Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
SUMMARY
2. The RCE filed on March 01, 2026, has been received and made of record. In response to Final Office Action mailed on December 02, 2025, applicant amended independent claims 1, 19, and 24. Claims 2-18, 20-23, 25, and 26 are maintained. NO claim has been cancelled and/or added as a new claim after the Final Office Action. Therefore, claims 1-26 are pending for consideration.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments in “Remarks” submitted on January 26, 2026, with respect to independent claims 1, 19, and 24 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection as necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RHE et al.(US 2019/0302943 A1)(herein after RHE) in view of KIM et al.(US 2018/0329576 A1)(herein after KIM).
PNG
media_image1.png
449
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig.27
Regarding claim 24, RHE teaches an electronic device(touch display device, Para-2), comprising:
first electrode groups(X-touch electrode lines (X-TEL) or Y-touch electrode lines (Y-TEL), figs.7&8, Para-165) in a sensing region (active area AA, fig.2, Para-118, 123), and arranged in a first direction(Para-178, 179);
second electrode groups(Y-touch electrode lines(Y-TEL) or X-touch electrode lines(X-TEL), figs.7&8, Para-165) crossing the first electrode groups(X-TEL or Y-TEL) in the sensing region(active area AA, fig.2, Para-118, 123), and arranged in a second direction crossing the first direction(Para-178, 179);
a first line(X-TL-2, or X-TL-8, fig.27, Para-420) in the sensing region, and electrically connected to the one of the second electrode groups(X-TEL); and
a second trace line(X-TL-8, or X-TL-2, fig.27, Para-420) in the sensing region(AA), and adjacent to the first line(X-TL-2, or X-TL-8) in the first direction(fig.27); and
a third line(X-TL-4, fig.27) in the sensing region(AA), and electrically connected to another of the second electrode groups(X-TEL-4, fig.27, Para-399),
wherein a gap between the first line(X-TL-2) and the second line(X-TL-8) is narrower than a gap between the second line(X-TL-8) and the third line(X-TL-4), and
wherein a length of a portion of the first line(X-TL-2) in the sensing region(AA) is substantially equal to a length of a portion of the second line(X-TL-8) in the sensing region(AA).
Nevertheless, RHE is not found to teach expressly the electronic device, wherein auxiliary electrodes overlapping the second electrode groups and arranged in the second direction; and wherein at least some of the auxiliary electrodes are directly electrically connected to each other.
However, KIM teaches a touch sensor, wherein auxiliary electrodes(second electrodes 130, fig.1, Para-77) overlapping the second electrode groups(first electrodes 111, fig.3, Para-78)(Para-77: certain regions of at least some of the first electrodes 110 and the second electrodes 130 may overlap and/or intersect each other, but they may be separated and isolated from each other by one or more insulating layers (not illustrated)) and arranged in the second direction(X direction, fig.3);
wherein at least some of the auxiliary electrodes are directly electrically connected to each other(Para-96: all of the second electrodes 130 may be electrically coupled to each other while sharing a single second line 140. ----. Alternatively, in other exemplary embodiments, the second electrodes 130 may be divided into a plurality of groups, and the second electrodes 130 in each group may be electrically coupled to each other).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified RHE with the teaching of KIM to include the feature in order to provide a touch apparatus having an improved touch sensitivity, uniform visible properties and decreased noise’s influence.
Regarding claim 25, RHE as modified by KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the one of the second electrode groups(X-TEL-1 to X-TEL-12) comprises a first divided electrode(X-TEL-1), and a second divided electrode(X-TEL-7) spaced apart from the first divided electrode in the first direction(fig.27), and
wherein the first line(X-TL-2) is electrically connected to the first divided electrode(X-TEL-1), and the second line(X-TL-8) is electrically connected to the second divided electrode(X-TEL-8, fig.27, RHE).
Regarding claim 26, RHE as modified by KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the first line(X-TL-2) comprises a first portion extending in the first direction, and a second portion extending in the second direction from the first portion(fig.27, RHE), and
wherein the second line(X-TL-8) faces the second portion of the first line(X-TL-2) while extending in the second direction (fig.27, RHE).
8. Claims 1-7 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RHE et al.(US 2019/0302943 A1)(herein after RHE) in view of LEE et al.(US 2021/0373705 A1)(herein after LEE) and further in view of KIM et al.(US 2018/0329576 A1)(herein after KIM).
Regarding claim 1, RHE teaches an electronic device(touch display device, Para-2), comprising:
a sensor layer(touch panel TSP, fig.1, Para-107) comprising:
a sensing region(active area AA, fig.2, Para-118, 123);
PNG
media_image1.png
449
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig.27
a peripheral region(non-active area NA, fig.2, Para-118, 123) adjacent to the sensing region(AA);
first electrode groups(X-touch electrode lines (X-TEL) or Y-touch electrode lines (Y-TEL), figs.7&8, Para-165) arranged in a first direction(Para-178, 179);
second electrode groups(Y-touch electrode lines(Y-TEL) or X-touch electrode lines(X-TEL), figs.7&8, Para-177) crossing the first electrode groups(X-TEL or Y-TEL), and arranged in a second direction crossing the first direction(Para-178, 179);
first trace lines(X-touch routing lines (X-TL) or Y-touch routing lines(Y-TL), figs.7&8, Para-184) electrically connected to the first electrode groups(X-TEL or Y-TEL); and
second trace lines(Y-touch routing lines(Y-TL) or X-touch routing lines (X-TL), figs.7&8, Para-184) electrically connected to the second electrode groups(Y-TEL or X-TEL), and comprising:
a (2-1)-th trace line(X-TL-2, or X-TL-8, fig.27, Para-431) electrically connected to one of the second electrode groups (X-TEL-2 or X-TEL-8), and having a first length in the second direction(second direction, figs.8&28); and
a (2-2)-th trace line(X-TL-8 or X-TL-2, fig.27, Para-431) spaced apart from the (2-1)-th trace line(X-TL-2, or X-TL-8) in the first direction(first direction, fig.8) while extending in the second direction(second direction, figs.8&27), and having a second length in the second direction that is substantially equal to the first length(fig.27); and
a sensor driver(touch driving circuit TSC, fig.1) configured to drive the sensor layer(TSP, Para-97)[and to selectively operate in a first mode for sensing a touch input, or in a second mode for sensing a pen input].
Nevertheless, RHE is not found to teach expressly the electronic device, wherein a sensor driver configured to selectively operate in a first mode for sensing a touch input, or in a second mode for sensing a pen input.
However, LEE teaches an electronic device, wherein a sensor driver(sensing driving circuit 240, figs.5&8A-8B, Para-25, 115-116, 144, 147) configured to drive the sensor layer, and to selectively operate in a first mode for sensing a touch input (fig.3, Para-75, 221), or in a second mode for sensing a pen input(fig.3, Para-75, 221).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified RHE with the teaching of LEE to include the feature in order to provide an electronic device capable of sensing and differentiating both finger touch and active pen touch.
Neither RHE nor LEE teaches expressly the electronic device, wherein auxiliary electrodes overlapping the second electrode groups and arranged in the second direction; and wherein at least some of the auxiliary electrodes are directly electrically connected to each other.
However, KIM teaches a touch sensor, wherein auxiliary electrodes(second electrodes 130, fig.1, Para-77) overlapping the second electrode groups(first electrodes 111, fig.3, Para-78)(Para-77: certain regions of at least some of the first electrodes 110 and the second electrodes 130 may overlap and/or intersect each other, but they may be separated and isolated from each other by one or more insulating layers (not illustrated)) and arranged in the second direction(X direction, fig.3);
wherein at least some of the auxiliary electrodes are directly electrically connected to each other(Para-96: all of the second electrodes 130 may be electrically coupled to each other while sharing a single second line 140. ----. Alternatively, in other exemplary embodiments, the second electrodes 130 may be divided into a plurality of groups, and the second electrodes 130 in each group may be electrically coupled to each other).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified RHE further with the teaching of KIM to include the feature in order to provide a touch sensing display device having an improved sensitivity, uniform visible properties and decreased noise’s influence.
Regarding claim 2, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein each of the second electrode groups comprises a first divided electrode(X-TEL-2/4/6 or X-TEL-8/10/12), and a second divided electrode(X-TEL-8/10/12 or X-TEL-2/4/6) spaced apart from the first divided electrode in the first direction(first direction), and
wherein the (2-1)-th trace line is electrically connected to the first divided electrode(fig.27), and the (2-2)-th trace line is electrically connected to the second divided electrode(fig.27, RHE).
Regarding claim 3, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 2, wherein at least a portion of the (2-1)-th trace line and at least a portion of the (2-2)-th trace line overlap the sensing region(fig.27, RHE),
wherein a portion with the first length of the (2-1)-th trace line overlaps the sensing region(fig.27, RHE), and
wherein a portion with the second length of the (2-2)-th trace line overlaps the sensing region(fig.27, RHE).
Regarding claim 4, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the (2-1)-th trace line is connected to the first divided electrode adjacent to the second divided electrode(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE), and
wherein the (2-2)-th trace line is connected to the second divided electrode adjacent to the first divided electrode (figs.23,25,27&29, RHE).
Regarding claim 5, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 2, wherein the (2-1)-th trace line and the (2-2)-th trace line overlap the peripheral region (figs.23,25,27&29, RHE), and are spaced apart from each other with the first divided electrode and the second divided electrode therebetween(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE).
Regarding claim 6, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the second electrode groups comprise:
a (2-1)-th electrode group(X-TEL-2), a (2-2)-th electrode group(X-TEL-4), and a (2-3)-th electrode group(X-TEL-6) sequentially arranged in the second direction(figs.23,25, 27&29, RHE),
wherein the (2-1)-th electrode group comprises a (1-1)-th divided electrode(x21-x24), and a (2-1)-th divided electrode (x25-x28) spaced apart from the (1-1)-th divided electrode in the first direction(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE),
wherein the (2-2)-th electrode group comprises a (1-2)-th divided electrode(x41-x44), and a (2-2)-th divided electrode (x45-x48) spaced apart from the (1-2)-th divided electrode in the first direction(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE),
wherein the (2-3)-th electrode group comprises a (1-3)-th divided electrode(x61-x64), and a (2-3)-th divided electrode (x65-x68) spaced apart from the (1-3)-th divided electrode in the first direction(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE), and
wherein the second trace lines comprises a (1-1)-th divided trace line(X-TL-2) electrical connected to the (1-1)-th divided electrode, a (2-1)-th divided trace line(X-TL-8) electrically connected to the (2-1)-th divided electrode, a (1-2)-th divided trace line(X-TL-4) electrically connected to the (1-2)-th divided electrode, a (2-2)-th divided trace line (X-TL-10) electrically connected to the (2-2)-th divided electrode, a (1-3)-th divided trace line(X-TL-6) electrically connected to the (1-3)-th divided electrode, and a (2-3)-th divided trace line(X-TL-12) electrically connected to the (2-3)-th divided electrode(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE).
Regarding claim 7, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 6, wherein a gap between the (1-1)-th divided trace line and the (2-1)-th divided trace line is narrower than a gap between th (2-1)-th divided trace line and the (1-2)-th divided trace line(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE).
Regarding claim 10, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 6, wherein a width of the (1-1)-th divided electrode in the first direction is narrower than a width of the (1-2)-th divided electrode in the first direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE)(211a is narrower width than the width of 212a), and
wherein a width of the (2-1)-th divided electrode in the first direction is wider than a width of the (2-2)-th divided electrode in the first direction(fig.20, Para-218, LEE).
Regarding claim 11, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein a width of the (1-3)-th divided electrode in the first direction is wider than the width of the (1-2)-th divided electrode in the first direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE), and
wherein a width of the (2-3)-th divided electrode in the first direction is narrower than the width of the (2-2)-th divided electrode in the first direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE).
Regarding claim 12, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein a width of the (1-3)-th divided electrode in the first direction is narrower than the width of the (1-1)-th divided electrode in the first direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE), and
wherein a width of the (2-3)-th divided electrode in the first direction is wider than the width of the (2-1)-th divided electrode in the first direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE).
Regarding claim 13, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 6, wherein a gap between the (1-3)-th divided electrode and the (2-3)-th divided electrode overlaps the (2-1)-th divided electrode and the (2-2)-th divided electrode, when viewed from the second direction(DR2, fig.20, LEE).
Regarding claim 14, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 6, wherein a gap between the (1-3)-th divided electrode and the (2-3)-th divided electrode overlaps the (1-1)-th divided electrode and the (1-2)-th divided electrode, when viewed from the second direction(DR1, fig.20, Para-218, LEE).
Regarding claim 15, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the (2-1)-th trace line comprises a first portion extending in the first direction, and a second portion extending in the second direction from the first portion, and
wherein the (2-2)-th trace line faces the second portion (Figs.23, 25, 27, &29, RHE).
9. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RHE et al.(US 2019/0302943 A1), LEE et al.(US 2021/0373705 A1), KIM et al.(US 2018/0329576 A1) and further in view of Shin et al.(US 2023/0117610 A1) (herein after Shin).
Regarding claim 16, RHE as modified by LEE and KIM is not found to teach expressly the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the sensor driver is configured to receive a first signal through the (2-1)-th trace line and a second signal through the (2-2)-th trace line, and to generate first data by performing a differential computing operation with respect to the first signal and the second signal.
However, Shin teaches a touch sensing display device, wherein the sensor driver is configured to receive a first signal through the (2-1)-th trace line and a second signal through the (2-2)-th trace line, and to generate first data by performing a differential computing operation with respect to the first signal and the second signal(fig.8, Para 174-176).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified RHE further with the teaching of Shin to include the feature in order to provide a touch sensing display device where a noise of the touch sensing signal could be reduced, and an accuracy of the touch sensing could be improved.
11. Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RHE et al.(US 2019/0302943 A1), LEE et al.(US 2021/0373705 A1), KIM et al.(US 2018/0329576 A1), Shin et al.(US 2023/0117610 A1) and further in view of CHANG et al.(US 2015/0277 665 A1) (herein after CHANG).
Regarding claim 17, RHE as modified by LEE, KIM and Shin teaches the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the second trace lines comprise a (2-3)-th trace line electrically connected to another second electrode group among the second electrode groups(figs.23,25,27&29, RHE), and a (2-4)-th trace line spaced apart from the (2-3)-th trace line in the first direction while extending in the second direction (figs.23,25,27&29, RHE), and
wherein the sensor driver is configured to receive a third signal through the (2-3)-th trace line and a fourth signal through the (2-4)-th trace line(fig.8, Para 174-176), to generate second data by performing a differential computing operation with respect to the third signal and the fourth signal(fig.8, Para 174-176)(as the first data is generated differentially from first sensor and second sensor, it is also obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art second data would be generated from third sensor and fourth sensor), and
None of the Prior arts of RHE, LEE, KIM, or Shin teaches expressly the electronic device, wherein the sensor driver is configured to generate third data by performing the differential computing operation with respect to the first data and the second data.
However, CHANG teaches a touch screen, wherein controller(160, fig.1G, Para-91) is configured to generate third data by performing the differential computing operation(double differentiation, Para-79) with respect to the first data and the second data(Para-104, 121).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to have modified RHE further with the teaching of CHANG to include the feature in order to effectively and efficiently reduce noise interference by applying dual differential sensing information to 2D analysis.
Regarding claim 18, RHE as modified by LEE, KIM, Shin and CHANG teaches the electronic device of claim 17, wherein the sensor driver is configured to generate the first data and the second data through at least one of analog differential processing or digital differential processing(Para-82, 99, CHANG), and
wherein the sensor driver is configured to generate the third data through at least one of the analog differential processing or the digital differential processing(Para-82, 99, CHANG).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claims 1, 16 and 17, since claim 19 recites the limitations of claims 1, 16 and 17 while reading the limitations combinedly.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reason as mentioned in the rejection of claim 6, since claim 20 recites the limitations of claim 6 with minor change in wording and terminology.
Regarding claim 21, RHE as modified by LEE, KIM, Shin and CHANG teaches the electronic device of claim 20, wherein the first line and the second line are insulated from one of the third divided electrode or the fourth divided electrode while crossing the third divided electrode and the fourth divided electrode(except connecting to the same node, all electrical components in an electrical circuit, each electrical routing or wiring insulated for each other, otherwise the device would be non-functional and it is obvious to one of ordinary in the art).
Claim 22 is rejected as the rejection of claim 26(for mapping).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 8, 9 and 23 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.
13. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 8: None of the prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination, provides a reasonable motivation and/or reasoning to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the electronic device of claim 6, wherein the (1-1)-th divided trace line, the (2-1)-th divided trace line, the (1-2)-th divided trace line, the (2-2)-th divided trace line, the (1-3)-th divided trace line, and the (2-3)-th divided trace line are sequentially arranged in the first direction”.
Claim 9: None of the prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination, provides a reasonable motivation and/or reasoning to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the electronic device of claim 6, wherein the (1-3)-th divided trace line, the (2-3)-th divided trace line, the (1-1)-th divided trace line, the (2-1)-th divided trace line, the (1-2)-th divided trace line, and the (2-2)-th divided trace line are sequentially arranged in the first direction”.
Claim 23: None of the prior arts, on record, taken alone or in combination, provides a reasonable motivation and/or reasoning to fairly teach or suggest the applicant’s claimed invention, “the electronic device of claim 20, wherein the sensor driver is connected to one end of the second line, and an opposite end of the second line is floated”.
Examiner Note
14. The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the references, as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the references or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-1530. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae, can be reached on (571)272-3017. 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.
/MD SAIFUL A SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626