Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 19/031,726

Touch Control System and Method

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jan 18, 2025
Examiner
BOYD, JONATHAN A
Art Unit
2627
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
481 granted / 698 resolved
+6.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
722
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 698 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,392,214. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application is a broader recitation of the U.S. Patent. Instant Application 19/031,726 US Patent 11,392,214 1. A method for position sensing, comprising the steps: providing one or more IR LEDs configured about at least a portion of a position sensing region; providing a plurality of IR detectors configured along at least one edge of the position sensing region, wherein at least some of the IR detectors are configured to be illuminated by plural LED beams when active; and sequentially pulsing the one or more IR LEDs to sequentially illuminate at least some of the IR detectors with plural LED beams, determining the detector signal strength at said detectors for a timing window for an LED pulse and correlating the time of the detector window signal to a specific LED beam, and employing a series of time correlated detected signal strengths to determine the position of a freely movable object in the position sensing region employing one or more microprocessors or microcontrollers. 1. A position sensing system, comprising: a plurality of IR LEDs positioned about a position sensing region; at least one IR detector positioned about the position sensing region, wherein at least one of the IR detectors is illuminated by plural IR LEDs when active; and a control system which sequentially pulses the IR LEDs, wherein at least one of the IR detectors are sequentially illuminated by the plural LEDs, wherein the control system determines a detector signal strength at said detector for a timing window for each IR LED pulse, correlates the time of the detector window signal to a specific LED, and wherein the control system processes the detected signal strength from at least one detector to determine the location of an object in the position sensing region. As can be shown above the instant application is a broader recitation of that of the U.S. Patent. Claim 2 of the instant application correlates to claim 2 of the U.S. Patent. Claim 3 of the instant application would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to transmit positions to a computing device so as to process the positions for GUI control. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Lin et al (2010/0253634) Newton et al (2010/0225588) ELIAS (2010/0149099) Hisano et al (2006/0034042) Kurakane (2003/0092470) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BOYD whose telephone number is (571)270-7503. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00. 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. /JONATHAN A BOYD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 18, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604616
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591362
ADJACENT CAPACITIVE TOUCH SCREEN EVENT TRACKING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586534
DRIVING CIRCUIT UNIT, DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME, AND METHOD OF DRIVING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586516
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585348
INPUT DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+7.0%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 698 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month