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 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant argues on pg. 6:
“The Office is understood to the assert that the touch panel scanning voltage (Vstc) disclosed by Tsuyuzaki corresponds to the "transmission signal" recited in claim 1. Nothing has been found, or pointed to, in Tsuyuzaki which teaches or suggests that the touch panel scanning voltage (Vstc) is transmitted to a position indicator…”
Examiner responds that Tsuyuzaki shows that the touch panel scanning voltage is used to determine a touch position of a finger (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76). In other words, the touch panel scanning voltage is transmitted directly to at least the counter electrode 21 (para. 52), and at least indirectly to the detection electrode 31 (paras. 52 and 55 – 57) and the finger (para. 76), each of which can be considered as s “position indicator” as claimed. Therefore the argument is rendered unpersuasive.
Applicant continues on pg. 6:
“…Much less does Tsuyuzaki teach or suggest that a resonance signal is received from a position indicator that received the touch panel scanning voltage (Vstc) and/or that a position of a position indicator on a display device is detected based on such a resonance signal received from the position indicator. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the touch panel scanning voltage (Vstc) disclosed by Tsuyuzaki does correspond to the "transmission signal" recited in claim 1, as amended herein. Nothing has been found, or pointed to, in Tsuyuzaki and Jeon which teaches or suggests that output of a horizontal synchronization signal is controlled such that a frequency of the horizontal synchronization signal is different from an integer multiple of a frequency of a transmission signal transmitted by an electromagnetic resonance sensor, which detects a position of a position indicator that received the transmission signal on a display device based on a resonance signal received from the position indicator.”
Examiner responds that the rejection does not rely on Tsuyuzaki to show the reception of a resonance signal, but rather that it would have been obvious to incorporate such a teaching into the device described in Tsuyuzaki (see rationale below). Therefore the argument is rendered unpersuasive.
Applicant continues on pg. 7:
“In addition, Applicant respectfully submits that, even if Tsuyuzaki were combined with Jeon, as proposed in the Office Action, the resulting combination would merely suggest structural integration, as taught by Jeon, and timing offset adjustment, as taught by Tsuyuzaki. Applicant respectfully submits that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify a display timing controller to deliberately select a frequency of a horizontal synchronization signal that is non-harmonically related to a frequency of a transmission signal transmitted by an electromagnetic resonance sensor. The display apparatus recited in claim 1 redesigns a conventional synchronization architecture and addresses interference at a system frequency planning level, which Applicant respectfully submits is neither disclosed nor suggested by the cited references. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the display apparatus recited in claim 1 is not a predictable variation of the cited references.”
Examiner responds that it is the examiner’s position that Tsuyuzaki details a methodology of intentionally adjusting a transmission signal with respect to a horizontal synchronization signal so as to improve fidelity/functionality of a sensing function (para. 114, for example). It is the Examiner’s position that incorporating Jeon’s electromagnetic resonance-type sensing methodology to this process would have been an obvious alternative to Tsuyuzaki’s capacitance-type sensing methodology (see rationale below). Therefore the argument is rendered unpersuasive.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuyuzaki et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0268796 A1) in view of Jeon et al. (US Pub. No. 2015/0220192 A1).
As to claim 1, Tsuyuzaki shows a display apparatus (Fig. 1 and para. 46), comprising: a display device including a plurality of image elements (i.e. pixels, for example, Fig. 3 and para. 55); a position detector (106/105, Fig. 4 and para. 59) that, in operation, transmits a transmission signal (i.e. scanning voltage Vstc, Figs. 4 and 12 and paras. 68 and 107) from the position detector to a position indicator (i.e. detection electrode 31/finger, Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76), receives a signal from the position indicator that received the transmission signal (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76) and detects a position of a position indicator (i.e. finger 502, for example) on the display device based on the signal received from the position indicator (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76); and a controller (sequencer 102) that, in operation, controls transmission of the transmission signal from the position detector and output of a horizontal synchronization signal (Hsync) to the image elements (Fig. 4 and para. 72), wherein the controller, in operation, controls the output of the horizontal synchronization signal such that a frequency of the horizontal synchronization signal is different from an integer multiple of a frequency of the transmission signal (Figs. 12 and 13 and paras. 99 – 111).
Tsuyuzaki does not show that the position detector includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor.
Jeon shows that a position detector (digitizer 50) includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor (para. 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Tsuyuzaki with those of Jeon because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced simplicity and reduced thickness (para. 41).
As to claim 2, Tsuyuzaki shows that the controller, in operation, controls the output of the horizontal synchronization signal such that the horizontal synchronization signal is output at a timing at which a potential of the transmission signal either rises or falls (Figs. 12 and 13).
As to claim 4, Tsuyuzaki shows a display apparatus (Fig. 1 and para. 46) comprising: a display device including a plurality of image elements (i.e. pixels, for example, Fig. 3 and para. 55); a position detector (106/105, Fig. 4 and para. 59) that, in operation, transmits a transmission signal (i.e. scanning voltage Vstc, Figs. 4 and 12 and paras. 68 and 107) from the position detector to a position indicator (i.e. detection electrode 31/finger, Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76), receives a signal from the position indicator that received the transmission signal (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76) and detects a position of a position indicator (i.e. finger 502, for example) on the display device based on the signal received from the position indicator (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76); and a sensor controller including a transmission circuit (103, Fig. 4 and para. 64) that, in operation, generates a transmission signal (i.e. scanning voltage Vstc, Figs. 4 and 12 and paras. 68 and 107) and a timing adjustment circuit (i.e. sequencer 102) that, in operation, outputs a horizontal synchronization signal (Hsync) supplied to the image elements (Fig. 4 and para. 72), wherein the timing adjustment circuit, in operation, adjusts a frequency of the horizontal synchronization signal to a frequency different from an integer multiple of a frequency of the transmission signal, and outputs the horizontal synchronization signal with the frequency adjusted (Figs. 12 and 13 and paras. 99 – 111).
Tsuyuzaki does not show that the image elements each receive a common potential and an individual potential, or that that the position detector includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor.
Jeon shows that image elements (i.e. pixels) each receive a common potential and an individual potential (i.e. data voltage, paras. 32 and 33), and that a position detector (digitizer 50) includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor (para. 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Tsuyuzaki with those of Jeon because designing the system in this way allows the device to control light transmittance (para. 33), and also allows the device to exhibit enhanced simplicity and reduced thickness (para. 41).
As to claim 5, Tsuyuzaki shows that the timing adjustment circuit, in operation, starts the output of the horizontal synchronization signal at a timing at which a potential of the transmission signal either rises or falls (Figs. 12 and 13).
As to claim 7, Tsuyuzaki shows a controller board for use with a display device (Figs. 1 – 3 and paras. 46 and 47), the controller board comprising: a position detector (106/105, Fig. 4 and para. 59) that, in operation, transmits a transmission signal (i.e. scanning voltage Vstc, Figs. 4 and 12 and paras. 68 and 107) from the position detector to a position indicator (i.e. detection electrode 31/finger, Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76), receives a signal from the position indicator that received the transmission signal (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76) and detects a position of a position indicator (i.e. finger 502, for example) on the display device based on the signal received from the position indicator (Fig. 3 and paras. 52 and 55 – 57 and 76); a clock generation circuit that, in operation, generates a clock signal (inherently the case in any electronic device controlled by various CPUs/processors); a timing adjustment circuit (sequencer 102) that, in operation, outputs a horizontal synchronization signal (Hsync) to the display device (Fig. 4 and para. 72), wherein the timing adjustment circuit, in operation, adjusts a frequency of the horizontal synchronization signal to a frequency different from an integer multiple of a frequency of the transmission signal, and outputs the horizontal synchronization signal with the frequency adjusted (Figs. 12 and 13 and paras. 99 – 111).
Tsuyuzaki does not show that the position detector includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor.
Jeon shows that a position detector (digitizer 50) includes an electromagnetic resonance sensor (para. 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Tsuyuzaki with those of Jeon because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced simplicity and reduced thickness (para. 41).
As to claim 8, Tsuyuzaki shows that the timing adjustment circuit, in operation, starts output of the horizontal synchronization signal at a timing at which a potential of the transmission signal either rises or falls (Figs. 12 and 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Tsuyuzaki with those of Jeon because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced simplicity and reduced thickness (para. 41).
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 CARL ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM 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, 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.
/CARL ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2627