DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 33-37 and 40-41, 43-44 and 46-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cok in view of Cok (US 2018/0226386), hereinafter referred to as “6386”.
Regarding claim 33, Cok discloses a touch-screen control system, comprising:
a display substrate (10, fig. 6C) comprising a display area (para. 167);
an array of micro-iLEDs (90, fig. 6C) disposed in pixel rows and pixel columns on the display substrate in the display area (see fig. 6C and fig. 6B and para. 167, wherein the display substrate 10 is the display area);
a touch controller (40, fig. 6) comprising a touch-controller substrate (see 14, fig. 6C) distinct from the display substrate (see fig. 6C; wherein touch controller substrate 14 is distinct from display substrate 10) and a touch control circuit (40, fig. 6C) disposed in or on the touch controller substrate (see fig. 6B-6C and para. 166-167);
a touch control circuit (40, fig. 6C) disposed in or on the touch controller substrate (fig. 6C); and
a capacitor conductor (50 in fig. 2 and fig. 6C and see para. 164) forming a touch sensor (para. 164) disposed in or on the touch controller substrate electrically connected to the touch control circuit (see fig. 2, 6C and para. 164),
wherein the micro-iLEDs is an array of micro-iLEDs are arranged in mutually exclusive pixel cluster (90 in fig. 6C), each of the pixel cluster comprising (ii) a cluster controller (92, fig. 6C) operable to control ones of the micro-iLEDs (para. 165), and (iii) a single touch controller (left touch controller 40 in fig. 6C) of the plurality of touch controllers (see left and right touch controllers in fig. 6C).
Cok fails to disclose wherein the pixel clusters comprise an array of pixels.
6386 discloses wherein the micro-iLEDs (50 in fig. 12B) in the array of micro-iLEDs (see array of 50 in fig. 12B) are arranged in mutually exclusive pixel clusters (see multiple 20 in fig. 14B), each of the pixel clusters comprising: (i) an array of pixels (see independent rows of 50 in fig. 12B, wherein each row of RGB is a corresponding pixel) comprising independently controllable ones of the micro-iLEDs (see independently controllable 50 in fig. 12B) emitting a plurality of colors of light in each pixel in the array of pixels (see 50R, 50B, 50G in fig. 12B), (ii) a cluster controller (60, fig. 12B) operable to control only the ones of the micro-iLEDs in the array of pixels in the pixel cluster (see 12B and para. 55), and (iii) a single touch controller of the plurality of touch controllers (see multiple 60 from fig. 12B in fig. 14B).
When the invention was made (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the teachings of 6386 in the device of Cok. The motivation for doing so would have been to have a pixel controller for controlling multiple groups of pixels (6386; fig. 12B and para. 55; wherein the number of pixel controllers used is decreased as compared to Cok, resulting in cost savings).
Regarding claim 34, Cok discloses wherein the touch-controller substrate is a semiconductor substrate (para. 163).
Regarding claim 35, Cok discloses wherein the display substrate is a dielectric substrate (para. 163).
Regarding claim 36, Cok discloses comprising a plurality of touch controllers (40A-40B in fig. 3) disposed on the display substrate, each comprising a touch-controller substrate distinct from the display substrate (see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 37, Cok discloses wherein the plurality of touch controllers is arranged in a regular array on the display substrate (see fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim 38, Cok discloses wherein the micro-iLEDs in the array of micro-iLEDs are arranged in mutually exclusive pixel clusters, each of the pixel clusters comprising a touch controller of the plurality of touch controllers (see fig. 6A).
Regarding claim 39, Cok discloses comprising a cluster controller (92, fig. 6A) for each of the pixel clusters operable to control the micro-iLEDs in each cluster (para. 165).
Regarding claim 40, Cok discloses wherein the touch controller and the cluster controller are disposed in a common integrated circuit (12, fig. 6A) distinct from the display substrate (fig. 6A and para. 166).
Regarding claim 41, Cok discloses wherein the capacitor conductor forms a self-capacitance touch detector (para. 161).
Regarding claim 43, Cok discloses wherein the capacitor conductor is electrically connected to a power signal, a ground signal, a power plane, or a ground plane (para. 174-175).
Regarding claim 44, Cok discloses wherein the capacitor conductor is a first capacitor conductor (52B, fig. 3) and the touch screen control system comprises a second capacitor conductor (54B, fig. 3) forming a mutual capacitance capacitor with the first capacitor conductor (see fig. 3 and para. 161),
Regarding claim 46, Cok discloses wherein the first capacitor conductor or the second capacitor conductor is electrically connected to a power wire, a power plane, a ground wire, or a ground plane (para. 174).
Regarding claim 47, Cok discloses wherein the first capacitor conductor and the second capacitor conductor are interdigitated (see 52, 54 in fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 55-58 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Cok fails to disclose “a capacitor conductor forming a touch sensor disposed in or on the touch controller substrate”. The Office disagrees. Specifically Cok discloses a capacitor conductor (50 in fig. 2 and as applied to fig. 6C) on touch controller (14, fig. 6C) substrate (para. 164; wherein “the touch sensor 50 is formed on a touch substrate 14 separate and distinct from the backplane substrate 10”).
Additionally, Applicant argues the prior art of record fails to disclose “pixel controllers controlling pixels clusters of multiple pixels”. The Office disagrees. Specifically, 6386 discloses a pixel controller (60, fig.12B) controlling pixel clusters (20, fig. 12B) of multiple pixels (see each row of 50R, 50G and 50B in fig. 12B; wherein three RGB LEDs/light sources make a single pixel).
Additionally, Applicant argues that Cok fails to disclose “power and ground signals being connected to capacitive conductor”. The Office disagrees. Specifically, Cok discloses “includes providing power and ground signals to an array of spatially separated independent touch elements” (see para. 175; wherein each touch/capacitive element is connected to power in ground in order to function).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBIN J MISHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-7251. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, NITIN PATEL can be reached at (571)272-7677. 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.
/ROBIN J MISHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights