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 .
Status of the Application
This Office action is responsive to the amendment filed June 10, 2026. The amendments to the claims, the specification, and the drawings have been entered.
Claims 1-13 and 20 are pending.
Claims 4-7 remain withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a nonelected invention.
Claims 13 and 20 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a nonelected species (see the Election/Restrictions section below).
Claims 14-19 are canceled.
Claims 1-3 and 8-12 are examined on the merits herein.
Election/Restrictions
In the reply filed December 4, 2025, applicant elected, without traverse, Invention 1 and Species 11 (FIG. 8B), Species 13 (FIG. 7B), Species 15 (FIG. 9), Species 28 (FIG. 20), and Species 33 of Species Group 5, and identified claims 1-3 and 8-13 as readable on the elected species.
The elected Species 15 corresponds to the capacitance sensing circuit 116MS1 of FIG. 9, in which a single differential amplifier A1 receives the capacitance under test at its inverting input.
Amended claim 13 and new claim 20 are directed to a species nonelected in the reply filed December 4, 2025.
As amended, claim 13 requires two differential amplifiers with the capacitance under test connected between the inverting input terminals of the first and second differential amplifiers - the fully differential capacitance sensing circuit 116MS4 of FIG. 12 (nonelected Species 18) - and new claim 20 recites the associated operation of FIG. 12A.
Applicant’s remarks confirm this correspondence, stating that “FIG. 12 corresponds to the fully differential capacitance sensing circuit of amended claim 13, and FIG. 12A corresponds to the associated operation waveforms of new claim 20” (Remarks, June 10, 2026), and reproducing FIGS. 12 and 12A.
The reply presents no showing that claims 13 and 20 are readable on the elected Species 15, as required by the restriction requirement for claims subsequently added.
Accordingly, claims 13 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species. See MPEP § 821.03.
Because the election was made without traverse, the requirement is deemed proper.
Drawings
The replacement drawing sheets (18 sheets) filed June 10, 2026 are accepted. FIG. 1 is now designated with the legend “Prior Art,” and the reference characters of FIG. 8B have been conformed to the specification (322U, 322PAU, 330).
The objections to the drawings set forth in the Office action mailed December 17, 2025 are withdrawn.
Specification
The amendments to the specification filed June 10, 2026 (replacement paragraphs [0106]-[0129], [0131]-[0134], [0136]-[0139], [0141]-[0142], [0144]-[0145], [0149]-[0151], [0154]-[0157], [0160]-[0164], and [0166]-[0168]), have been entered.
The amendments conform the typography of the subscripted circuit symbols and equations and introduce no new matter.
Withdrawn Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112
The rejections of claims 1-3 and 8-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) set forth in the Office action mailed December 17, 2025 are withdrawn in view of the amendments to the claims filed June 10, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 10, 2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-3 and 8-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Tseng in view of Takizawa have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection set forth below does not rely on Takizawa.
The arguments are directed to the newly added limitations of amended claim 1 - in particular, the capacitance sensing circuit configured to measure the respective display medium as a capacitance under test and to evaluate a capacitance characteristic of the respective display medium based on an output voltage of the capacitance sensing circuit - and to Takizawa’s asserted failure to teach those limitations.
Those limitations are addressed by the newly applied Brown reference in the ground of rejection below.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground of rejection presented in this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Tseng (US 2020/0126961 A1) was published April 23, 2020, more than one year before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and therefore qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) that is not subject to the exceptions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1).
Brown (US 2012/0206408 A1) was published August 16, 2012 and likewise qualifies under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Claims 1-3 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng (US 2020/0126961 A1) in view of Brown (US 2012/0206408 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tseng discloses a pixel array [e.g., Fig. 23: 722PAU] comprising:
a plurality of pixel units [e.g., Fig. 23: 720],
wherein each of the plurality of pixel units comprises:
a display media module [e.g., Fig. 23: 722U] comprising
one or more pairs of electrodes [e.g., Fig. 23: 710, 101 PE, 102RE; Paragraph 105: “The display medium module 722U comprises at least two pairs 710 of electrodes and a display medium 105. Each pair 710 of electrodes comprises a first electrode 101 PE and a second electrode 102RE.”] and
one or more display media [e.g., Fig. 23: 105],
wherein each pair of electrodes comprises
a first electrode [e.g., Fig. 23: 101 PE] disposed on a first substrate [e.g., Fig. 2B: 101PS; Paragraph 56: “The first electrode 101 PE may be disposed on the first substrate 101 PS”] and
a second electrode [e.g., Fig. 23: 102RE], and
wherein, for each pair of electrodes, a respective display medium of the one or more display media is disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode [e.g., Paragraph 105: “The display medium 105 is disposed between the first electrodes 101PE and the second electrodes 102RE of the display medium module 722U.”] such that the respective display medium forms a capacitance under test between the first electrode and the second electrode [e.g., Tseng’s display medium 105 between the pair of electrodes forms a capacitance; the measurement of that capacitance as a capacitance under test is addressed by Brown, below]; and
a sensing function element constructed from an active switching element [e.g., Fig. 2B: 116],
wherein the active switching element comprises a substrate portion [e.g., Fig. 2B: 116S] and a transistor portion [e.g., Fig. 2B: 116T] formed on the substrate portion; and
wherein the sensing function element is
independently manufactured from the display media module [e.g., Paragraph 92: “the active switching element is independently manufactured, rather than being directly manufactured on the display medium module”; see also Paragraph 96] and
electrically coupled to at least the first electrode of the at least one pair of electrodes of the display media module [e.g., Paragraph 105: “The active switching element 116 is electrically connected to first electrodes 101 PE”; Paragraph 53], and
configured to provide electric energy between the first electrode and the second electrode of the at least one pair of electrodes for sensing, measuring or compensating one or more characteristics of the respective display medium to adjust an amount of light passing through the respective display medium [e.g., Paragraph 53: “The active switching element 116 may control whether electrical energy is to be imposed on the first electrode 101PE and/or the second electrode 102RE”; Paragraph 54: “Its state may be changed via the first electrode 101PE and the second electrode 102RE to control the amount of light passing through”]
(e.g., see Paragraphs 50-109).
Tseng does not expressly disclose
(i) that the transistor portion comprises a plurality of transistors that are constructed into one or more gain stages or feedback loops; or
(ii) that, for at least one pair of electrodes, the sensing function element comprises a capacitance sensing circuit configured to measure the respective display medium disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode as a capacitance under test and to evaluate a capacitance characteristic of the respective display medium based on an output voltage of the capacitance sensing circuit.
Tseng does, however, expressly contemplate capacitance sensing among the functions of its pixel units: the functional elements of the pixel unit include [e.g., Paragraph 65] “a touch sensing functional element”, and [e.g., Paragraph 66] “The touch sensing functional element may include: one of a photo-sensing element, a piezoelectric sensing element, a capacitance sensing element, a resistance sensing element, an inductance sensing element, an electromagnetic sensing element, an electric charge sensing element, a voltage sensing element, a current sensing element, a pressure sensing element and an acoustic sensing element.
PNG
media_image1.png
1
1
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”
Brown discloses a capacitance sensing circuit configured
to measure a display medium disposed between a first electrode and a second electrode as a capacitance under test [e.g., Paragraph 3: “Each unique pair of electrodes formed by the opposing transparent conductors forms a picture element (pixel) comprising a capacitor in which the liquid crystal material forms the dielectric material.”; Paragraph 12: “A liquid crystal material is filled between the pixel electrode P and the common electrode COM and is represented by a liquid crystal capacitance Clc”; Paragraph 1: sensing “a change in capacitance of a liquid crystal material”; Paragraph 95: “a variable liquid crystal capacitor element, CV which functions in use as a liquid crystal sensing capacitor”, with “An input of the amplifier is connected to a terminal of the sensing capacitor.”; Fig. 9: CV, C1, M1; Fig. 12] and
to evaluate a capacitance characteristic of the display medium based on an output voltage of the capacitance sensing circuit [e.g., Paragraph 106: “The pixel output voltage, VPIX, is defined as the output voltage of this source follower amplifier and is determined by the voltage of the gate terminal, VG, and hence the capacitance of the liquid crystal capacitor element.”; Paragraph 108: “the source follower output voltage is indicative of the capacitance of the variable liquid crystal capacitor element, CV”; Paragraph 2: “Circuits to measure the liquid crystal capacitance”; Fig. 13 read-out circuit],
wherein the capacitance sensing circuit comprises a plurality of transistors that are constructed into one or more gain stages [e.g., Paragraph 97: “the amplifier M1 comprises a transistor” which “is connected as a source follower”; Paragraph 106: the transistor will “form a source follower amplifier with the bias transistor M3 connected to the data line”; Fig. 9: M1, M3] (e.g., see Paragraphs 1-3, 9-18, 95-108).
Brown further teaches that the measured capacitance change of the liquid crystal is evaluated to detect the location and force of a touch input [e.g., Paragraph 1: “creating a touch panel function based on this measurement”; Paragraph 26: “The sensing capacitor may have a capacitance which changes in response to a touch event.”].
Tseng and Brown are analogous art because they are both from the field of display devices in which a display medium disposed between pixel electrodes is combined with integrated sensing circuitry on the pixel-array substrate.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement, as the capacitance sensing element expressly contemplated by Tseng [e.g., Paragraph 66],
Brown’s capacitance sensing circuit measuring the display medium between the electrode pair as a capacitance under test, with the sensing transistors (e.g., Brown’s M1 and M3) constructed in the transistor portion 116T of Tseng’s independently manufactured active switching element, which Tseng provides as the situs of the pixel unit’s functional elements [e.g., Paragraphs 65-66, 92].
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so
because Brown teaches that “a touch panel may be formed within an LCD by providing a means of measuring the value of these liquid crystal capacitors across the display area” [e.g., Paragraph 3], yielding “information not only about the location of a touch input event but also of the force of touch” [e.g., Paragraph 1], using circuits that “may be fabricated in a thin-film polysilicon process compatible with that used in the manufacture of the TFT substrate” in which “the same liquid crystal cell used for the display generates the sensor signal” [e.g., Paragraph 2] - i.e., touch and force sensing without a separate touch panel layer - and
because Brown’s active pixel form “provides a significantly more accurate measure of the liquid crystal capacitance” than passive alternatives [e.g., Paragraph 18].
The combination is furthermore consistent with Tseng’s own teaching that the electrode pair geometry accommodates liquid crystal display media, including in-plane arrangements [e.g., Paragraph 54: “if the display medium 105 is in-plane-switching liquid crystal, the first electrode 101 PE and the second electrode 102RE may be arranged on the same plane”], matching Brown’s co-planar sensing electrode embodiments [e.g., Paragraph 22].
As further documentary evidence of the knowledge of one of ordinary skill:
measuring a capacitance “under test” and evaluating it from a circuit output was the ordinary framework for capacitive sensing in displays –
Kuang (US 2012/0068724 A1) describes “a capacitance evaluation circuit for evaluating a capacitance of a capacitor under test” [e.g., Kuang, Paragraph 2] in capacitive touch panels and capacitive display touch panels wherein “the capacitance of the capacitor under test therein is changed due to the user’s operation” [e.g., Kuang, Paragraph 5] - and reading the display pixel’s own liquid-crystal capacitance was likewise expressly known –
Choi (US 2005/0094038 A1, the pre-grant publication of US 7,280,167 described by Brown at Paragraph 10) teaches that “liquid crystal capacitance and storage capacitance are formed between the pixel electrode and a common electrode” and that switching elements “are designed to read variation in the liquid crystal capacitance” [e.g., Choi, Abstract].
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined Brown’s capacitance sensing circuitry with Tseng’s pixel units as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Regarding claim 2, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 1, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the display media module further comprises the first substrate and a second substrate [e.g., Fig. 2B: 101PS, 102RS], which are disposed facing each other and separated from each other [e.g., Paragraph 56: “a first substrate 101PS and/or a second substrate 102RS, which are disposed facing each other and separate from each other”];
wherein the second electrode is disposed on the first substrate or the second substrate [e.g., Paragraph 56: “the second electrode 102RE may be disposed on the first substrate 101 PS and/or the second substrate 102RS”].
Regarding claim 3, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 2, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the first electrode or the second electrode is made of transparent conductive material, non-transparent conductive material, flexible conductive material, rigid conductive material, metallic conductive material, metal alloy material, organic conductive material, inorganic conductive material, composite conductive material, or one of combinations thereof [e.g., Paragraph 60: “first electrode 101PE and/or second electrode 102RE may be made of (but not limited to) the following materials: transparent conductive material, non-transparent conductive material, flexible conductive material, rigid conductive material, metallic conductive material, metal compound material, metal alloy material, organic conductive material, inorganic conductive material, and composite conductive material, and one of the combinations thereof”].
Regarding claim 8, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 1, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the display media comprises at least one of self-luminous medium material, non-self-luminous medium material, light-filtering material, electric conductive material, insulating material, light absorbing material, light reflecting material, photorefractive material, light deflecting material and light diffusing material [e.g., Paragraph 55: “Besides non-self-luminous and self-luminous medium materials, in other embodiments the display medium 105 may further comprise color filter material, conductive material, insulating material, light absorbing material, light reflecting material, photo refractive material, light deflecting material, light diffusing material and at least one of the foregoing materials”; see also Paragraph 54].
Regarding claim 9, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 8, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the non-self-luminous medium material comprises at least one of electrophoretic material, electric fluid material, liquid crystal material, micro electromechanical reflective material, electrowetting material, electric ink material, magnetic fluid material, electrochromic material, electromorphous material and thermochromic material; and the self-luminous medium material comprises at least one of electroluminescent material, photoluminescent material, cathodoluminescent material, field emissive luminescent material and light-emitting diode material [e.g., Paragraph 55: “non-self-luminous medium materials may include at least one of electrophoretic material, electric fluid material, liquid crystal material, micro electromechanical reflective material, electrowetting material, electric ink material, magnetic fluid material, electrochromic material, electromorphous material and thermochromic material”; “Self-luminous medium materials may include at least one of electroluminescent material, photoluminescent material, cathodoluminescent material, field emissive luminescent material, phosphorescent material, fluorescent material and light-emitting diode material”].
Regarding claim 10, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 1, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the shape of the display media module is square, rectangular, fan-shaped, triangular,
PNG
media_image2.png
1
1
media_image2.png
Greyscale
trapezoid, round, polygonal, irregular, or one of the combinations thereof [e.g., Paragraph 89: “square, rectangular, fan, triangular, trapezoidal, circular, rhombus, rectangle, regular polygon, a polygon, irregular shape or a combination thereof”].
Regarding claim 11, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations
of claim 1, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses a connecting module [e.g., Fig. 23: 730; Paragraph 105: “The pixel array 722PAU comprises a display medium module 722U, an active switching element 116, and a connecting module 730.”] being separately manufactured and combined with the display media module or the sensing function element [e.g., Fig. 24 (assembly view); Paragraphs 104-105],
wherein the connecting module is a pitch connector [e.g., Paragraph 105: “the connecting module may be a pitch connector”], and
a first pitch [e.g., Fig. 23: P1] between two connectors [e.g., Fig. 23: 118A] electrically connected to the sensing function elements of the plurality of pixel units is less than a second pitch [e.g., Fig. 23: P2] between two connectors [e.g., Fig. 23: 118C] electrically connected to the respective first electrodes of two of the one or more pairs of electrodes [e.g., Fig. 23 shows P1 < P2] (e.g., see Paragraph 105).
Regarding claim 12, Tseng in view of Brown discloses all the limitations of claim 11, as previously detailed.
Tseng further discloses the connecting module is characterized as an interposer and is disposed, assembled, bonded, combined, merged, associated, linked, embedded, or integrated with the display media module or the sensing function elements of the plurality of pixel units [e.g., Paragraph 104: “Each connecting module 630 is an interposer integrated with the display medium module 622U and disposed in one of the perforations 609TV”; see also Paragraphs 101, 105].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Koo (US 2013/0271677 A1) discloses a display apparatus and method of measuring a liquid crystal capacitance of a display panel;
Lee et al. (US 2006/0017710 A1) discloses a liquid crystal display device including a sensing element in which an in-pixel amplifier transistor measures the capacitance of a variable capacitor having a first capacitor electrode on the first panel and a second capacitor electrode on the second panel, with the liquid crystal layer therebetween.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeff Piziali whose telephone number is (571)272-7678. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (7:30AM - 4PM).
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.
/Jeff Piziali/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
9 August 2026
Prosecution Insights