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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 6-11, 14 and 18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicants assert with respect to independent claim 15 that Shih does not disclose detecting the substate being touched by the finger of the user, and in response to the detecting step, applying a second voltage to a second capacitive sensor. The Examiner respectfully disagrees since Fig. 4 teaches calculating coordinates of a touch point according to first values C1 from driving and sensing electrodes. Then, in response to the detecting step, coordinates of the touch point are determined and then a second value C2 is determined by applying a second voltage (driving and sensing while grounding the remaining driving and sensing electrodes). The grounding of the other driving and sensing electrodes is applying a second ground voltage to a second capacitive sensor under a broadest reasonable interpretation when obtaining the C2 values. For this reason, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive at this time.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 3/32/26. These drawings are acceptable and the objection to the drawings is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 11 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (US 2009/0315858, hereinafter “Sato”) in view of Han (US 2011/0025631). Regarding claim 1, Sato discloses a touch-sensitive screen arrangement, comprising (Fig. 3, [0014, 0062], touch-sensitive screen as a capacitive touch panel that detects a user touch from finger): a substrate configured to be touched by and elastically deformed or deflected by a finger of a human user (Fig. 3, [0014, 0065], second substrate 200 configured to be touched by and elastically deformed by pressure from a finger); a first capacitive sensor positioned relative to the substrate such that the first capacitive sensor can detect the substrate being touched by the finger, the first capacitive sensor being configured to be elastically deformed by the finger of the human user touching the substrate (Fig. 3, [0014, 0076], first capacitive sensor is counter electrode 201 on lower side of substrate 200 to detect finger touch or contact with the substrate 200, the first capacitive sensor 201 being elastically deformed by the finger of the human user touching the substrate 200); and a second capacitive sensor positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor such that the second capacitive sensor can detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to the elastic deformation of the first capacitive sensor that results from the substrate being touched by the finger (Fig. 3, [0014, 0067, 0070, 0076], second capacitive sensor 122 is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor 201 and detects capacitance changes between the first capacitive sensor 201 and the second capacitance sensor 122 due to elastic deformation of the first capacitive sensor 201 from the substrate 200 being touched by the finger); and a fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor (Fig. 3, [0065], fixed support panel as the first substrate 100 supports the second capacitive sensor 122). Sato does not explicitly disclose one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel, the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs. Han teaches one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel, the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs (Figs. 1 and 7, [0057, 0064, 0069], springs 30c interconnect the substrate 50 and the fixed support panel 10, the fixed support panel 10 supporting the second capacitive sensor 20 independently of the springs 30c). 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 touch-sensitive screen of Sato to have one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel, the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs in place of the gel sheet 300 of Sato, such as taught by Han, because such a modification produces a predictable result of providing an elastic member for facilitating deformation of the substate to move the substrate towards the second capacitive sensor and detect touches applied to the substrate based on changes in capacitance. Regarding claim 4, Sato as modified by Han discloses the arrangement of claim 1 wherein the elastic deformation of the first capacitive sensor results in the first capacitive sensor being moved closer to the second capacitive sensor (Sato, Fig. 3, [0077], elastic deformation of first capacitive sensor 201 results in the first capacitive sensor 20 being moved closer to the second capacitive sensor 22). The motivation is the same as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Sato as modified by Han discloses the arrangement of claim 1, wherein the second capacitive sensor can detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs (Han, [0062, 0068-0069, 0076], capacitance varied by touch pressure wherein the second capacitive sensor can detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs 30c to change a distance between sensing plates 40 and 20). The motivation is the same as in claim 1. Regarding claim 8, Sato discloses a method of detecting a user touching a touch-sensitive screen, the method comprising (Fig. 3, [0014, 0062], touch-sensitive screen as a capacitive touch panel that detects a user touch from finger): providing a substrate that is elastically deformed or deflected when touched by a finger of a human user (Fig. 3, [0014, 0065], second substrate 200 configured to be touched by and elastically deformed by pressure from a finger); positioning a first capacitive sensor relative to the substrate such that the first capacitive sensor detects the substrate being touched by the finger, the first capacitive sensor being elastically deformed by the finger of the human user touching the substrate (Fig. 3, [0014, 0076], first capacitive sensor is counter electrode 201 on lower side of substrate 200 to detect finger touch or contact with the substrate 200, the first capacitive sensor 201 being elastically deformed by the finger of the human user touching the substrate 200); and positioning a second capacitive sensor relative to the first capacitive sensor such that the second capacitive sensor detects a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to the elastic deformation of the first capacitive sensor that results from the substrate being touched by the finger (Fig. 3, [0014, 0067, 0070, 0076], second capacitive sensor 122 is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor 201 and detects capacitance changes between the first capacitive sensor 201 and the second capacitance sensor 122 due to elastic deformation of the first capacitive sensor 201 from the substrate 200 being touched by the finger); and providing a fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor (Fig. 3, [0065], fixed support panel as the first substrate 100 supports the second capacitive sensor 122). Sato does not explicitly disclose providing one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel; and using the second capacitive sensor to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs. Han teaches providing one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel (Figs. 1 and 7, [0057, 0064, 0069], springs 30c interconnect the substrate 50 and the fixed support panel 10); and using the second capacitive sensor to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs (Figs. 1 and 7, [0057, 0064, 0069], springs 30c interconnect the substrate 50 and the fixed support panel 10 and are compressed due to a finger touch thereby using the second capacitive sensor 20 to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor 40 and the second capacitive sensor 20 due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs 30c). 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 method of Sato to provide one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel in place of the gel sheet 300 of Sato, and use the second capacitive sensor to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs, such as taught by Han, because such a modification produces a predictable result of providing an elastic member for facilitating deformation of the substate to move the substrate towards the second capacitive sensor and detect touches applied to the substrate based on changes in capacitance.
Regarding claim 11, this claim is rejected for the same reasons recited with respect to the rejection of claim 4. Regarding claim 21, Sato as modified by Han discloses the method of claim 8 wherein the fixed support panel supports the second capacitive sensor independently of the electrically conductive pads (Han, Figs. 1 and 7, [0057, 0064, 0069], springs 30c interconnect the substrate 50 and the fixed support panel 10, the fixed support panel 10 supporting the second capacitive sensor 20 independently of the springs 30c). The motivation is the same as in claim 8.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Han as applied to claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 11 and 21, and further in view of Serban et al. (US 2008/0202251, hereinafter “Serban”). Regarding claim 7, Sato as modified by Han discloses the arrangement of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first capacitive sensor includes a plurality of electrically conductive pads. Serban teaches wherein the first capacitive sensor includes a plurality of electrically conductive pads (Fig. 4, [0023], first electrodes 20 as a plurality of conductive pads formed of silver ink). 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 touch-sensitive screen of Sato as modified by Han to have wherein the first capacitive sensor includes a plurality of electrically conductive pads, such as taught by Serban, because such a modification is a simple substitution of one type of capacitance sensing layer for another producing a predictable result of detecting a change in capacitance based on a finger touch. Regarding claim 14, this claim is rejected for the same reasons recited with respect to the rejection of claim 7.
Claims 15-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roziere (US 2014/0360854) in view of Shih et al. (US 2015/0062079, hereinafter “Shih”). Regarding claim 15, Roziere discloses a method of detecting a user touching a touch-sensitive screen, the method comprising (Fig. 1, [0001, 0003], touch-sensitive screens that detect a user touch from finger 1): providing a user-facing substrate on the touch-sensitive screen (Fig. 1, [0050, 0058], substrate 2 deformed by pressure from finger 1 is a user-facing substrate on touch-sensitive screen having display 3); detecting the substrate being touched by a finger of the user, the detecting being performed by use of the first capacitive sensor (Fig. 1, [0050, 0058], substrate 2 deformed by pressure from finger 1 by first electrodes 5 as a first capacitive sensor). Roziere does not explicitly disclose applying a first voltage to a first capacitive sensor; detecting the substrate being touched by a finger of the user, the detecting being performed by use of the first capacitive sensor while the first voltage is being applied to the first capacitive sensor; in response to the detecting step, electrically grounding the first capacitive sensor and applying a second voltage to a second capacitive sensor; and detecting the substrate being touched by the finger, the detecting being performed by use of the second capacitive sensor while the first capacitive sensor is electrically grounded and while the second voltage is being applied to the second capacitive sensor. Shih discloses detecting pressure and capacitance values between first capacitive electrodes changing distance with second capacitive electrodes by driving each of the driving and sensing electrodes individually while other driving and sensing electrodes are grounded (Fig. 4, [0040-0041], fourth decision box). 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 touch-sensitive screen of Roziere to have detecting pressure and capacitance values between first capacitive electrodes changing distance with second capacitive electrodes by driving each of the driving and sensing electrodes individually while other driving and sensing electrodes are grounded, such as taught by Shih, for the purpose of detecting specific individual capacitances at each of the pads while shielding from noise by grounding other conductive elements. The modified method would include: applying a first voltage to a first capacitive sensor (driving voltage applied to each first electrode 5 of Roziere); detecting the substrate being touched by a finger of the user, the detecting being performed by use of the first capacitive sensor while the first voltage is being applied to the first capacitive sensor (driving voltage applied to each first electrode 5 of Roziere including where finger 1 touches results in detection of finger while first voltage is applied); in response to the detecting step, electrically grounding the first capacitive sensor and applying a second voltage to a second capacitive sensor (driving voltage applied to each second electrode 6 of Roziere while first electrodes 5 are grounded when finger is detected by first electrode 5); and detecting the substrate being touched by the finger, the detecting being performed by use of the second capacitive sensor while the first capacitive sensor is electrically grounded and while the second voltage is being applied to the second capacitive sensor (driving voltage applied to second electrode 6 of Roziere where the finger 1 touches is detected by second electrode 6 while first electrodes 5 are grounded when finger is detected by second electrode 6; grounding of the second electrodes is a second voltage being applied to the capacitive sensor in response to a touch being detected in box 2 of Fig. 4 of Shih). Regarding claim 16, Roziere as modified by Shih discloses the method of claim 15, wherein the second capacitive sensor detects the substrate being touched by the finger due to the finger pushing the first capacitive sensor closer to the second capacitive sensor (driving voltage applied to second electrode 6 of Roziere where the finger 1 touches is detected by second electrode 6 while first electrodes 5 are grounded and deformed (Roziere, [0058]) when finger is detected by second electrode 6). Regarding claim 17, Roziere as modified by Shih discloses the method of claim 16 wherein the first capacitive sensor is moved closer to the second capacitive sensor due to the substrate and first capacitive sensor being elastically deformed when the substrate is touched by the finger of the human user (driving voltage applied to second electrode 6 of Roziere where the finger 1 touches is detected by second electrode 6 while first electrodes 5 are grounded and deformed (Roziere, [0058]) when finger is detected by second electrode 6). Regarding claim 19, Roziere as modified by Shih discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising using the second capacitive sensor to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation (Roziere, Fig. 1, [0058], first capacitive sensor 5 moves toward second capacitive sensor 6 due to elastic deformation; Shih, driving voltage applied to second electrode 6 of Roziere where the finger 1 touches is detected by second electrode 6 while first electrodes 5 are grounded and deformed when finger is detected by second electrode 6). Roziere as modified by Shih does not explicitly disclose using the second capacitive sensor to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs. However, Roziere further teaches to measure capacitance differences between different electrode layers using springs (Fig. 1, [0049, 0053, and 0055], springs 4). 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 method of Roziere as modified by Shih to have springs between first capacitive electrodes and the second capacitive electrodes, as further taught by Roziere, for the purpose of providing a touch-sensitive screen that can be reformed as a planar surface more quickly based on the return spring action when pressure is released by the finger. Regarding claim 20, Roziere as modified by Shih discloses the method of claim 15 wherein the first capacitive sensor includes a plurality of conductive pads (Roziere, Fig. 1, [0052,0057], first electrodes 5 as a plurality of conductive pads formed of ITO).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roziere in view of Shih as applied to claims 15-17 and 19-20, and further in view of Han. Regarding claim 18, Roziere as modified by Shih discloses the method of claim 15 further comprising:
providing a fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor, (Roziere, Fig. 1, [0050], display screen or command interface 3 as a fixed support panel supports the second capacitive sensor 6); and providing one or more springs interconnecting the substrate and the fixed support panel (Roziere, [0049], springs 4 connect the substrate 2 and fixed support panel 3). Roziere as modified by Shih does not explicitly disclose the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs. Han discloses the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs (Figs. 1 and 7, [0057, 0064, 0069], springs 30c interconnect the substrate 50 and the fixed support panel 10 and are compressed due to a finger touch thereby using the second capacitive sensor 20 to detect a change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor 40 and the second capacitive sensor 20 due to an elastic deformation of at least one of the springs 30c; the fixed support panel supports the second capacitive sensor 40 independently of the springs 30c). 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 method of Roziere as modified by Shih to have the fixed support panel supporting the second capacitive sensor independently of the springs, such as taught by Han, because such a modification produces a predictable result of proving a touch screen as a fixed support panel that independently supports the springs and second capacitive sensor.
Claims 2-3 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Han as applied to claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 11 and 21, and further in view of Shih. Regarding claim 2, Sato as modified by Han discloses the arrangement of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the second capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor to detect the change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor while at least a portion of the first capacitive sensor is grounded. Shih discloses detecting pressure and capacitance values between first capacitive electrodes changing distance with second capacitive electrodes by driving each of the driving and sensing electrodes individually while other driving and sensing electrodes are grounded (Fig. 4, [0040-0041], fourth decision box). 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 touch-sensitive screen of Sato as modified by Han to have wherein the second capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor to detect the change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor while at least a portion of the first capacitive sensor is grounded, for the purpose of detecting specific individual capacitances at each of the pads while shielding from noise by grounding other conductive elements.
Regarding claim 3, Sato as modified by Han and Shih discloses the arrangement of claim 2 wherein the first capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the substrate to detect the change in capacitance associated with the first capacitive sensor while the first capacitive sensor has a voltage applied thereto (Shih, Fig. 4, [0040-0041], fourth decision box, first capacitive sensor is driven resulting in a voltage being applied to the first capacitive sensor to detect changes in capacitances associated with the first capacitive sensor). The motivation is the same as in claim 2. Regarding claim 9, Sato as modified by Han discloses the method of claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the second capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor to detect the change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor while the first capacitive sensor is grounded and the second capacitive sensor has a voltage applied thereto.
Shih discloses detecting pressure and capacitance values between first capacitive electrodes changing distance with second capacitive electrodes by driving each of the driving and sensing electrodes individually while other driving and sensing electrodes are grounded (Fig. 4, [0040-0041], fourth decision box). 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 method of Sato as modified by Han to have wherein the second capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the first capacitive sensor to detect the change in capacitance between the first capacitive sensor and the second capacitive sensor while the first capacitive sensor is grounded and the second capacitive sensor has a voltage applied thereto, such as taught by Shih, for the purpose of detecting specific individual capacitances at each of the pads while shielding from noise by grounding other conductive elements. Regarding claim 10, Sato as modified by Han and Shih discloses the method of claim 9 wherein the first capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the substrate to detect the change in capacitance associated with the first capacitive sensor while the second capacitive sensor has a voltage applied thereto (Shih, Fig. 4, [0040-0041], fourth decision box, second capacitive sensor is driven with a voltage while first capacitive sensor is grounded such that the first capacitive sensor is positioned relative to the substrate to detect the change in capacitance associated with the first capacitive sensor). The motivation is the same as in claim 9.
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 JOSEPH PATRICK FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-3877. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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 PATRICK FOX
Examiner
Art Unit 2622
/JOSEPH P FOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2622
/PATRICK N EDOUARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights