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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 filed on January 13, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. That is, the new reference, Hsu, properly combined with previous references, clearly discloses the limitations brought into question by Applicant’s arguments. Furthermore, previously cited references in combination with the new reference clearly disclose any deficiencies that were raised in Applicant’s arguments and are properly address below. As such, Examiner respectfully submits the claims stand rejected.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, 14-18, 20-22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabo et al., US 2013/0194229 A1 (hereinafter “Sabo”) in view of Okada, US 2021/0064215 A1 (hereafter “Okada”) further in view of Hsu et al., US 12,190,768 B1 (hereinafter “Hsu”).
Regarding claim 1, Sabo discloses a method of mitigating noise coupling (Sabo, Abstract, [0020], and FIG. 1 at [0024]; FIGS. 3-5 and [0060]-[0072], method at FIGS. 3 and 6 generally), in a display (FIGS. 1-2 and input device comprising a display device at [0039]-[0042]), the method comprising:
initiating a scan of a display frame in the display (Sabo at FIGS. 3-4, and [0068]-[0071], single display line of a display screen is scanned for a display frame 400), the scan displaying a sequence of display rows (FIGS. 1-4 and [0062]-[0075] display rows would be constituted by the pixel update 406 per display line of the display line period of a display frame 400 and 402, which is sequentially updated at [0051] and [0071]-[0075]) from a starting point (Sabo at FIGS. 1-4 and beginning of display line period 404 at [0071]-[0075]) of the display frame to an ending point of the display frame (Sabo at FIGS. 1-4 and ending of display line period 404 at [0071]-[0075]), wherein a horizontal blanking period (408, 422, 502]) is positioned in time between each display row during which display emissions are turned off (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]);
progressively scanning a first sub-sequence of the display rows in the sequence during a first time period (Sabo at FIGS. 1-4, and [0068]-[0071], single display line of a display screen is scanned for a display frame 400; the display rows being updated during the horizontal blanking period 408, 422 and further FIGS. 5-6 and 502 being updated at [0079]-[0080]);
wherein display pixel operations are performed during the first horizontal blanking period, based at least upon progressively scanning the first sub-sequence of the display rows (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]); and
progressively scanning a second sub-sequence of the display rows in the sequence during a second time period (e.g., 2nd capacitive frame 414), based at least upon scanning the display row having the quiet period (FIGS. 3-6 [0062]-[0078] adjusting frequency of capacitive scanning in a second period 414 based on previous scan of a display row and noise determination therein).
However, Sabo does not explicitly disclose scanning a display row having a quiet period inserted into a first horizontal blanking period adjacent to the display row, and display pixel operations are performed outside of the quiet period.
In the same field of endeavor, Okada discloses scanning a display row having a quiet period inserted into a first horizontal blanking period adjacent to the display row (Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0027-0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2 as annotated below), and display pixel operations are performed outside of the quiet period (Okada at FIG. 2 below, THD during which pixel writing is performed and no writing of pixel data during the difference between TH and THD at .
PNG
media_image1.png
536
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the blanking period and display driving of Sabo to incorporate the display stop line periods as disclosed by Okada because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, touch display devices with blanking periods for touch detection. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve responsiveness of the display to the user’s touch operation (see Okada at least at [0013]-[0014] and [0040]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
However, Sabo in view of Okada does not explicitly disclose wherein the quiet period is shorter than the first horizontal blanking period,
In the same field of endeavor, Hsu discloses a blanking period in which BPH blanking pulse for detection is inserted, and this serves the same function as Applicant’s claimed quiet period – to detect/sense, in the blanking period wherein the quiet period is shorter than the first horizontal blanking period (FIG. 8 below, col. 3, lines 22-35; and col. 4, lines 47-67, and claim 1; BPH is inserted in the horizontal blanking period and is shorter than the horizontal blanking period and exists during non-display of the row).
PNG
media_image2.png
542
770
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the driving scheme and blanking period of Sabo in view of Okada to incorporate the shorter blanking period pulse as disclosed by Hsu because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, driving schemes for displays using blanking periods for detection/sensing. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve continuous display and sense function of a sensing display panel (see Hsu at col. 1 lines 15-29). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the horizontal blanking periods between the display rows of the first sub-sequence and between the display rows of the second sub-sequence do not include quiet periods (Sabo at FIG. 4 and [0071] [0076], horizontal blanking period 422 with no capacitive change in the horizontal blanking period 422 and may be used to drive a voltage onto the common electrodes corresponding to the display lines; Okada with FIG. 2, not all Horizontal periods included, Hsu FIG. 8 generally).
Regarding claim 3, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the first time period and the second time period are substantially of a same duration (Sabo at FIG. 4 at [0077] with 412 and 414 substantially the same, alternatively, each line having substantially the same horizontal blanking period duration; further see Okada at FIGS. 2, 4, and 5 at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042])
Regarding claim 4, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein display pixel operations include one or more of pixel initialization (see below, condition satisfied), diode threshold voltage sampling (see below, condition satisfied), or pixel data programming (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding claim 6, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), further comprising: scanning another display row having a quiet period inserted into a horizontal blanking period adjacent to the other display row (Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2), wherein display pixel operations are delayed until expiration of the quiet period during the horizontal blanking period (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]); and progressively scanning a third sub-sequence of the display rows in the sequence during a third time period (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085] in view of Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 6 (see above), wherein the horizontal blanking periods between the display rows of the first sub-sequence, between the display rows of the second sub-sequence (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085] in view of Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2), and between the display rows of the third sub-sequence do not include quiet periods and the first time period, the second time period, and the third time period are substantially of a same duration (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085] in view of Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 8, it is similar in scope to claim 1 above, the only difference being claim 8 is directed to an electronic device (Sabo at FIG. 2, and [0041], input device 100) including a display (Sabo at FIG. 2, and [0041], input device 100 for a display), the electronic device comprising: a display control circuitry (Sabo at FIG. 2, [0041] processing system 110 comprising driver circuitry 202, receiver circuitry 212; Okada and LCD controller 13, touch panel controller 14, and controller 16 at [0020]-[0021]) configured to perform the same steps as claim 1. Therefore, claim 8 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above. Therefore, claim 9 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Regarding claim 10, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the electronic device of claim 8 (see above), further comprising: a touch sensor (Sabo, FIG. 2, sensor pattern 200 at [0041], Okada FIG. 1, and [0020]-[0024] and [0031] and touch panel 12) configured to detect a touch action during the quiet period through the display (Sabo, FIGS. 2-5 and [0038], [0070]-[0075]; Okada FIGS. 1-5, at [0041]).
Regarding claim 14, it is similar in scope to claim 6 above. Therefore, claim 14 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, it is similar in scope to claim 1 above, the only difference being claim 15 is directed to one or more tangible processor-readable storage media (Sabo FIG. 1, at [0033] electronically-readable instructions as stored at [0040]) embodied with instructions (Sabo FIG. 1, at [0033] electronically-readable instructions as stored at [0040]) for executing on one or more processors (Sabo at FIG. 1 and processor at [0033] and [0040]) of a computing device (Sabo at FIG. 2 and [0041] input device 100 with a display and [0033]-[0040]) a process for mitigating noise coupling in a display (Sabo at processes FIGS. 3 and 5 generally, Okada at FIG. 1 and LCD 11 and [0020]-[0025]), the process to perform the same steps as claim 1. Therefore, claim 15 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, it is similar in scope to claim 2 above. Therefore, claim 16 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, it is similar in scope to claim 3 above. Therefore, claim 17 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, it is similar in scope to claim 4 above. Therefore, claim 18 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 4.
Regarding claim 20, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the one or more tangible processor-readable storage media of claim 15 (see above), further comprising: scanning another display row having a quiet period inserted into a horizontal blanking period adjacent to the other display row (Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2), wherein display pixel operations are delayed until expiration of the quiet period during the horizontal blanking period (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]); and progressively scanning a third sub-sequence of the display rows in the sequence during a third time period (Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2 in view of Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]), wherein the horizontal blanking periods between the display rows of the first sub-sequence, between the display rows of the second sub-sequence, and between the display rows of the third sub-sequence do not include quiet periods and the first time period, the second time period, and the third time period are substantially of a same duration (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085] in view of Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the display pixel operations include pixel data programming (Sabo at FIGS. 1-5 horizontal blanking period 408, 422, 502 also called non-display update periods at [0006], [0060]-[0063], [0067]-[0078] and FIG. 6 at [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding claim 22, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the first horizontal blanking period is positioned between adjacent display rows of the display frame (Sabo at FIG. 4 and [0071] [0076], horizontal blanking period 422 with no capacitive change in the horizontal blanking period 422 and may be used to drive a voltage onto the common electrodes corresponding to the display lines, in view of Okada FIGS. 1-5 illustrating a display stop line EVD described at [0028], [0031]-[0035] and [0040]-[0042] of which a period is blanked in the TH as displayed in FIG. 2; Hsu at FIG. 8, lines 1 and 2 are adjacent display rows).
Regarding claim 24, it is similar in scope to claim 21 above. Therefore, claim 24 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 21.
Claims 5, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Lin et al., US 2020/0226978 A1 (hereinafter “Lin”).
Regarding claim 5, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the method of claim 1 (see above).
However, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu does not explicitly disclose wherein the horizontal blanking period including the quiet period includes an emission off signal, followed by an anode reset signal, followed by the quiet period, followed by one or more display pixel operations.
In the same field of endeavor, Lin discloses wherein the horizontal blanking period including the quiet period includes an emission off signal (FIGS. 16-17B and [0103]-[0111]), followed by an anode reset signal (FIGS. 16-17B and [0103]-[0111]), followed by the quiet period (FIGS. 16-17B and [0103]-[0111]), followed by one or more display pixel operations (FIGS. 16-17B and [0103]-[0111]; in view of Hsu at FIG. 8 with pixel operation following the quiet period as illustrated col. 1 lines 15-29 and col. 3, lines 22-35; and col. 4, lines 47-67).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch sensitive display driving scheme of Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu to incorporate the emission off and anode reset followed with a pixel operation during a blanking period as disclosed by Lin because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, sensing periods in display devices and detection methods thereof. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve frame rate response (see Lin at least at Abstract). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 13, it is similar in scope to claim 5 above. Therefore, claim 13 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 5.
Regarding claim 19, it is similar in scope to claim 5 above. Therefore, claim 19 is similarly analyzed and rejected as claim 5.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Lim et al., US 2022/0137773 A1 (hereinafter “Lim”).
Regarding claim 11, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the electronic device of claim 8 (see above).
However, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu does not explicitly disclose the device is further comprising: a digitizer configured to perform communications with a stylus during the quiet period through the display.
In the same field of endeavor, Lim discloses the device is further comprising: a digitizer ([0024]-[0026] and [0117]) configured to perform communications with a stylus ([0024]-[0026] and [0117]) during the quiet period through the display ([0024]-[0026] and [0117] and FIGS. 7, 13-15 generally and [0085]-[0087] and [0099], noting Hsu col. 1 lines 15-29 col. 3, lines 22-35; and col. 4, lines 47-67 describing sensing and detecting during the time).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch sensitive display driving scheme of Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu to incorporate the digitizer communication with pen during a blanking period as disclosed by Lim because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, sensing periods in display devices and detection methods thereof. The motivation to combine these references would have been to reduce interference when operating (see Lim at least at [0026]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Zheng et al., US 2021/0090509 A1 (hereinafter “Zheng”).
Regarding claim 12, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu discloses the electronic device of claim 8 (see above).
However, Sabo in view of Okada further in view of Hsu does not explicitly disclose an optical sensor configured to detect ambient light during the quiet period.
In the same field of endeavor, Zheng discloses an optical sensor (FIG. 3 and ambient light sensor 40 at [0029] and FIG. 8 and [0050]-[0055]) configured to detect ambient light (FIG. 3 and ambient light sensor 40, and FIG. 8 and [0050]-[0055]) during the quiet period (FIGS. 7A-9 and [0049]-[0055] and FIGS. 10-11 at [0058]-[0060] and 61 blanking periods include a non-display period; further note, in view of Hsu at col. 1 lines 15-29 and col. 3, lines 22-35; and col. 4, lines 47-67 describing the pulse for detection).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch sensitive display driving scheme of Sabo in view of Okada to incorporate the ambient light detection during a blanking period as disclosed by Zheng because the references are within the same field of endeavor, namely, sensing periods in display devices and detection methods thereof. The motivation to combine these references would have been to improve noise during display and detection (see Zhang at least at [0055]). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the prior art to achieve the claimed invention and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wyatt et al., US 2015/0346902 A1;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARVESH J NADKARNI whose telephone number is (571)270-7562. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM 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, LunYi Lao can be reached at (571) 272-7671. 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.
/SARVESH J NADKARNI/Examiner, Art Unit 2621