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 .
Claims 1, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, and 27 are amended
Claims 29-32 are new
Claims 1-32 have been examined
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on February 19, 2026 have been considered.
With respect to arguments regarding claims 1 and 14, these arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Mirfakhraei does not teach any of the proposed limitations. Examiner relies on Knausz in view of Mirfakhraei to teach “wherein the set of scrambled codewords is obtained by selecting, at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized, one or more scrambler operators from a set of scrambling operators, and converting an input codeword according to the one or more scrambler operators.” Examiner relies on Knausz to teach the modification of a CDM pattern, which can only be done by a conversion operation on the inputs of the CDM pattern. Examiner relies on Mirfakhraei to teach the randomization application. Examiner relies on Knausz in view of Mirfakhraei in order to teach “stimulating the same drive lines of a touch sensor in a touch screen sequentially in time over multiple measurement frames.” Knausz teaches different electrodes having different timeslots being able to sense touch signals. Mirfakhraei teaches the same drive lines being stimulated by different patterns of codes. Applicant argues Yokomoto fails to disclose “touch-screen overlay attack prevention.” However, the argued features are not recited in the claim. Yokomoto teaches a touch screen attack prevention as it prevents the leakage of personal data entered via touch screen. See the summary of the invention in Yokomoto Page 11 lines 10-13.
With respect to arguments regarding claim 22 27, and 28, these arguments are not persuasive for reasons similar to those regarding claims 1 and 14
With respect to arguments regarding claims 3, 15, 16, 18, and 21, these arguments are not persuasive. The arguments state that these limitations require to be a part of a security-oriented scrambling of CDM drive patterns for overlay attack prevention, but Forlines is only relied upon to teach the selection of a scrambling operator based on a pseudorandom value which is achieved in Forlines.
With respect to the argument regarding claims 5 and 17, the argument is not persuasive. The argument states that these limitations require a mathematical operation on CDM matrices, however, the limitations just require the ability to scramble by one of the listed methods.
With respect to arguments regarding claims 7, 12, and 13, these arguments are not persuasive. The argument states that Genossar does not teach a scrambling CDM pattern, however, Genossar is not relied on to teach the CDM pattern it is only relied upon to teach the scrambling sequences.
With respect to arguments regarding claims 8-11, 19-20 and 23-26, these arguments are not persuasive as these claims depend on previously rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 14 recite “stimulating the same drive lines of a touch sensor” and claims 22, and 27 recite the limitation “stimulating the same drive lines of the touch sensor”. These terms lack antecedent basis. Claims 2-13 and 29-32 depend on claim 1, claims 15-21 depend on claim 14, claims 23-26 depend on claim 22, and claim 28 depends on claim 27, therefore they inherit this rejection.
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) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz).
Regarding claim 22, Mirfakhraei discloses: An apparatus, comprising: a codeword generator to generate codewords (Mirfakhraei: paragraph [0032] mentions that the codes are generated by a code generator.); a scrambler to generate codewords scrambled for respective measurement frames of a touch sensing system at least partially based on the codewords generated by the code generator and a code division multiplexing (CDM) pattern (Mirfakhraei: fig 1 and fig 3, fig 1 shows the touch controller which paragraph 0019 states that the drive unit supplies the drive signals to the drive electrodes of the touch sensor, and fig 3 shows that the signals get encoded by the cdm pattern codes.), but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the scrambler selects one or more scrambler operators at least partially based on a randomized selection process and generates different scrambled codewords for each respective measurement frame by applying the selected one or more scrambler operators to the codewords.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Knausz discloses: wherein the scrambler selects one or more scrambler operators [at least partially based on a randomized selection process] and generates different scrambled codewords for each respective measurement frame by applying the selected one or more scrambler operators to the codewords (Knausz: Col 11 lines 21-24 states, "multiplexing patterns may include Hadamard, Legendre, Barker sequences, modifications of these sequences, or other suitable CDM matrices." Examiner's note: "modifications of these sequences" are CDM matrices and since they are being modified, it is interpreted that any modification of a cdm pattern meets the criteria of "one or more scrambling operators" and that the inputs to create the cdm pattern were converted.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei and include the above limitation with the teaching of Knausz in order "for improved signal routing" (Knausz: Col 1 lines 46-47).
This motivation applies to the remainder of the claim.
Knausz fails to explicitly disclose: at least partially based on a randomized selection process.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: at least partially based on a randomized selection process (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0037] states, "generating the codes may be done using a sequence generator seeded with a random initial value."); and a driver to generate drive signals at least partially based on the scrambled codewords generated by the scrambler (Mirfakhraei: fig 1 and fig 3, fig 1 shows the touch controller which paragraph 0019 states that the drive unit supplies the drive signals to the drive electrodes of the touch sensor, and fig 3 shows that the signals get encoded by the cdm pattern codes.), but fails to explicitly disclose: such that the same drive lines of the touch sensing system are stimulated sequentially in time over the respective measurement frames utilizing the different scrambled codewords.
However, Knausz further discloses: such that [the same] drive lines of the touch sensing system are stimulated sequentially in time over the respective measurement frames utilizing the different scrambled codewords (Knausz: Col 6 lines 25-30 states, "These surrounding electrode sets (112a, 112c in this timeslot) may thus act as guard lines, which may surround one or more electrodes that are in a sensing state in a given timeslot and help to isolate the signal of interest (here, capacitance between the sensing electrodes and the object to be sensed)." Column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.), but fails to explicitly disclose: the same drive lines…are stimulated.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: the same drive lines…are stimulated (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0024] states, "the first drive line is assigned the code (1, 1, 1, −1), the second drive line is assigned the code (1, 1, −1, 1), the third drive line is assigned the code (1, −1, 1, 1), and the fourth drive line is assigned the code (−1, 1, 1, 1). However, other embodiments may use groups of codes assigned to groups of drive lines. As an example, referring again to FIG. 2B, the first code (1, 1, 1, −1) may be assigned to a first quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, the second code (1, 1, −1, 1) may be assigned to a second quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, the third code (1, −1, 1, 1) may be assigned to a third quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, and the fourth code (−1, 1, 1, 1) may be assigned to a fourth quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110." Paragraph [0027] states, "the first code indicated may be rotated to the second drive line shown, while the second code indicated may be rotated to the third drive line, the third code indicated may be rotated to the fourth drive line shown, and the fourth code indicated may be rotated back to the first drive line shown. Thus, after this code rotation, the first drive line would be assigned the code (−1, 1, 1, 1), the second drive line would be assigned the code (1, 1, 1, −1), the third drive line would be assigned the code (1, 1, −1, 1), and the fourth drive line would be assigned the code (1, −1, 1, 1). Though the above example indicates rotation among the codes assigned, code rotation may be among more than the codes initially assigned to the drive lines. For instance, if there are N drive lines, a number of codes greater than N may be chosen for rotation between the drive lines. As an example, with sixteen drive lines, twenty four codes may be chosen to rotate between." Examiner's note: The code rotation allows for each different code to stimulate a respective drive line, therefore it is interpreted that the same drive lines are being stimulated by different codes.).
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto).
Regarding claim 1, Mirfakhraei discloses: A method [of touch-screen overlay attack prevention], comprising: obtaining a set of codewords scrambled based, in part, on a code division multiplexing (CDM) pattern (Mirfakhraei: Page 5 paragraph [0032], figure 3 which states that "touch sensor system 300 incorporating code hopping algorithms with CDM.), but fails to explicitly disclose: A method of touch-screen overlay attack prevention…wherein the set of scrambled codewords is obtained by selecting, at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized, one or more scrambler operators from a set of scrambling operators, and converting an input codeword according to the one or more scrambler operators.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Knausz discloses: A method [of touch-screen overlay attack prevention]…wherein the set of scrambled codewords is obtained by selecting, [at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized], one or more scrambler operators from a set of scrambling operators, and converting an input codeword according to the one or more scrambler operators (Knausz: Col 11 lines 21-24 states, "multiplexing patterns may include Hadamard, Legendre, Barker sequences, modifications of these sequences, or other suitable CDM matrices." Examiner's note: "modifications of these sequences" are CDM matricies and since they are being modified, it is interpreted that any modification of a cdm pattern meets the criteria of "one or more scrambling operators" and that the inputs to create the cdm pattern were converted.).
The same motivation to modify with Knausz, as in claim 22, applies.
This motivation applies to the remainder of the claim.
Knausz fails to explicitly disclose: A method of touch-screen overlay attack prevention…at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: A method [of touch-screen overlay attack prevention]…at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0037] states, "generating the codes may be done using a sequence generator seeded with a random initial value."), but fails to explicitly disclose: A method of touch-screen overlay attack prevention.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yokomoto discloses: A method of touch-screen overlay attack prevention (Yokomoto: Page 11 lines 10-13 states, "Where it is determined that the first coordinates correspond to a position within the computer generated keypad 119, a determination of the number associated with the first coordinates is made 120. This number is encrypted and stored in memory 122.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and include the above limitation with the teaching of Yokomoto in order encrypting an "input for security reasons" (Yokomoto: Page 1 lines 6-7).
Mirfakhraei further discloses: generating drive signals encoded with the set of scrambled codewords (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0032] states, "In touch sensor system 300, drive signals 310 (such as drive signal 201 of FIG. 2B) may be multiplexed with a set of codes 320 (such as code signal 202) provided by code generator 360 to yield an encoded array of drive signals 330."), but fails to explicitly disclose: and stimulating [the same] drive lines of a touch sensor in a touch screen sequentially in time over multiple measurement frames utilizing different patterns of the set of scrambled codewords for respective ones of the multiple measurement frames.
However, Knausz further discloses: and stimulating [the same] drive lines of a touch sensor in a touch screen sequentially in time over multiple measurement frames utilizing different patterns of the set of scrambled codewords for respective ones of the multiple measurement frames (Knausz: Col 6 lines 25-30 states, "These surrounding electrode sets (112a, 112c in this timeslot) may thus act as guard lines, which may surround one or more electrodes that are in a sensing state in a given timeslot and help to isolate the signal of interest (here, capacitance between the sensing electrodes and the object to be sensed)." Col 17 lines 52-67 Col 18 lines 1-2 states, "each cell 10 may include a transmit electrode (e.g., 12a-f) and a receive electrode (e.g., 11a-f). In some embodiments, the cells 10 may be arranged in linear arrays 20a, 20b, 20c. For example, a first linear array 20a may include cell 11a, 12a, cell 11b, 12b, and cell 11ac, 12c. A second linear array 20b may likewise include its own cells (shown in FIG. 14), a third linear array 20c may include cell 11d, 12d, cell 11e, 12e, and cell 11f, 12f. Each of the transmit electrodes (e.g., 12a-12c) in a respective linear array (e.g., 20a) may be selectively connected to associated drive lines (e.g., 16a, 17a) for that linear array (e.g., 20a). Likewise, each of the receive electrodes (e.g., 11a-11c) in a respective linear array (e.g., 20a) may be connected to an associated output line (e.g., 14a) for that linear array (e.g., 20a). This arrangement may be applied across a sensor area for as many linear arrays as are desired for a given application. Likewise, each linear array in a sensor area may include as many cells as are desired for a given application." Examiner's note: Since there are timeslots for the stimulation of the drive lines, this is interpreted as the stimulation of drive lines sequentially in time.), but fails to explicitly disclose: stimulating the same drive lines.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: stimulating the same drive lines (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0024] states, "the first drive line is assigned the code (1, 1, 1, −1), the second drive line is assigned the code (1, 1, −1, 1), the third drive line is assigned the code (1, −1, 1, 1), and the fourth drive line is assigned the code (−1, 1, 1, 1). However, other embodiments may use groups of codes assigned to groups of drive lines. As an example, referring again to FIG. 2B, the first code (1, 1, 1, −1) may be assigned to a first quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, the second code (1, 1, −1, 1) may be assigned to a second quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, the third code (1, −1, 1, 1) may be assigned to a third quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110, and the fourth code (−1, 1, 1, 1) may be assigned to a fourth quadrant of drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110." Paragraph [0027] states, "the first code indicated may be rotated to the second drive line shown, while the second code indicated may be rotated to the third drive line, the third code indicated may be rotated to the fourth drive line shown, and the fourth code indicated may be rotated back to the first drive line shown. Thus, after this code rotation, the first drive line would be assigned the code (−1, 1, 1, 1), the second drive line would be assigned the code (1, 1, 1, −1), the third drive line would be assigned the code (1, 1, −1, 1), and the fourth drive line would be assigned the code (1, −1, 1, 1). Though the above example indicates rotation among the codes assigned, code rotation may be among more than the codes initially assigned to the drive lines. For instance, if there are N drive lines, a number of codes greater than N may be chosen for rotation between the drive lines. As an example, with sixteen drive lines, twenty four codes may be chosen to rotate between." Examiner's note: The code rotation allows for each different code to stimulate a respective drive line, therefore the same drive lines being stimulated is taught.).
Regarding claim 2, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: The method of claim 1.
Knausz further discloses: wherein obtaining the scrambled codeword comprises: selecting, at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized, one or more scrambler operators from a set of scrambling operators (Knausz: column 11, lines 21-24 which states that "multiplexing patterns may include Hadamard, Legendre, Barker sequences, modifications of these sequences, or other suitable CDM matrices." Any modification of the cdm pattern meets the criteria of “one or more scrambling operators.”); and converting a codeword according to the selected one or more scrambler operators to generate the scrambled codeword (Knausz: column 11, lines 21-24 which states that "multiplexing patterns may include Hadamard, Legendre, Barker sequences, modifications of these sequences, or other suitable CDM matrices." Modifying the multiplexing pattern meets the criteria of “converting a codeword.”).
The same motivation to modify with Knausz, as in claim 1, applies.
Regarding claim 4, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: the method of claim 2, comprising: receiving encoded sense signals from the touch sensor (Mirfakhraei: Fig 3, paragraph [0032] which teaches that the sense signals are encoded with the codes that were applied to the drive signals.); and touch-processing the received encoded sense signals at least partially based on the scrambled codeword (Mirfakhraei: Fig 3, paragraph [0032] which talks about the encoded sense signals being demultiplexed using the codes from the code generator which is a form of touch-processing.).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: the method of claim 1, wherein at least some respective ones of the different patterns of codewords are orthogonal to at least some other respective ones of the different patterns of codewords (Mirfakhraei: figure 2A and 2B and paragraph [0024] talk about the codes assigned being orthogonal to each of the other codes assigned.).
Claim 14 recites features similar to those recited in claim 1, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 3, 15-16, 18, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto), and further in view of Forlines (US 20170024061 A1, hereinafter refered to as Forlines).
Regarding claim 3, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: the method of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose: obtaining a value responsive to the randomized selection process, wherein the obtained value is one of a true random value or pseudo-random value; and determining a selection of the one or more scrambling operators from the set of scrambling operators at least partially based on the obtained value.
However, Forlines discloses: obtaining a value responsive to the randomized selection process, wherein the obtained value is one of a true random value or pseudo-random value (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090] disclose that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and whether or not they get inverted is dependent on a pseudorandom function. Inversion is a scrambling operator which only one or more was needed, and the pseudorandom function always equal to a value which would end up being a pseudorandom value like its function.).; and determining a selection of the one or more scrambling operators from the set of scrambling operators at least partially based on the obtained value (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090] disclose that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and whether or not they get inverted is dependent on a pseudorandom function. Inversion is a scrambling operator which only one or more was needed, and the pseudorandom function always equal to a value which would end up being a pseudorandom value like its function.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto to include the above limitation of Forlines in order for a touch sensor that encrypts touch locations over multiple measurement frames to utilize random or pseudorandom values to determine how to scramble the codewords.
Regarding claim 15, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 14, wherein the acts comprise: selecting one or more scrambling operators responsive to a selection process that is randomized (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090] disclose that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and whether or not they get inverted is dependent on a pseudorandom function. Inversion is a scrambling operator which only one or more was needed, and the pseudorandom function always equal to a value which would end up being a pseudorandom value like its function).
The same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto with Forlines, as in claim 3, applies.
Knausz further discloses: scrambling the codeword according to the selected one or more scrambling operators (Knausz: column 11, lines 21-24 which states that "multiplexing patterns may include Hadamard, Legendre, Barker sequences, modifications of these sequences, or other suitable CDM matrices." Examiner’s note: Modifying the multiplexing pattern meets the criteria of “converting a codeword.”);
The same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto with Forlines, as in claim 3, applies.
Mirfakhraei further discloses: and utilizing an encoded drive signal to stimulate a drive line of
the touch sensor (Mirfakhraei: figure 3 and [0032], "the encoded drive signals 330 may be input to the drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110.").
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the acts comprise: selecting, for the randomized selection process, the one or more scrambling operators at least partially responsive to a value that is one of a true random value or pseudo-random value (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090], [0076] states that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and [0090] describes inversion of the sinusoids occurring partially due to a pseudorandom function).
The same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto with Forlines,
as in claim 3, applies.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the acts comprise: receiving sensed signals from the touch sensor (Mirfakhraei: Fig 3, paragraph [0032] which teaches that the sense signals are encoded with the codes that were applied to the drive signals.); and touch-processing the received sensed signals at least partially based on a scrambled codeword (Mirfakhraei: Fig 3, paragraph [0032] which talks about the encoded sense signals being demultiplexed using the codes from the code generator.).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 16, wherein at least some respective ones of patterns of different patterns of codewords are orthogonal to at least some other respective ones of the different patterns of codewords (Mirfakhraei: figure 2A and 2B and paragraph [0024] talk about the codes assigned being orthogonal to each of the other codes assigned.).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter referred to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Bar-El (US 20130305392 A1, hereinafter referred to as Bar-El).
Regarding claim 5, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: the method of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the set of scrambling operators comprises one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bar-El teaches: wherein the set of scrambling operators comprises one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns (Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095] which describes the scrambling or shuffling of a keypad in order to change the order of the keys at each invocation into any random order that’s different from the previous invocation.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto and include the above limitation using the teaching of Bar-El in order to have a touch sensor that utilizes the scrambling of codewords according to different types of scrambling operators in order to hide the user touch location and prevent attackers from retrieving the information based on the touch coordinates (see Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095]).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter referred to as Yokomoto), and further in view of Forlines (US 20170024061 A1, hereinafter referred to as Forlines) and in further view of Bar-El (US 20130305392 A1, hereinafter referred to as Bar-El).
Regarding claim 17, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Forlines teaches: the apparatus of claim 15, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the acts comprise:
selecting the one or more scrambling operators from a set of scrambling operators, the set of
scrambling operators including one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword
columns, or inserting invalid patterns.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bar-El teaches: wherein the acts comprise: selecting
the one or more scrambling operators from a set of scrambling operators, the set of scrambling
operators including one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns,
or inserting invalid patterns (Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095] which describes the scrambling or
shuffling of a keypad in order to change the order of the keys at each invocation into any random order
that’s different from the previous invocation.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto and include the above limitation using the teaching of Bar-El in order to have a touch sensor that utilizes the scrambling of codewords, which is based on a pseudorandom value determining the scrambling, in order to hide the user touch location and prevent attackers from retrieving the information based on the touch coordinates (see Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095]).
Claim(s) 7, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto) and further in view of Genossar (WO 2018222224 A1, hereinafter refered to as Genossar).
Regarding claim 7, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto
teaches: The method of claim 6 wherein [stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over multiple
measurement frames utilizing different patterns of codewords for respective ones of the multiple
measurement frames] comprises: generating a first set of codewords and a second set of codewords
(Mirfakhraei: claim 4 talks about the use of a second plurality of codes and paragraph [0032] talks about
the use of a code generator to generate the codes that encode the drive signal.); encoding a first drive
pattern utilizing the scrambled first codeword set (Mirfakhraei: paragraph [0032] talks about the drive
signals being multiplexed based on codes from a code generator to yield an encoded drive signal.);
encoding a second drive pattern utilizing the scrambled second codeword set (Mirfakhraei: paragraphs
[0023] and [0024] talk about the need for the encoding codes needing to be distinguished from each
other and gave an example of different codes being assigned to different drive lines once stimulated by
the encoded signals); [stimulating drive lines of a touch sensor over a first measurement frame
utilizing the encoded first drive pattern] (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.); [and stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over a second measurement frame utilizing the encoded second drive pattern, wherein the second measurement frame is different than the first measurement frame] (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.), but fails to explicitly disclose: scrambling the first set of codewords according to one or more first scrambling operators; scrambling the second set of codewords according to one or more second scrambling operators, wherein the one or more second scrambling operators are different than the one or more first scrambling operators.
Knausz further discloses: stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over multiple
measurement frames utilizing different patterns of codewords for respective ones of the multiple
measurement frames (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there
are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and
receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a
multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and
correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention); stimulating drive lines of a touch sensor over a first measurement frame utilizing the encoded first drive pattern (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.); and stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over a second measurement frame utilizing the encoded second drive pattern, wherein the second measurement frame is different than the first measurement frame (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.), but fails to explicitly disclose: scrambling the first set of codewords according to one or more first scrambling operators; scrambling the second set of codewords according to one or more second scrambling operators, wherein the one or more second scrambling operators are different than the one or more first scrambling operators.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Genossar discloses: scrambling the first set of codewords according to one or more first scrambling operators (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167] [00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first
polynomial.); scrambling the second set of codewords according to one or more second scrambling
operators, wherein the one or more second scrambling operators are different than the one or more
first scrambling operators (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first
data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence,
respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively,
where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, and
Yokomoto and include the above limitations using the teaching of Genossar in order to have a touch
sensor that utilizes the scrambling of multiple codewords, which is based on a pseudorandom value
determining the scrambling and the operators are distinct from one another, in order to hide the user
touch location and prevent attackers from retrieving the information based on the touch coordinates
(see Genossar: abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170]).
Regarding claim 12, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar teaches: the method of claim 7, wherein the touch sensor is a portion of a capacitive touch sensing system (Mirfakhraei: paragraph [0006] describes figure 3 as a touch sensor system and figure 3 shows a touch sensor within the system).
Regarding claim 13, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar teaches: the method of claim 12, wherein the stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over multiple measurement frames utilizing different patterns of codewords for respective ones of the multiple measurement frames (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.) comprises: stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor utilizing first codewords during a first measurement frame of the multiple measurement frames (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.); and stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor utilizing second codewords during a second measurement frame of the multiple measurement frames, wherein a pattern of the second codewords is different than a pattern of the first codewords, and wherein the second measurement frame is different than the first measurement frame (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention).
The same motivation to modify Mifrakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto with Yokomoto, as in claim 7, applies.
Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter referred to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Genossar (WO 2018222224 A1, hereinafter referred to as Genossar) and in further view of Bar-El (US 20130305392 A1, hereinafter referred to as Bar-El).
Regarding claim 8, The combination of Mirfakhraei, Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar discloses: The method of claim 7, but fails to explicitly disclose: selecting the first scrambling operator and the second scrambling operator, respectively, from the set of one or more scrambling operators including one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bar-El teaches: selecting the first scrambling operator and the second scrambling operator, respectively, from the set of one or more scrambling operators including one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns (Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095] which describes the scrambling or shuffling of a keypad in order to change the order of the keys at each invocation into any random order that’s different from the previous invocation.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar and include the above limitation using the teaching of Bar-El in order to have a touch sensor that utilizes the scrambling of multiple codewords, which is based on a pseudorandom value determining the scrambling out of a selection of operators and the operators are distinct from one another, in order to hide the user touch location and prevent attackers from retrieving the information based on the touch coordinates (see Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095]).
Regarding claim 9, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, Genossar, and Bar-El discloses: the method of claim 8, wherein the shuffling comprises one or more of rearranging a row of codewords and rearranging a column of codewords (Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095] which describes the scrambling or shuffling of a keypad in order to change the order of the keys at each invocation into any random order that’s different from the previous invocation.).
Same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar with Bar-El, as claim 8, applies here.
Regarding claim 10, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, Genossar, and Bar-El discloses: the method of claim 9, wherein inverting codeword rows comprises one or more of inverting some symbols or a totality of symbols of some or a totality of codeword rows (Knauz: column 20 lines 28-31 which explains that signals can be passed in an inverted form according to a cdm pattern, which is an orthogonal pattern which means both rows and columns are being inverted.).
Same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar with Bar-El, as claim 8, applies here.
Regarding claim 11, The combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, Genossar, and Bar-El discloses: the method of claim 10, wherein inverting codeword columns comprises one or more of inverting some symbols or a totality of symbols of some or a totality of codewords columns (Knauz: column 20 lines 28-31 which explains that signals can be passed in an inverted form according to a cdm pattern, which is an orthogonal pattern which means both rows and columns are being inverted.).
Same motivation to modify Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Genossar with Bar-El, as claim 8, applies here.
Claim(s) 23, 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Forlines (US 20170024061 A1, hereinafter referred to as Forlines).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz discloses: the apparatus of claim 22, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the scrambler to: select one or more scrambling operators at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized; and generate a scrambled codeword at least partially based on the randomized selection process, wherein the randomized selection process obtains a value that is one of a true random value or pseudo-random value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Forlines teaches: wherein the scrambler to: select one or more scrambling operators at least partially based on a selection process that is randomized (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090] disclose that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and whether or not they get inverted is dependent on a pseudorandom function. Inversion is a scrambling operator which only one or more was needed, and the pseudorandom function always equal to a value which would end up being a pseudorandom value like its function); and generate a scrambled codeword at least partially based on the randomized selection process, wherein the randomized selection process obtains a value that is one of a true random value or pseudo-random value (Forlines: paragraphs [0076] and [0090] disclose that sinusoids are orthogonal signals and whether or not they get inverted is dependent on a pseudorandom function. Inversion is a scrambling operator which only one or more was needed, and the pseudorandom function always equal to a value which would end up being a
pseudorandom value like its function).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz to include the above limitation using the teaching of Forlines in order for a touch signal that encodes the signals in a cdm pattern, which is scrambled based on a pseudorandom value, over multiple measurement frames (see Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 23, comprising: a touch controller to touch-process received sensed signals at least partially based on the scrambled codewords (Mirfakhraei: Fig 3, paragraph [0032] which talks about the encoded sense signals being demultiplexed using the codes from the code generator which is a form of touch-processing.).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, and Forlines discloses: the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the scrambler generates at least some scrambled codewords, wherein each scrambled codeword remains orthogonal to another scrambled codeword (Mirfakhraei: figure 2A and 2B and paragraph [0024] talk about the codes assigned being orthogonal to each of the other codes assigned).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and further in view of Forlines (US 20170024061 A1, hereinafter referred to as Forlines) and in further view of Bar-El (US 20130305392 A1, hereinafter referred to as Bar-El).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Forlines teaches: the apparatus of claim 23, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the scrambler to: select the one or more scrambling operators from a set of scrambling operators, the set of scrambling operators comprising one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Bar-El teaches: wherein the scrambler to: select the one or more scrambling operators from a set of scrambling operators, the set of scrambling operators comprising one or more of shuffling, inverting codeword rows, inverting codeword columns, or inserting invalid patterns (Bar-El: paragraphs [0032] and [0095] which describes the scrambling or shuffling of a keypad in order to change the order of the keys at each invocation into any random order that’s different from the previous invocation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teachings of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Forlines with the teachings of Bar-El in order for a touch signal that encodes the signals in a cdm pattern, which is scrambled based on a pseudorandom value by a selection of scrambling operators, over multiple measurement frames (see Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4).
Claim(s) 27 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Genossar (WO 2018222224 A1, hereinafter refered to as Genossar).
Claim 27 recites features similar to those recited in claims 1 and 22, rejected by Mirfakhraei in view of Knausz, therefore those similar features are rejected in a similar manner.
Mirfakhraei further discloses: A system comprising: a touch sensor (Mirfakhraei: Figure 3 shows a touch sensor); and a touch controller (Mirfakhraei: Figure 1 shows a touch controller), but fails to explicitly disclose: scramble respective codewords according to different patterns of codewords.
However, Genossar discloses: scramble respective codewords according to different patterns of codewords (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and include the above limitations using the teaching of Genossar in order to have a touch sensor that utilizes the scrambling of multiple codewords, which is based on a pseudorandom value determining the scrambling and the operators are distinct from one another (see Genossar: abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170]).
Knausz further discloses: and perform a capacitive measurement of the touch sensor at least partially based on each respective scrambled codeword (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell.).
The same motivation to modify with Knausz, as in claim 22, applies.
Regarding claim 28, The combination of Mirkahraei as modified by Knausz and Genossar teaches: the system of claim 27, wherein the touch controller to: obtain a first codeword set (Mirfakhraei: page 5 paragraph [0032], figure 3 which states that “drive signals 310 (such as drive signal 201 of FIG. 2B) may be multiplexed with a set of codes 320 (such as code signal 202) provided by code generator 360 to yield an encoded array of drive signals 330.”); encode a first drive signal utilizing the scrambled first codeword set (Mirfakhraei: page 5 paragraph [0032], figure 3, figure 2 which states that drive signals 310 can be multiplexed with codes 320 by code generator 360 in order to yield encoded drive signals (all numbers are labels in figure 3). Figure 2 shows example of two different multiplexing patterns, one of which being cdm.); obtain a second codeword set (Mirfakhraei: claim 4 talks about the use of a second plurality of codes and paragraph [0032] talks about the use of a code generator to generate the codes that encode the drive signal); encode a second drive signal utilizing the scrambled second codeword set (Mirfakhraei: claim 4 talks about the use of a second plurality of codes and paragraph [0032] talks about the use of a code generator to generate the codes that encode the drive signal.);
Knausz further discloses: stimulate a drive line of a touch sensor over a first measurement frame utilizing the encoded first drive signal (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.); and stimulate the drive line of the touch sensor over a second measurement frame utilizing the encoded second drive signal, wherein the second measurement frame is different than the first measurement frame (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.).
The same motivation to modify with Knausz, as in claim 22, applies.
Genossar further discloses: scramble the first codeword set according to a first scrambling operator (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial); scramble the second codeword set according to a second scrambling operator, wherein the second scrambling operator is different from the first scrambling operator (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial.).
The same motivation to modify with Genossar, as in claim 27, applies.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Forlines (US 20170024061 A1, hereinafter refered to as Forlines), and further in view of Genossar (WO 2018222224 A1, hereinafter refered to as Genossar).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and forlines teaches: The apparatus of claim 18, wherein [the act of stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over multiple measurement frames utilizing different patterns of codewords for respective ones of the multiple measurement frames], comprises: generating a first codeword and a second codeword (Mirfakhraei: claim 4 talks about the use of a second plurality of codes and paragraph [0032] talks about the use of a code generator to generate the codes that encode the drive signal); encoding a first drive signal utilizing the scrambled first codeword (Mirfakhraei: paragraph [0032] talks about the drive signals being multiplexed based on codes from a code generator to yield an encoded drive signal); encoding a second drive signal utilizing the scrambled second codeword (Mirfakhraei: paragraphs [0023] and [0024] talk about the need for the encoding codes needing to be distinguished from each other and gave an example of different codes being assigned to different drive lines once stimulated by the encoded signals); [stimulating a drive line of the touch sensor over a first measurement frame utilizing the encoded first drive signal]; [and stimulating the drive line of the touch sensor over a second measurement frame utilizing the encoded second drive signal, wherein the second measurement frame is different than the first measurement frame] (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.), but fails to explicitly disclose: scrambling the first codeword according to a first scrambling operator; and scrambling the second codeword according to a second scrambling operator, wherein the first scrambling operator is different than the second scrambling operator.
Knausz further discloses: the act of stimulating drive lines of the touch sensor over multiple measurement frames utilizing different patterns of codewords for respective ones of the multiple
measurement frames (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention); stimulating a drive line of the touch sensor over a first measurement frame utilizing the
encoded first drive signal (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention.); and stimulating the drive line of the touch sensor over a second measurement frame
utilizing the encoded second drive signal, wherein the second measurement frame is different than
the first measurement frame (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that
there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit
and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to
a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and
correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames
since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the
invention.), but fails to explicitly disclose: scrambling the first codeword according to a first scrambling
operator; and scrambling the second codeword according to a second scrambling operator, wherein
the first scrambling operator is different than the second scrambling operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Genossar discloses the steps of generating a first codeword and a second codeword (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial.); scrambling the first codeword according to a first scrambling operator (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial); scrambling the second codeword according to a second scrambling operator, wherein the first scrambling operator is different than the second scrambling operator (Genossar: The abstract and paragraphs [00167]-[00170] discloses that a first data word and second data word are scrambled based on a first and second scrambling sequence, respectively, and each scrambling sequence is based on a first and second polynomial, respectively, where the second polynomial is different from the first polynomial).
The same motivation to modify with Genossar, as in claim 7, applies.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, Forlines,
and Genossar teaches the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the touch sensor is a portion of a capacitive
touch sensing system (Figure 3 of Mirfakhraei is a demonstration of a touch sensor system and shows a touch sensor within the system).
Claim(s) 29 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Khuong (US 20160266669 A1, hereinafter referred to as Khuong).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: The method of claim 1.
Mirfakhraei further discloses: receiving encoded sense signals from the touch sensor (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0032] states, "The encoded drive signals 330 may be input to the drive lines 220 of touch sensor 110. These encoded drive signals 330 may, however, encounter noise interference which may be further multiplexed into each of the encoded drive signals 330. The sense lines 210 may then sense signals 340 associated with the drive signals 330. The sense signals 340 may be encoded with the codes 320 applied to the drive signals 310. To yield the underlying sense signals 370 associated with the drive signals 310, the encoded sense signals 340 may be de-multiplexed using the codes 320 provided by code generator 360."), but fails to explicitly disclose: and decoding the received encoded sense signals utilizing scrambled codewords associated with a respective measurement frame, wherein the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame are stored by or accessible to a touch controller and are not accessible to an external overlay sensor.
However, Knausz further discloses: and decoding the received encoded sense signals utilizing scrambled codewords associated with a respective measurement frame, wherein the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame [are stored by or accessible to a touch controller and are not accessible to an external overlay sensor] (Knausz: column 17 lines 51-67, column 18 lines 1-4 which describes that there are multiple linear arrays in a single embodiment, and each array has multiple cells which transmit and receive electrodes. Each cell is generating its own driving signal, which may be applied according to a multiplexing pattern. The encoded drive signals are then used to decode the measurements and correlate them with the respective cell. These arrays are playing the role of the measurement frames since all of the functionality and cells are connected to these arrays, and there are multiple arrays in the invention. Col 20 lines 24-28 states, "the signals received from simultaneously active arrays may be encoded according to a CDM pattern, such that the received signals may be decoded to correlate the measurement signals received to the array from which they were received.").
The same motivation to modify with Knausz, as in claim 1, applies.
Knausz fails to explicitly disclose: codewords…are stored by or accessible to a touch controller and are not accessible to an external overlay sensor.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: codewords…are stored by or accessible to a touch controller [and are not accessible to an external overlay sensor] (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0029] states, "a number of codes may be available to the controller in an associated memory of the touch sensor system."), but fails to explicitly disclose: codewords…are stored…and are not accessible to an external overlay sensor.
However, Yokomoto discloses: and are not accessible to an external [overlay] sensor (Yokomoto: Page 3 lines 20-24 states, "unauthorized third parties do not have access to the programs familiar with the code; accordingly, even if the coded message is intercepted by the third parties, the encoded signal will appear as "jibberish" to the third parties and the third parties will be unable to decode the PIN from the coded signal.").
The same motivation to modify the Yokomoto, as in claim 1, applies.
Yokomoto fails to explicitly disclose: external overlay sensor.
However, Khuong further discloses: external overlay sensor (Khuong: Paragraph [0040] states, "Display controller 302 includes hardware for one or more overlay planes for the display and composition of multiple layers of video or user interface elements.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto and include the above limitation with the teaching of Khuong in order for encrypting touch click inputs (Khuong: Paragraph [0113]).
Claim 32 recites features similar to claim 29, therefore it is rejected in a similar manner.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter refered to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter refered to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Matsuda (US 20190165872 A1, hereinafter referred to as Matsuda).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto discloses: The method of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the set of scrambling operators comprises inserting one or more invalid code patterns that are non-orthogonal with respect to other code patterns into a codeword set.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Matsuda further discloses: wherein the set of scrambling operators comprises inserting one or more invalid [code] patterns that are non-orthogonal with respect to other code patterns into a codeword set (Matsuda: Paragraph [0005] states, " NOMA is a technology for increase resources to improve frequency use efficiency by adding non-orthogonal axes such as an interleave pattern axis, a spreading pattern axis, a scrambling pattern axis, a codebook axis, and a power axis to a frequency axis and a time axis, and use of the technology in NR is expected." Paragraph [0206] states, "the reception device is one of the base station device 1 and the terminal device 2. For each transmission signal set, corresponding NOMA pattern vectors are applied. An NOMA pattern vector is an example of information regarding non-orthogonal multiplexing.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz and Yokomoto and include the above limitation with the teaching of Matsuda in order to improve efficiency of the system (Matsuda: abstract).
Matsuda fails to explicitly disclose: code patterns.
However, Mirfakhraei further discloses: code patterns (Mirfakhraei: Paragraph [0024] states, "the codes assigned may be orthogonal to each of the other codes assigned.").
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mirfakhraei (US 20150301631 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mirfakhraei) in view of Knausz (US 11320935 B1, hereinafter referred to as Knausz) and in further view of Yokomoto (WO 9745781 A2, hereinafter referred to as Yokomoto) and in further view of Khuong (US 20160266669 A1, hereinafter referred to as Khuong) and in further view of Lohbihler (US 20060166681 A1, hereinafter referred to as Lohbilhler).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Khuong disclose: The method of claim 29, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein decoding the received encoded sense signals utilizing the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame produces a single decoded peak corresponding to a touch location, and wherein attempting to decode the received encoded sense signals without the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame produces multiple distributed peaks without a distinguishable touch location.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lohbihler discloses: wherein decoding the received encoded sense signals utilizing the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame produces a single decoded peak [corresponding to a touch location], and wherein attempting to decode the received encoded sense signals without the scrambled codewords associated with the respective measurement frame produces multiple distributed peaks [without a distinguishable touch location] (Lohbihler: Paragraph [0114] states, "the number of ones and zeros in a PN-code are approximately equal and evenly distributed in time so that the spectrum is substantially flat. If two parallel matched-filters operating each with code A and B are applied to the sum of PN-code A and PN-code B then a correlation peak is outputted separately for each code match." Examiner's note: This implicitly states that the right codes need to be operated with for the peak to be outputted which means the wrong code will keep the spectrum flat.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the teaching of Mirfakhraei as modified by Knausz, Yokomoto, and Khuong and include the above limitation with the teaching of Lohbihler in order to improve accuracy (Lohbihler: Paragraph [0113]).
Lohbihler fails to explicitly disclose: corresponding to a touch location…peaks without a distinguishable touch location.
However, Yokomoto discloses: corresponding to a touch location…peaks without a distinguishable touch location (Yokomoto: Page 11 lines 7-10 states, “Where it is determined that the coordinates do not correspond to any location of the touch screen keypad 114, an error message is displayed 116 and the operations depicted in Figure 3 is restarted 118.”).
The same motivation to modify with Yokomoto, as in claim 1, applies.
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 SHREYAJ RAM BHANDARI whose telephone number is (571)272-0727. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Ali Shayanfar can be reached at (571) 270-1050. 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.
/SHREYAJ RAM BHANDARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2434
/NOURA ZOUBAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434
Prosecution Insights