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.
Claims 1 – 8 and 12 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0373688 A1) in view of Wu et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0181918 A1).
As to claim 1, Ding shows an electronic device (i.e. terminal device 101, Figs. 1 and 2 and para. 118) comprising: a first housing (i.e. first body 10a, Fig. 1 and para. 119); a second housing (i.e. second body 10b, Fig. 1 and para. 119) rotatably connected to the first housing (Fig. 1 and para. 119); a display panel (i.e. TFT layer 213/ OLED layer 214 included within display layer 21) disposed across the first housing and the second housing (Figs. 1 and 3 paras. 121 and 123); and a digitizer (i.e. touch) plate 215 disposed below the display panel (Figs. 3 and 6 and para. 123) and comprising wires of a digitizer (inherently the case in any electronic touch screen device), wherein the digitizer plate comprises: a first plate area disposed in the first housing, a second plate area disposed in the second housing (Figs. 3, 5 and 6), and a pattern area provided between the first plate area and the second plate area (i.e. corresponding to rotary connection structure 12/metal wires 2311, Figs. 1, 5 and 7 and paras. 119 and 144) and comprising a plurality of openings (corresponding to wires 2311, Figs. 7a – 7i and para. 144), wherein the first plate area and the second plate area of the digitizer plate comprise: at least one additional layer (i.e. insulation layer 232, for example, Fig. 6 and para. 143), and wherein the at least one additional layer in the first plate area and/or the second plate area is provided with an additional wire electrically connected to the wires of the digitizer (i.e. wires connecting first mainboard 131 to second mainboard 132, Figs. 4 – 6 and 7i and paras. 117 and 180).
Ding does not show that the first plate area and the second plate area of the digitizer plate comprise a plurality of layers comprising a first layer and a second layer where the wires of the digitizer are provided.
Wu shows that a the first plate area and a second plate area of a digitizer plate (i.e. touch electrodes TE) comprise a plurality of layers comprising a first layer and a second layer where the wires of the digitizer are provided (Fig. 14 and para. 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced flexibility (para. 62).
As to claim 2, Ding shows that the patterns provided in the pattern area are configured by the openings provided in a folding area of a support plate (i.e. corresponding to rotary connection structure 12/metal wires 2311, Figs. 1, 5 and 7a – 7i and paras. 119 and 144), and wherein, among the wires of the digitizer, wires provided across the first plate area and the second plate area extend from the first plate area to the second plate area along a winding path around the openings of the pattern area (Figs. 7a and 7i).
As to claim 3, Ding shows that some of the wires provided on the first layer extend to avoid the openings in the pattern area (Fig. 7i), and wherein others pass through the at least one additional layer of the pattern area (Fig. 7i).
As to claim 4, Wu show that at least one additional layer (i.e. buffer layer, for example) is provided between the first layer and the second layer (para. 62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced flexibility (para. 62).
As to claim 5, Wu shows that the at least one additional layer comprises: a first additional layer adjacent to the first layer (i.e. buffer layer, for example, para. 62); and a second additional layer adjacent to the second layer (i.e. insulating portions IP and/or bridges BC, for example, Fig. 14 and paras. 43 – 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to reduce the possibility of poor touch due to the breaking of wires (para. 45).
As to claim 6, Wu shows that the first layer comprises X-channel wires of the digitizer, and wherein the second layer includes Y-channel wires of the digitizer (Fig. 14 and paras. 43 – 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to transport signals in both directions (para. 43).
As to claim 7, Wu shows that the X-channel wires form an electrical loop elongated in a horizontal direction of the electronic device (i.e. transportation lines TR2 each connected to the same control/driving unit, (Fig. 14 and para. 44), and wherein the Y-channel wires form an electrical loop elongated in a vertical direction of the electronic device (i.e. transportation lines TR1 each connected to the same control/driving unit, Fig. 14 and para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to transport signals in both directions (para. 43).
As to claim 8, Wu shows that a wire (TR/TR2) is connected to the wires of at least one of the X-channel or the Y-channel used as a driving channel of the digitizer (i.e. transportation lines TR1/TR2 each connected to the same control/driving unit, Fig. 14 and para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to transport signals in both directions (para. 43).
As to claim 12, Ding shows that the additional wire is not disposed in an area of the at least one additional layer where the wires of the digitizer are not disposed (Fig. 7h).
As to claim 13, Ding does not show that the additional wire disposed in the at least one additional layer is connected to the wires of the digitizer on the first layer and/or the second layer via a via hole.
Wu shows that a wire disposed in the at least one additional layer (i.e. electrical layer EL, Fig. 4 and para. 58) is connected to the wires of a digitizer (i.e. touch unit TU) on another layer via a via hole (i.e. contact via CH, Fig. 4 and para. 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the operation of the touch unit to be controlled through the driving circuit (para. 58).
As to claim 14, Ding does not show that the additional wire is connected in parallel to the wires of the digitizer.
Wu shows that additional wires are connected in parallel to the wires of a digitizer (i.e. transportation lines TR1/TR2 each connected to the same control/driving unit, Fig. 14 and para. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the device to transport signals in both directions (para. 43).
As to claim 15, Ding shows a digitizer driving integrated circuit (IC) configured to process a signal from the digitizer (i.e. mainboards 131/132, for example, Figs. 4 and 5 and paras. 117, 127 and 180), wherein a connector (236/237, for example) interconnecting the wires of the digitizer and the digitizer driving IC is disposed in the first housing or the second housing (Figs. 4 and 5 and para. 155).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0373688 A1) in view of Yoo et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0397972 A1).
As to claim 16, Ding shows an electronic device (i.e. terminal device 101, Figs. 1 and 2 and para. 118) comprising: a first housing (i.e. first body 10a, Fig. 1 and para. 119), a second housing (i.e. second body 10b, Fig. 1 and para. 119), and a hinge (structure) housing connected to the first housing and the second housing (Fig. 1 and para. 119); and a flexible display 21 (Fig. 1 and para. 121) disposed on a foldable housing (Figs. 1 and 3 paras. 121 and 123) and comprising: a display panel (i.e. TFT layer 213/ OLED layer 214 included within display layer 21) and a support plate (i.e. protective structure 22) disposed between the display panel and the foldable housing (Fig. 3 and paras. 123 and 124), wherein the support plate comprises: a first area corresponding to the first housing, a second area corresponding to the second housing (Fig. 1 and para. 124), and a folding area corresponding to the hinge housing (corresponding to rotary connection structure 12, Fig. 1 and para. 119), and further comprises patterns to bend the folding area (i.e. fold line, Figs. 7a – 7i and para. 146), wherein the support plate comprises wires to detect a touch input (Figs. 4 – 6 and 7i and paras. 117, 123 and 180), and wherein, among the wires, at least two wires disposed on different layers of the folding area of the support plate extend in parallel in a first direction via the folding area (Figs. 7a – 7i).
Ding does not show wires to detect an electronic pen.
Yoo shows wires to detect an electronic pen (para. 142).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Yoo because designing the system in this way allows the device to make it possible to determine a position in a touch screen to which the electronic pen gets close (para. 142).
Claims 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et al. (US Pub. No. 2024/0373688 A1) in view of Yoo et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0397972 A1).
As to claim 17, Ding as modified above by Yoo does not show that the at least two wires are connected to each other via at least one via and extend to the first area and/or the second area as a single wire.
Wu shows that two wires are connected to each other via at least one via and extend to a first area and a second area as a single wire (i.e. electrical layer EL/touch unit TU, Fig. 4 and para. 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the operation of the touch unit to be controlled through the driving circuit (para. 58).
As to claim 18, Ding as modified above by Yoo does not show that among the wires, a single wire extending to the first area and the second area of the support plate is connected to at least two wires disposed on different layers of the folding area of the support plate via at least one via.
Wu shows that a single wire extending to a first area and a second area of a foldable display device is connected to at least two wires disposed on different layers of the folding area of the support plate via at least one via (i.e. electrical layer EL/touch unit TU, Fig. 4 and para. 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Wu because designing the system in this way allows the operation of the touch unit to be controlled through the driving circuit (para. 58).
As to claim 19, Ding shows that the folding area of the support plate comprises a first layer and a second layer where at least two conductive layers are provided (Figs. 7a – 7i).
Ding does not show that a glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) layer is disposed between the first layer and the second layer.
Yoo shows that a glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) layer is disposed between a first layer and a second layer (Fig. 5 and para. 137).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Ding with those of Yoo because designing the system in this way allows the device to transmit an electromagnetic field generated by a digitizer without loss or with minimal loss (para. 137).
As to claim 20, Ding shows that the patterns to bend the folding area are configured by openings provided in the folding area of the support plate (Figs. 7a – 7i and para. 146), and wherein the at least two wires are provided along a winding path corresponding to different layers of the patterns comprised within the folding area of the support plate (Figs. 7a – 7i and para. 146).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 – 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Specifically, claim 9 recites “…in case that the X-channel is used as the driving channel of the digitizer, the additional wire disposed in the at least one additional layer is connected to the wires of the digitizer on the first layer.”
The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter.
Also, claim 10 recites “… in case that the Y channel is used as the driving channel of the digitizer, the additional wire disposed in the at least one additional layer is connected to the wires of the digitizer on the second layer.”
The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter.
Also, claim 11 recites “…in case that the X-channel and the Y-channel are used as driving channels of the digitizer, an additional wire disposed in the first additional layer is connected to the wires of the digitizer on the first layer, and an additional wire disposed on the second additional layer is connected to the wires of the digitizer on the second layer.”
The prior art does not show this configuration; therefore this claim contains allowable subject matter.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM EST.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. 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.
/CARL ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2627