DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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) 15, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2019/0034696) in view of Hatsumi et al. (US 2022/0285461).
In regard to claim 15, Zhang et al. teach an electronic device comprising: a display panel in which a display area and a non-display area adjacent to the display area are defined (fig. 1d) and including a plurality of pixels and a plurality of sensors (fig. 1f and paragraph 97); the display area comprising a primary display area parallel to a plane (fig. 1a);an input sensing layer on the display panel and configured to sense an external input (fig. 1A element 110); a drive controller configured to drive the display panel (fig. 6 processor and display panel); and a readout circuit electrically connected to the plurality of sensors and configured to output a sensing signal to the drive controller (input unit connected to processor in fig. 6), wherein a first sensor in the first sensing area from among the plurality of sensors is configured to sense first biometric information from the external input, wherein the drive controller compares the first biometric information and stored first authentication information, wherein, based on an outcome of the driver controller comparing the first biometric information and the stored first authentication information (fig. 2 element 202, when the first authentication is unsuccessful the mobile terminal detects a second fingerprint image) a second sensor in the second sensing area from among the plurality of sensors is configured to sense second biometric information from the external input (element 103 and element 205), wherein the drive controller is configured to compare the second biometric information and stored second authentication information (fig. 2), and wherein, when the first biometric information is matched with the first authentication information or when the second biometric information is matched with the second authentication information, the drive controller is configured to drive the display panel (fig. 2 and paragraph 28, the phone unlocks when authenticated) but does not teach a plurality of edge display areas that are angled relative to the plane and wherein the external input overlaps the display area and defines a first sensing area and a second sensing area different from the first sensing area; wherein the first sensing area overlaps a first edge display area from among the edge display areas.
Hatsumi et al. teach a plurality of edge display areas that are angled relative to the plane (fig. 6a elements 11b) and wherein the external input overlaps the display area and defines a first sensing area and a second sensing area different from the first sensing area (fig. 6A, fingers touching both sensing areas 11a and 11b); wherein the first sensing area overlaps a first edge display area from among the edge display areas (element 11b and paragraph 66).
The two are analogous art because they both deal with the same field of invention of biometric detection.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al. with the dual display detection zones of Hatsumi et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al. with the dual display detection zones of Hatsumi et al. because providing the detection zones of Zhang et al. with the dual zones integrated into the display as shown in Hatsumi et al. would reduce the manufacturing complexity of the device.
In regard to claim 16, Zhang et al. teach wherein the external input includes an input from a hand of a user, and wherein the first biometric information includes a thumb fingerprint corresponding to the hand of the user (fig. 1A the user places a finger on the device. The finger could be any of the user’s choosing)
Hatsumi et al. teach wherein the second biometric information includes a palm print corresponding to the hand of the user (paragraph 53).
In regard to claim 20, Zhang et al. teach wherein the first authentication information includes the first biometric information and information corresponding to the first sensing area (figs. 1 and 2).
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. in view of Hatsumi et al. further considered with Prest et al. (US 2020/0057525).
In regard to claim 17, Hatsumi et al. teach wherein the display area includes: a first area including a first edge, a second edge extending in a direction intersecting the first edge, a third edge parallel to the first edge, and a fourth edge parallel to the second edge (fig. 6A, Hatsumi et al. teach the display area has a rectangular shape with 4 edges); a third area extending from the second edge, wherein at least a portion of the third area is bent; a fourth area extending from the third edge, wherein at least a portion of the fourth area is bent (fig. 6A, Hatsumi et al. teach bent display portions along either longer side) but does not teach a second area extending from the first edge, wherein at least a portion of the second area is bent; and a fifth area extending from the fourth edge, wherein at least a portion of the fifth area is bent.
Prest et al. teach a second area extending from the first edge, wherein at least a portion of the second area is bent; and a fifth area extending from the fourth edge, wherein at least a portion of the fifth area is bent.
The three are anaologus art because they both deal with the same field of invention of displays.
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al. and Hatsumi et al. with the omni-directional display of Prest et al. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al. and Hatsumi et al. with the omni-directional display of Prest et al. because the omni-directional display of Prest et al. would maximize surface area and improve the amount of information displayed to the user.
In regard to claims 18-19, the prior art fails to specifically teach the first and second sensing areas overlapping the specific claimed areas (Hatsumi et al. teach detecting fingerprints in area 11b and fig. 6A. Paragraph 110 of Prest et al. state a touch can be sensed at any area of the display device).
Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al., Hatsumi et al. and Prest et al. with the claimed fingerprint sensing areas. The rationale is as follows: Before the effective filing date it would have been obvious to provide the apparatus of Zhang et al., Hatsumi et al. and Prest et al. with the claimed fingerprint sensing areas because there are only a finite number of areas that could be used to detect the fingerprint. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that to make any of these areas into the claimed first sensing area or second sensing area could be accomplished based upon user preferences. The sensing areas would work in the same manner as they do in the prior art and would provide predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on page 10 that the prior art fails to teach allowing the second pixel allowing a second pixel to emit light based on the outcome of the first authentication. Claim 15 makes no mention of allowing a second pixel to emit light. Claims 1 and 6-13, which show these features, are allowed. Zhang et al. show using a second sensing area based on the outcome of the first sensing area (fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 6-13 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or make obvious allowing the third pixel to emit light based on the first and second authentication and wherein the third sensing area is in the first edge display area.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH R HALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-0574. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5pm.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/JOSEPH R HALEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621