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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “processing module” in claims 13 and 18, of which claims 14-17 and 19-20 are dependent.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Paragraph 0058 discloses that the processing module is included in a computing device.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 10-14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0089382 to Gray et al. (Gray) in view of U. S. Publication No. 2016/0209944 to Shim et al. (Shim).
As to claim 1, Gray discloses a method for use in a touch-sensitive panel, the method comprising:
generating electric fields by applying drive signals to a plurality of row electrodes and a plurality of column electrodes included in the touch-sensitive panel(Fig. 1, 3; Para. 0073, electric field; Para. 0100, sensors, 30);
sensing at least one information signal capacitively coupled to the touch-sensitive panel by detecting impedance changes associated with the plurality of row electrodes and the plurality of column electrodes (Fig. 14; Para. 0164, the e-pen #1 transmits the first pen signal that is capacitively coupled via capacitive coupling (CC) to the one or more touch sensors 1410; Para. 0101, 0135, impedance changes);
converting the impedance changes to received data (Fig. 3, 14; Para. 0095-0098, processing module, 42; Para. 0164, processing module, 1430; Para. 0087, computing device 12-1 interprets the representative signals);
Gray does not expressly determining, based on the received data, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal; and associating the transmission pattern with an access code.
Shim teaches determining, based on the received data, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal); and
associating the transmission pattern with an access code(Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Gray to include the transmission pattern of Shim because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the method of Gray as modified by the transmission pattern of Shim can yield a predictable result of a method for simultaneously detecting positions of various types of the stylus pens regardless of the types of the stylus pens. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the method of Gray the ability to use the transmission pattern of Shim since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 2, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray does not expressly disclose wherein associating the transmission pattern with an access code includes: determining that the transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal includes a pattern of repeating frequencies; and matching the pattern of repeating frequencies to a predetermined pattern of repeating frequencies associated with the access code.
Shim discloses determining that the transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal includes a pattern of repeating frequencies (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal); and
matching the pattern of repeating frequencies to a known pattern of repeating frequencies associated with the identification code (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal). This combination is obvious to one skilled in the art for at least the reasons set forth in claim 1.
As to claim 3, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray discloses wherein associating the transmission pattern with an access code includes:
determining that the transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal includes a pattern of signal amplitudes associated with one or more frequencies Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph); and
matching the pattern of the signal amplitudes to a predetermined pattern of signal amplitudes associated with the access code (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph).
As to claim 7, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray discloses wherein determining a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal includes:
determining, based on the received data, a number of frequencies included in the at least one information signal (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal); and
determining the transmission pattern based, at least in part, on the number of frequencies included in the at least one information signal (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal).
As to claim 10, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray discloses wherein generating electric fields by applying drive signals to a plurality of row electrodes and a plurality of column electrodes includes varying oscillating components of the drive signals applied to particular electrodes (Para. 0131-0136, 0143-0144, oscillating component).
As to claim 11, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray discloses wherein generating electric fields by applying drive signals to a plurality of row electrodes and a plurality of column electrodes includes varying an order in which the drive signals are applied to particular electrodes (Fig. 29; Para. 0252-0255, operations of the steps 2910 and 2920 may be operated independently with respect one another and/or simultaneously).
As to claim 12, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1. Gray does not expressly disclose further comprising: determining, based on the impedance changes, at least two of the following transmission pattern types: a timing pattern, a frequency pattern, an amplitude pattern, or a spatial pattern; and associating the transmission pattern with the access code based on a combination of at least two transmission pattern types.
Shim discloses determining, based on the impedance changes, at least two of the following transmission pattern types: a timing pattern , a frequency pattern, an amplitude pattern, or a spatial pattern (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph); and
associating the transmission pattern with the access code based on a combination of at least two transmission pattern types (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph). This combination is obvious to one skilled in the art for at least the reasons set forth in claim 1.
As to claim 13, Gray discloses a touch-sensitive panel, comprising:
a plurality of row electrodes (Fig. 3; Para. 0100, touch screen display, 80; Fig. 24; Para. 0235, row 1);
a plurality of column electrodes (Fig. 3; Para. 0100, touch screen display, 80; Fig. 24; Para. 0235, col 1);
a plurality of drive-sense circuits coupled to the plurality of row electrodes and the plurality of column electrodes (Fig. 3, 24; Para. 0100-0104, drive-sense circuit, DSC), and configured to sense at least one information signal capacitively coupled to the touch-sensitive panel by detecting impedance changes associated with the plurality of row electrodes and the plurality of column electrodes (Fig. 14; Para. 0164, the e-pen #1 transmits the first pen signal that is capacitively coupled via capacitive coupling (CC) to the one or more touch sensors 1410);
a processing module coupled to the plurality of drive-sense circuits via the plurality of [analog-to-digital] converters (Fig. 3, 14; Para. 0095-0098, processing module, 42; Para. 0164, processing module, 1430; Para. 0087, computing device 12-1 interprets the representative signals).
Gray does not expressly disclose a plurality of analog-to-digital converters coupled to outputs of the drive-sense circuits; convert the impedance changes to received data; determine, based on the received data, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal; and associating the transmission pattern with an access code.
Shim teaches a plurality of analog-to-digital converters coupled to outputs of the drive-sense circuits (Fig. 5, 6, 9; Para. 0132, 0135, ADC, 123);
convert the impedance changes to received data (Fig. 5, 6, 9; Para. 0132, 0135, ADC, 123, may convert the amplified response signal to a digital signal);
determine, based on the received data, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal); and
associating the transmission pattern with an access code (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Gray to include the transmission pattern of Shim because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the method of Gray as modified by the transmission pattern of Shim can yield a predictable result of a method for simultaneously detecting positions of various types of the stylus pens regardless of the types of the stylus pens. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the method of Gray the ability to use the transmission pattern of Shim since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 14, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 13. Gray does not expressly disclose touch-sensitive panel of claim 13, wherein the processing module is further configured to: determine, based on the received data, one or more transmission patterns associated with the at least one information signal, wherein the one or more transmission patterns are selected from the group of transmission patterns consisting of a timing pattern, a frequency pattern, an amplitude pattern, and a spatial pattern; and determine that the one or more transmission patterns match the access code.
Shim discloses determine, based on the received data, one or more transmission patterns associated with the at least one information signal, wherein the one or more transmission patterns are selected from the group of transmission patterns consisting of a timing pattern, a frequency pattern, an amplitude pattern, and a spatial pattern (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph); and
determine that the one or more transmission patterns match the access code (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal; Specifically Fig. 8B with amplitude v. frequency graph). This combination is obvious to one skilled in the art for at least the reasons set forth in claim 13.
As to claim 18, Gray discloses a touch-sensitive panel comprising:
a processing module (Fig. 3, 14; Para. 0095-0098, processing module, 42; Para. 0164, processing module, 1430; Para. 0087, computing device 12-1 interprets the representative signals);
a plurality of electrodes including one or more row electrodes (Fig. 3; Para. 0100, touch screen display, 80; Fig. 24; Para. 0235, row 1), and one or more column electrodes (Fig. 3; Para. 0100, touch screen display, 80; Fig. 24; Para. 0235, row 1);
low voltage drive circuits (LVDCs) having inputs and outputs (Para. 0228, one or more drive-sense circuits (DSCs) with low-power mode), wherein the inputs are coupled to the plurality of electrodes (Fig. 3,5), and the outputs are coupled to the processing module (Fig. 3,5), and wherein individual LVDCs include at least one drive-sense circuit and at least one [analog-to-digital] converter (Fig. 3, 6, 13; Para. 0100-0104, drive-sense circuit, DSC) configured to:
sense at least one information signal capacitively coupled to the touch-sensitive panel by detecting impedance changes associated with the one or more row electrodes and one or more column electrodes (Fig. 14; Para. 0132, 0164, the e-pen #1 transmits the first pen signal that is capacitively coupled via capacitive coupling (CC) to the one or more touch sensors 1410);
generate sensed signals at outputs of the LVDCs based on the changes in the impedance (Para. 0132, The power signal change detection circuit 112 determines this change and generates a representative signal 120 of the change to the power signal);
the processing module Fig. 3, 14; Para. 0095-0098, processing module, 42; Para. 0164, processing module, 1430; Para. 0087, computing device 12-1 interprets the representative signals) configured to:
receive the sensed signals (Fig. 13, 14; Para. 0164, The one or more processing modules 1430 is configured to detect the first pen signal via one or more of the DSCs 28 that are coupled between the one or more processing modules 1430 and the one or more touch sensors 1410);
Gray does not expressly disclose analog-to-digital converters, determine, based on the sensed signals, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal; and determine that the transmission pattern corresponds to an access code.
Shim teaches analog-to-digital converters (Fig. 5, 6, 9; Para. 0132, 0135, ADC, 123);
determine, based on the sensed signals, a transmission pattern associated with the at least one information signal (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0162-0166, response signals received from the stylus pens 200-1, 200-2, 200-3, and 200-4 may have different frequencies, and the number of response signals included in the received signal and magnitudes of the response signals may be determined through frequency component analysis included in the received signal); and
determine that the transmission pattern corresponds to an access code (Fig. 8-11; Para. 0174-0175, touch panel 100 may identify the type of stylus pens on a current touch panel according to a frequency band in the detected response signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Gray to include the transmission pattern of Shim because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the method of Gray as modified by the transmission pattern of Shim can yield a predictable result of a method for simultaneously detecting positions of various types of the stylus pens regardless of the types of the stylus pens. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the method of Gray the ability to use the transmission pattern of Shim since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 20, Gray and Shim disclose touch-sensitive panel of claim 18. Gray discloses wherein processing module is further configured to associate the access code with a particular device or particular user (Fig. 14-20; Para. 0163-0180, user ore device can be identified).
Claim(s) 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gray and Shim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2020/0064941 to Chang et al. (Chang).
As to claims 8 and 15, Gray and Shim disclose the method of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose further comprising: determining, based on the transmission pattern, that the at least one information signal includes a modulated digital access code; and determining that the modulated digital access code matches the access code.
Chang teaches determining, based on the transmission pattern, that the at least one information signal includes a modulated digital access code (Para. 0510, modulating a data code of a smaller bandwidth into a PN code of a larger bandwidth); and
determining that the modulated digital access code matches the access code (Para. 0510, the bandwidth of the carrier signal after modulation matches or is similar to that of the PN code).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Gray and Shim to include the modulated carrier signal of Chang because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the method of Gray and Shim as modified by the modulated carrier signal of Chang can yield a predictable result of a method for simultaneously detecting positions of various types of the stylus pens regardless of the types of the stylus pens. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the method of Gray and Shim the ability to use the modulated carrier signal of Chang since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 9, 16, 17 and 19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lisa S Landis whose telephone number is (571)270-1061. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6.
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 at (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.
/LISA S LANDIS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2626