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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 1, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant's amendments, filed March 1, 2026 are respectfully acknowledged and have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed March 1, 2026 and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Claims 1 and 10 are amended.
Claims 1-17 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Badaye et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20170090622 A1, hereinafter “Badaye”).
Regarding Claim 1 (Currently Amended), Badaye teaches a touch detection module (par 0037 Fig 2 combination of touch sensor panel 224 and panel subsystem 206) comprising:
a touch sensing unit (par 0051 Fig 4C touch sensor panel 412) comprising:
touch electrodes in a touch sensing area (par 0051 Fig 4C touch sensor panel 412 comprises multiple row electrode blocks 408 arranged in a horizontal orientation, and a plurality of column electrode segments 406 in each of columns C1-CN separated into different columns; par 0052 in active touch sensor area 420) the touch sensing area being divided into a plurality of divided areas along a first direction (par 0052 Fig 4C touch sensing area 420 being divided into a plurality of [three, each comprising a set of vertical electrodes C1-C4] divided areas along a first horizontal direction in the figure); and
touch driving signal lines and touch sensing signal lines in a touch peripheral area (par 0051 Fig 4C touch driving signal lines 416 [connected to four touch electrodes 406/C1-C4 extending in the second vertical direction in each touch region] and touch sensing signals lines 414 [connected to each of the touch electrodes 402/R1-RN across the three touch regions] are shown around the periphery of the touch sensing area and connecting at the electrode’s periphery); and
a touch driver circuit (par 0037 Fig 2 driver logic 214) configured to:
concurrently supply touch driving signals to the touch electrodes extending in a second direction crossing the first direction and located in each of the divided areas through the touch driving signal lines (par 0084 Fig 4C a plurality of
detect touch sensing signals of the touch electrodes from each of the divided areas through the touch sensing signal lines (par 0084 Fig 4C while the
the touch driver circuit is configured to
concurrently detect the touch sensing signals from the divided areas ((par 0084 Fig 4C while the
measure an amount of change in a capacitance of the touch electrodes (par 0035 Figs 2,4C the change in the mutual capacitance of the touch node can be detected and measured by the touch sensing system to determine the positions of multiple objects when they touch, or come in proximity to, the touch screen), and
wherein each of the touch driving signal lines is connected to ends of at least two of the touch electrodes extending in the second direction (par 0051 Fig 4C), the ends of the at least two of the touch electrodes facing a same side of the touch sensing unit as each other (par 0051 Fig 4C), and each of the at least two of the touch electrodes being located in a different one of the divided areas (par 0051 Fig 4C).
Regarding Claim 2 (Previously Presented), Badaye teaches the touch detection module of claim 1, wherein the touch electrodes comprise:
a plurality of driving electrodes spaced from one another along the first direction, and extending in the second direction crossing the first direction to be parallel with each other (par 0051 Fig 4C touch driving electrodes 406/C1-C4 spaced from one another along the first horizontal direction, extending in the second vertical direction, crossing the first horizontal direction to be parallel to each other, in each touch region); and
a plurality of sensing electrodes spaced from one another along the second direction, and extending in the first direction to be parallel with each other (par 0051 Fig 4C touch sensing row electrodes [par 0051 402/R1-RN across the three touch regions] spaced from one another along the second vertical direction, extending in the first horizontal direction to be parallel to each other), and wherein
crossings between the plurality of driving electrodes and the plurality of sensing electrodes define touch nodes (par 0035 Figs 2, drive and sense lines that cross over each other can be referred to as touch nodes).
Regarding Claim 10 (Currently Amended), Badaye teaches a display device (par 0034 Fig 1C personal computer 144) comprising: a display panel comprising a display area comprising a plurality of pixels (par 0040 Fig 2 display device 230); and a touch detection module located on a front of the display panel to detect a user's touch (par 0040 Fig 2 display device 230 with touch detection module 224; par 0042 all of the circuit elements of the display pixel stackups may be single-function circuit elements; par 0045 detect a user’s touch). As Claim 10 defines the display device which corresponds to the touch module claim 1, the additional limitations of Claim 10 are rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 1, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 11 presents the limitations of Claim 2 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 11 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 2, mutatis mutandis.
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.
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 3-9 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badaye et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20170090622 A1, hereinafter “Badaye”) in view of Okayama et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20140152621 A1, hereinafter “Okayama”).
Regarding Claim 3 (Original), Badaye teaches the touch detection module of claim 2. However, Badaye appears not to expressly teach wherein
each of the touch driving signal lines comprises branches in a number equal to a number of the plurality of divided areas,
branching ends are connected to corresponding ones of the driving electrodes of the divided areas, and
an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit through a touch pad.
Okayama teaches wherein
each of the touch driving signal lines comprises branches in a number equal to a number of the plurality of divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, two),
branching ends are connected to corresponding ones of the driving electrodes of the divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such), and
an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit through a touch pad (Okayama par 0060 Fig 11 an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit comprising at least drive electrode switch 112 through a touch terminal therefor, par 0060).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been in order to provide enhanced detection sensitivity with a simple configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 4 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 2, wherein
the touch sensing area is divided in half according to a length or a width in the first direction into first and second divided areas (Badaye par 0050 Fig 4B the touch sensing area is divided in half according to a width in the first horizontal direction into first left area and second right area), and wherein:
each of the touch driving signal lines comprises branches associated with the first and second divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, two), respectively;
branching ends are connected to corresponding ones of the driving electrodes of the first and second divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such); and
an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit through a touch pad (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit comprising at least drive electrode switch 112 through a touch terminal therefor, par 0060).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been in order to provide enhanced detection sensitivity with a simple configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 5 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 3, wherein
the driving electrodes of each of the divided areas are electrically connected to the branches of the touch driving signal lines in a same number as that of the divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, two), and
are connected to touch pads and the touch driver circuit through the branches of the touch driving signal lines (Okayama par 0060 Fig 11 an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit comprising at least drive electrode switch 112 through a touch terminal therefor, par 0060).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been to enhance detection sensitivity while maintaining a simple configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 6 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 2, wherein
the touch sensing signal lines comprises a plurality of first to mth sensing lines associated with each of the plurality of divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 teaches such, m=3 associated with each area, Y1-Y3 for the upper area, Y4-Y6 for the lower area),
each of the plurality of first to mth sensing lines of each of the divided areas being connected to a corresponding one of the sensing electrodes of a corresponding one of the divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 teaches such), and wherein
the sensing electrodes for each of the divided areas are electrically connected to touch pads and the touch driver circuit through corresponding ones of the plurality of first to mth sensing lines, where m is an integer (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11; sensing electrodes for each of the divided areas are electrically connected to the touch driver circuit comprising at least sensing electrode circuit 113 through corresponding ones of the plurality of first to mth [m=3] sensing lines and a touch terminal of the touch driver circuit comprising at least sensing electrode circuit 113, par 0060).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been to simplify the touch detection module configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 7 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 2, wherein:
each of the touch driving signal lines comprises branches in a number equal to a number of the plurality of divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, two);
branching ends are connected to corresponding ones of the driving electrodes of the divided areas (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such); and
an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit through a touch pad (Okayama par 0060 Fig 11 an opposite end is electrically connected to the touch driver circuit comprising at least drive electrode switch 112 through a touch terminal therefor, par 0060), and wherein
the touch sensing signal lines are connected with the sensing electrodes for each of the plurality of divided areas, respectively (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 shows such, 3 lines to 3 sensing electrodes in each of the two divided areas).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been to enhance detection sensitivity while maintaining a simple configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 8 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 7, wherein
the touch driver circuit is configured to:
concurrently supply the touch driving signals to the driving electrodes located in each of the divided areas through the branches of the touch driving signal lines (Okayama par 0108 Fig 11 signals are simultaneously input from one signal source 110 to divisional drive electrode Xm1 (1≤m≤6) and divisional drive electrode Xm2 (1≤m≤6) ); and
receive the touch sensing signals through the touch sensing signal lines connected with the sensing electrodes for each of the plurality of divided areas (Okayama par 0070 Fig 11 during the period when specific drive electrode Xm [in Fig 11 Xm1/Xm2] is connected to AC signal source 110 (during when the AC signal is input), detection electrode switch 113 scans to successively select all detection electrodes Y1 to Y6 in a fixed time interval Ts, and outputs the AC signal to detection circuit 114 from selected detection electrode Yn (1≤m≤6); such meets the this limitation of the claim).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been to enhance detection sensitivity while maintaining a simple configuration (Okayama par 0009).
Regarding Claim 9 (Original), Badaye as modified teaches the touch detection module of claim 8, wherein the touch driver circuit is configured to:
sequentially select the touch driving signal lines comprising the branches to sequentially supply the touch driving signals to the driving electrodes located in each of the divided areas (Okayama par 0070 Fig 11 drive electrode switch 112 scans drive electrodes X1 to X6 to successively [sequentially] select drive electrodes X1 to X6 which each comprise branches to sequentially supply the touch driving signals to the driving electrodes located in each of the divided areas); and
sequentially receive the touch sensing signals through the touch sensing signal lines (Okayama par 0070 Fig 11 during the period when specific drive electrode Xm [in Fig 11 Xm1/Xm2] is connected to AC signal source 110 (during when the AC signal is input), detection electrode switch 113 scans to successively [sequentially] select all detection electrodes Y1 to Y6 in a fixed time interval Ts, and outputs the AC signal to detection circuit 114 from selected detection electrode Yn (1≤m≤6)).
Badaye and Okayama are analogous art as they each pertain to mutual capacitance touch detection modules. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch detection module with divided areas of Badaye with the inclusion of the branched drive lines of Okayama. The motivation would have been to improve accuracy of touch recognition in a touch display process and reduce a probability of occurrence of an accidental touch phenomenon (Okayama par 0004).
Claim 12 presents the limitations of Claim 3 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 12 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 3, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 13 presents the limitations of Claim 4 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 13 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 4, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 14 presents the limitations of Claim 6 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 14 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 6, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 15 presents the limitations of Claim 7 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 15 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 7, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 16 presents the limitations of Claim 8 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 16 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 8, mutatis mutandis.
Claim 17 presents the limitations of Claim 9 in a different claim category, and therefore Claim 17 is rejected with a rationale similar to Claim 9, mutatis mutandis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 1, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 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. As such, the rejections of Claims 1 and 10 and of their dependent claims are maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK EDWARDS whose telephone number is 571-270-7731. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9a-5p.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached on 571-270-7230. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARK EDWARDS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624