DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
With respect to the rejection of claims 6 and 11-14 under 35 USC 103, Applicant's arguments filed 05/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, see page 8, section II:
Because Sebastian is cited for other purposes of alleging elements of dependent claims and fails to describe the above-recited features, this reference fails to bridge the deficiencies of Zhang. Hence, Applicant traverses these rejections and submits that any combination of Zhang and Sebastian fails to teach or suggest each and every element of the claimed invention.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant’s argument fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation without pointing out specific reasons or evidences why the reference fails to teach the claim.
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 of this title, 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 1-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 11,016,542 B1) in view of Sebastian (US 2016/0188092 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches a system comprising:
a support structure (Fig. 8, temple arm 808);
an antenna feed including one or more antenna feed components (Fig. 8, radio 830);
a multi-layer capacitive touch sensor (Fig. 8, touch pad sensors 810, col. 2, lines 45-46, 130, capacitive touch sensors) wherein the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor is secured to at least a portion of the support structure (808); and
a conductive element that electrically connects the antenna feed to the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor (Fig. 8, connection between 830 and 810, Fig. 2, 240, col. 3, lines 31-32, a conductive connection 240), such that at least a portion of the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor acts as a radiator (col. 2, lines 15-16, touch pad sensors operative as antennas, Fig. 8, wireless link 850) for the antenna feed.
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach the system wherein the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor includes a capacitive touch surface layer, a ground flood layer, and a structural layer, the structural layer including one or more traces of the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor; and
wherein the antenna feed is electrically attached to the traces on the structural layer of the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor.
Sebastian teaches a system, wherein the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor includes a capacitive touch surface layer (Fig. 4A, [0050] touch sensing unit 48, and protective layer 49), a ground flood layer ([0050] the ground plane of display unit 47), and a structural layer (Fig. 4A, [0049] substrate layer 42); and
wherein the antenna feed is electrically attached to the traces on the structural layer of the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor (Fig. 4A, [0051] feeding mechanism 46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to apply the sensor of Sebastian to the teachings of Zhang in order to enhance the performance and increase the robustness of the overall antenna system while mitigating or eliminating undesired effects, by configuring the touchscreen element to function as a part of the touchscreen antenna system. In particular, a configuration may be designed to integrate an antenna element, a touchscreen element, a feeding mechanism and a corresponding transmission line in a single unit for additional advantages, such as more compactness, lower manufacturing costs, and potential higher signal integrity (Sebastian, [0008]).
Regarding claim 2, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang.
Zhang further teaches the system, further comprising a choking component (Fig. 6, RF chokes 440) configured to block signals having a frequency above a specified threshold value (col. 5, lines 22-25).
Regarding claim 3, all the limitations of claim 2 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, further comprising a second antenna feed, wherein the antenna feed is configured to operate at a first specified frequency, and wherein the second antenna is configured to operate at a second, different frequency (col. 2, lines 65-67, one or more frequency band).
Regarding claim 4, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, wherein the conductive element that electrically connects the antenna feed to the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor comprises a spring clip (col. 8, lines 9-15).
Regarding claim 5, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, wherein the antenna feed components comprise an impedance matching circuit configured to cause resonation at a specified frequency (Fig. 7, 460, col. 4, lines 39-45).
Regarding claim 6, all the limitations of claim 5 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Sebastian further teaches a system, wherein the impedance matching circuit is positioned on the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor (Fig. 5A, [0050] adjust certain performance parameters including input impedance).
Regarding claim 7, all the limitations of claim 5 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, wherein the impedance matching circuit is positioned on a main logic board (Fig. 9, matching circuitry 942).
Regarding claim 8, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, further comprising at least one trace that electrically links the antenna feed to at least one processor on a main logic board (MLB) (Fig. 1, controller 120).
Regarding claim 9, all the limitations of claim 8 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, wherein the trace that electrically links the antenna feed to the processor on the MLB is shared by at least one additional electronic component (col. 5, lines 50-54, electronic circuitry and/or battery).
Regarding claim 10, all the limitations of claim 9 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches the system, wherein the at least one additional electronic component comprises at least one of: a sensor, a microphone, a battery, or a speaker (col. 5, lines 50-54, electronic circuitry and/or battery).
Regarding claim 11, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Sebastian further teaches the system, wherein the ground flood layer provides an electrical ground for the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor ([0050] the ground plane may capacitively couple to touch sensing unit 48 ) and for at least one electronic component (antenna 44).
Zhang in combination with Sebastian teaches the system, wherein the ground flood layer is connected to a grounded subframe that extend along a sidearm of the support structure (Fig. 8, 810 extends along the temple arm 808).
Regarding claim 12, all the limitations of claim 11 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Sebastian further teaches, wherein the structural layer provides trace routing for one or more components of the capacitive touch surface layer (Fig. 11, main and flexible circuit boards 1120 and 1110).
Regarding claim 13, all the limitations of claim 12 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches, the system wherein the antenna feed is coupled with one or more tuners configured to control a frequency in which the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor operates as a radiator (col. 3, lines 31-41).
Regarding claim 14, all the limitations of claim 1 are taught by Zhang in view of Sebastian.
Zhang further teaches, wherein the antenna causes electrical signals to be transmitted directly to the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor to cause the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor to cause the multi-layer capacitive touch sensor to resonate in at least one of a transmission mode or a receiving mode (col. 3, lines 31-41, touch pad configurations operate as one or more antennas ).
Regarding claim 20, this claim has substantially the same subject matter as that in claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Conclusion
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 SEOKJIN KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Alexander Taningco can be reached at (571) 272-8048. 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.
/SEOKJIN KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights