisfied by a prior art teaching of the former alternative even in the absence of the latter).
As recited in independent claim 1, D1 is silent regarding generate a first type of touch synchronization signal having a first level for controlling a first display period of a first display frame to display a first image and a second level for controlling a touch driving period of the first display frame to detect the touch position, and supply the first type of touch synchronization signal to the touch driving circuit, and generate a second type of touch synchronization signal having the first level for controlling a second display period of a second display frame to display a second image and the second level for controlling a touch driving period of the second display frame to detect the touch presence, and supply the second type of touch synchronization signal to the touch driving circuit, wherein the touch driving circuit is further configured to: in response to receiving the first type of touch synchronization signal having the second level from the timing controller, supply a touch driving signal to one or more of the plurality of touch electrodes, and in response to receiving the second type of touch synchronization signal having the second level from the timing controller, supply the touch driving signal to one or more of the plurality of touch electrodes, and wherein the first level corresponds to displaying an image and the second level corresponds to supplying the touch driving signal by the touch driving circuit for detecting the touch presence or the touch position.
As recited in independent claim 1, D2 shows generate a first type of touch synchronization signal (“Tsync swinging between a high level and a low level” [0082]) having a first level for controlling a first display period of a first display frame to display a first image (“a high level section (or a low level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) and a second level for controlling a touch driving period of the first display frame to detect the touch position (“and a low level section (or a high level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]), and supply the first type of touch synchronization signal Tsync to the touch driving circuit, and generate a second type of touch synchronization signal Tsync having the first level for controlling a second display period of a second display frame to display a second image (“a high level section (or a low level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) and the second level for controlling a touch driving period of the second display frame to detect the touch presence (“and a low level section (or a high level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]), and supply the second type of touch synchronization signal Tsync to the touch driving circuit 300, wherein the touch driving circuit 300 is further configured to: in response to receiving the first type of touch synchronization signal having the second level from the timing controller, supply a touch driving signal to one or more of the plurality of touch electrodes (necessarily, insofar as “a low level section (or a high level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]), and in response to receiving the second type of touch synchronization signal having the second level from the timing controller, supply the touch driving signal to one or more of the plurality of touch electrodes (necessarily, insofar as “a low level section (or a high level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]), and wherein the first level corresponds to displaying an image (“a high level section (or a low level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) and the second level corresponds to supplying the touch driving signal by the touch driving circuit for detecting the touch presence or the touch position (“and a low level section (or a high level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]).
Moreover, the Examiner finds that Tsync was predictable before the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to incorporate Tsync into the device of D1 as suggested by D2. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to separate display periods and touch periods based on time as taught by D2 (“display period DP and the touch period TP … may be separated from each other based on time” [0080]) so as to avoid touch interference with display and display interference with touch as was well known in the art.
As recited in claim 3, D1 shows that the touch driving period of the second display frame (see one group of touch pulses in Touch Idle mode of Fig. 4) for the second mode (Touch Idle mode) is shorter than (compare Touch Idle mode to Touch Active mode in Fig. 4) the touch driving period of the first display frame (see two groups of touch pulses in Touch Active mode of Fig. 4) for the first mode (Touch Active mode).
As recited in claim 4, D1 is silent regarding whether the second display period of the second display frame for the second mode is longer than the first display period of the first display frame for the first mode.
Regarding claim 4: D2 discloses “the time of a single frame may be divided into a single display period DP and a single touch period TP, such that display driving can be performed during the single display period DP” [0083].
Moreover, the Examiner finds that a single display period was predictable before the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to provide a longer display period during the touch idle mode of D1 as suggested by D2. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to replace the intermittent display periods of D1 with a single, longer display period as taught by D2 (“a single display period DP and a single touch period TP, such that display driving can be performed during the single display period” [0083]) in order to perform display while Tsync is high (or low) as suggested by D2 (“a high level section (or a low level section) of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) so as to reduce flicker as is known in the art.
As recited in claim 14: D1 shows that the timing controller is further configured to: in response to sensing a touch presence (“a panel is driven in the idle mode for determining whether the panel is touched, and when a touch input occurs” [0009]) while in the second mode (“while the idle mode is being executed” [0009]), transition (“the panel is driven in the active touch mode” [0009]) the touch display device (Although the features of dependent claim 14 are described in the section “BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION”, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand these features to be present in the touch display device of the Fig. 3-4 embodiment.) from the second mode (Touch Idle) to the first mode (Touch Active) for sensing the touch position (“active touch mode for detecting a touch input position” [0009]).
Regarding claim 15: D1 may be arguably construed as teaching that in the second mode (Touch Idle mode), a same touch driving signal is simultaneously applied to all of the plurality of touch electrodes in the display panel (“When the driving mode of the panel 100 is the touch driving mode, the ROIC applies a touch scan signal to all … of the plurality of electrodes 110. Here, the touch scan signal is referred to as a touch sensing signal, a touch sensing voltage, or a touch driving voltage. ¶ For example, when the driving mode of the panel 100 is the touch driving mode, the ROIC applies the touch scan signal to the plurality of electrodes. Here, when the plurality of electrodes are grouped, the ROIC may apply the touch scan signal to all … of a plurality of electrode groups.” [0055]-[0056]); however, even if such a construction were not made, patentability would not result.
Applicant failed to timely challenge the official notice taken 11/20/2024; thus, the facts noticed (i.e., simultaneously driving all touch electrodes in an idle mode was known in the art prior to the effective filing date) in the non-final rejection mailed 11/20/2024 are taken to be admitted prior art.
Moreover, the Examiner finds that simultaneous scanning of all touch electrodes in an idle mode was known in the art prior to the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to simultaneously scan all touch electrodes in D1’s idle mode as was known in the art. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to reduce flicker in the display by minimizing a touch scanning time while the user is viewing rather than touching, the display as was known in the art.
As recited in claim 17, D1 is silent regarding the recited number of distinct touch driving periods.
There is no invention in changing the number of known parts when the claimed numbers fall within the range known in the art. Iron Grip Barbell Co., Inc. v. USA Sports, Inc., 392 F.3d 1317, 1322, 73 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The patent claim at issue was directed to a weight plate having 3 elongated openings that served as handles for transporting the weight plate. Multiple prior art patents each disclosed weight plates having 1, 2 or 4 elongated openings. 392 F.3d at 1319, 73 USPQ2d at 1226. The court stated that the claimed weight plate having 3 elongated openings fell within the "range" of the prior art and was thus presumed obvious. 392 F.3d at 1322, 73 USPQ2d at 1228.
Moreover, the Examiner finds that the recited numbers of touch driving periods were predictable.
It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date to arrive at the recited number of touch driving periods in the course of routine engineering choice. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to arrive at the recited numbers of touch driving periods in order to reduce flicker and save energy during an idle mode by minimizing the number of times the touch electrodes are driven, while reducing latency of touch sensing during an active mode as was known in the art.
As recited in claim 18, D1 is silent regarding whether the first level corresponds to a high level, and the second level corresponds to a low level lower than the high level, and wherein each of the first type of touch synchronization signal and the second type of touch synchronization signal swings between the high level and the low level.
Regarding claim 18: D2 shows that the first level corresponds to a high level (“a high level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]), and the second level corresponds to a low level (“and a low level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]) lower than the high level (“a high level section” [0082]), and wherein each of the first type of touch synchronization signal Tsync and the second type of touch synchronization signal Tsync swings (“Tsync swinging between a high level and a low level” [0082]) between the high level (“a high level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) and the low level (“and a low level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]).
Moreover, the Examiner finds that high and low levels were predictable before the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to arrive at the recited high and low levels in the course of routine engineering choice as suggested by D2. The rationale is as follows: One of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to try any one of the finite number of relative values for the two levels of Tsync as suggested by D2 [0082].
As recited in claim 19, D1 shows detecting the touch presence or the touch position (“an idle driving mode for determining the presence of a touch input and an active driving mode for detecting a touch input position” [0057]).
As recited in claim 19, D1 is silent regarding whether the high level corresponds to displaying an image and the low level corresponds to supplying the touch driving signal by the touch driving circuit for detecting the touch presence or the touch position.
Regarding claim 19: D2 shows that the high level corresponds to displaying an image (“a high level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the display period DP” [0082]) and the low level corresponds to supplying the touch driving signal by the touch driving circuit (“and a low level section … of the synchronization signal Tsync may correspond to the touch period TP” [0082]).
See teachings, findings, and rationale above for claim 18.
As recited in claim 20, D1 shows that a time period of the first display frame is equal to a time period of the second display frame (see identical frame lengths in Fig. 4).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julie Anne Watko whose telephone number is (571)272-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 9AM-5PM, Wednesday 10:30AM-5PM, Thursday-Friday 9AM-5PM, and occasional Saturdays.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
JULIE ANNE WATKO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Julie Anne Watko/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
05/27/2026
Prosecution Insights