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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/3/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues at pages 6-7 that “Sagawai does not teach detecting a change in the combined capacitance of the capacitance of the conductor and the capacitance of the sensor electrode as a change in the capacitance of the sensor electrode, as required by Applicant’s claim 1. Specifically, Sagawai does not teach detecting a change in both electrodes 4A and 6A”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As explained in paragraph 24 of Sagawai in connection with its arrangement of Figs. 1-2:
[0024] Since the second sensor electrodes 6 are disposed in this way, the first sensor electrodes 4 and the corresponding second sensor electrodes 6 are capacitively coupled. As a result, when the operation body approaches one of the second sensor electrodes 6, an electrostatic capacitance C of one of the first sensor electrode 4 corresponding to the second sensor electrode 6 approached by the operation body is changed. Therefore, the detection circuit 5 may detect the approach of the operation body to the second sensor electrode 6 based on the electrostatic capacitance C. When the operation body approaches the second sensor electrode 6A, for example, an electrostatic capacitance Ca of the first sensor electrode 4A corresponding to the second sensor electrode 6A is changed, and therefore, the detection circuit 5 may detect the approach of the operation body to the second sensor electrode 6A based on the electrostatic capacitance Ca.
At least in view of this disclosure of Sagawai, the examiner maintains that the electrostatic capacitance of first sensor electrode 4A measured by detection circuit 5 as the operation body approaches the second sensor electrode 6A in Fig. 2 will be the capacitance between the operation body and second sensor electrode 6A combined (in series) with the capacitance between the second sensor electrode 6A and the first sensor electrode 4A. For reference, the examiner notes that this same principle is disclosed in US 2011/0182458 to Rosener et al. cited but not relied upon in the previous Office action. See, e.g., Rosener, Fig. 2 and paragraphs 36-38 discussing “floating electrode” arrangement, which the examiner notes is identical to that of Sagawai.
Applicant argues at page 7 “Sagawai does not disclose the structural configuration of Applicant’s claimed invention, namely the sensor electrode is configured on an upper surface of the printed circuit board, and the detection device, including the detection part, is configured on a side of the printed circuit board that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board” (emphasis in original). The examiner notes that these limitations were added by amendment of the claim language, but applicant’s remarks do not appear to identify where support for the added limitations is found in the originally-filed disclosure. The examiner notes that Figs. 13-14 and paragraphs 124-125 of the published application (US 2025/0260401) disclose a printed circuit board 63 having sensor electrodes 2 configured on an upper surface of the printed circuit board 63 and that detection device 4 is connected to the sensor electrodes 2 through conductors that pass from a bottom surface of the printed circuit board 63 that is opposite the upper surface. Figs. 13-14 and paragraphs 124-125 do not disclose that the detection device 4 is mounted on or otherwise physically attached to the bottom surface of the printed circuit board 63. No other portion of the originally-filed disclosure appears to discloses an arrangement in which a sensor electrode is configured on an upper surface of a printed circuit board and a detection device is mounted/attached to an opposite side the printed circuit board. Therefore, to the extent that applicant intends the language “configured on a side of the printed circuit board that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board” to require mounting/attachment to the opposite side, such an interpretation does not appear to find support in the originally-filed disclosure. For purposes of the present examination, the language “the detection device, including the detection part, is configured on a side of the printed circuit board that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board” is construed to mean that the detection device, including the detection part, is connected to a side of the printed circuit board that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board. Under this interpretation, the examiner notes that Sagawai discloses in paragraph 20 in connection with Figs. 1-2:
[0020] The substrate 3 is a printed board, such as a rigid substrate or a flexible substrate and constitutes the touch sensor 7 along with the first sensor electrodes 4 and the detection circuit 5. The substrate 3 is supported by the support 2 so as to face the top plate of the case 1. Although not illustrated, a wiring pattern which connects the first sensor electrode 4 to the detection circuit 5 is formed on an upper surface and a lower surface of the substrate 3. Furthermore, although the substrate 3 has a rectangle shape in the example of FIGS. 1 and 2 in a plan view, the present invention is not limited to this.
(emphasis added).
Accordingly, Sagawai discloses that the detection device (detection circuit 5), including the detection part (measurement section 51), is connected to a side of the printed circuit board 3 that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board on which first sensor electrode 4A is connected.
Although not presently relied upon in connection with the prior art rejection of claim 1, the examiner notes that US 2010/0259283 to Togura et al. discloses a detection device (C-V conversion circuit 21) configured on a side opposite a side on which a sensor electrode (sensor electrode 11) is configured (see Togura, e.g., Fig. 2).
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 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.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0264716 to Sagawai (Sagawai) in view of US 2019/0212358 to Oshima et al. (Oshima).
Regarding claim 1, Sagawai discloses an electrostatic capacitance sensor comprising a sensor electrode, a detection device for detecting a contact or approach action of a detectable object with respect to a detection region based on a change in the capacitance of the sensor electrode, and a printed circuit board (Sagawai, e.g., Figs. 2-4 and paragraphs 14-39; in Fig. 2 (duplicated below), for example, electrostatic capacitance sensor in the form of input device 100 that includes a sensor electrode in the form of first sensor electrode 4A on substrate 3 (printed circuit board, see, e.g., paragraph 20) and a detection device in the form of detection circuit 5 for detecting a contact or approach action of a detectable object with respect to a detection region (see, e.g., paragraph 14) based on a change in the capacitance of the sensor electrode (see, e.g., Fig. 4 and paragraphs 30-36, steps S101-S106); in Fig. 2 of Sagawai, the detection region is regarded as the space directly above second sensor electrode 6A disposed above corresponding first sensor electrode 4A; see paragraph 23, first sentence; also see Fig. 5 (duplicated below) and paragraph 40 showing identical detection region),
the electrostatic capacitance sensor comprising a conductor provided in the detection region (Sagawai, e.g., Figs. 2-4 and paragraphs 14-39; in Fig. 2, for example, conductor in the form of second sensor electrode 6A disposed above corresponding first sensor electrode 4A; also see Fig. 5 and paragraph 40, second sensor electrode 6A),
the conductor being disposed opposite to the sensor electrode with a gap therebetween or with a dielectric interposed therebetween (see Sagawai as applied above, noting spatial relationship between second sensor electrode 6A disposed above corresponding first sensor electrode 4A in Figs. 2 and 5; note in Fig. 2 that a gap is present between electrodes 4A/6A, and in Fig. 5 both a gap and a dielectric in the form of case 12 are present between electrodes 4A/6A; the examiner notes that the portion of case 12 on which second sensor electrode 6A is disposed necessarily is, or necessarily includes, an electrical insulator),
the area of the conductor, as viewed from a direction in which the sensor electrode and the conductor face each other, being larger than the area of the sensor electrode, and a part of the conductor facing the sensor electrode (Sagawai, e.g., paragraph 25, second sensor electrodes 6 are preferably formed larger than the first sensor electrodes 4; note that in both Figs. 2 and 5 of Sagawai that a part of second sensor electrode 6A faces the first sensor electrode 4A),
the detection device comprising a detection part for detecting a change in the combined capacitance of the capacitance of the conductor and the capacitance of the sensor electrode as a change in the capacitance of the sensor electrode, and a control part (Sagawai, e.g., Figs. 2-4 and paragraphs 14-39; see Fig. 3 (duplicated below) and paragraphs 28-29 in particular, detection part in the form of measurement section 51 measures electrostatic capacitances C of the individual first sensor electrodes 4 and control part in the form of determination section 52 that determines whether the operation body has approached one of the second sensor electrodes 6 based on the electrostatic capacitances C supplied from the measurement section 51),
the detection part comprising or converting the change in capacitance into and the control part being configured to detect the contact or approach action of the detectable object with respect to the detection region based on output from the detection part (see Sagawai, e.g., Fig. 3 and paragraphs 28-29 as discussed above; also see Fig. 4 and paragraphs 30-36, steps S101-S106),
the sensor electrode is configured on an upper surface of the printed circuit board (see Sagawai as applied above, e.g., Fig. 2, noting that first sensor electrode 4A is connected to top or printed circuit board ), and
the detection device, including the detection part, is configured on a side of the printed circuit board that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board (see Response to Arguments above; also see Fig. 2 and paragraph 20 of Sagawai, a wiring pattern which connects the first sensor electrode 4 to the detection circuit 5 is formed on an upper surface and a lower surface of the substrate 3; Sagawai therefore discloses that the detection device (detection circuit 5), including the detection part (measurement section 51), is connected to a side of the printed circuit board 3 that is opposite to the upper surface of the printed circuit board on which first sensor electrode 4A is connected).
PNG
media_image1.png
852
547
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sagawai discloses that a method for measuring the electrostatic capacitances C may be arbitrarily selected, and that the measurement section 51 is constituted by, for example, a general circuit which measures a CR charging/discharging time, a circuit which transfers charged electric charge to a general capacitor, a circuit which measures an impedance, a circuit which is included in an oscillation circuit and which measures an oscillation frequency, and the like (Sagawai, e.g., paragraph 28). Sagawai is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing that circuitry of the detection part in the form of measurement section 51 includes a CV amplifier for converting the change in capacitance into a change in voltage, and that the detection signal received by the control part in the form of determination section 52 is a detection signal corresponding to the change in voltage. Oshima discloses the use of a CV amplifier for converting a change in capacitance into a change in voltage (Oshima, e.g., paragraph 31). It 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 to modify Sagawai such that circuitry of the detection part in the form of measurement section 51 includes a CV amplifier for converting the change in capacitance into a change in voltage, and that the detection signal received by the control part in the form of determination section 52 is a detection signal corresponding to the change in voltage. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Oshima, changes in capacitance can be converted into a change of voltage suitable for processing/analysis by subsequent stages of circuitry.
Regarding claim 2, Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1 discloses wherein the conductor is provided over the entire detection region (see Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1, in Fig. 2 of Sagawai, the detection region is regarded as the space directly above second sensor electrode 6A disposed above corresponding first sensor electrode 4A; see paragraph 23, first sentence; also see Fig. 5 and paragraph 40 showing identical detection region; Sagawai’s second sensor electrode 6A therefore is provided over the entire detection region).
Regarding claim 3, Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1 discloses wherein the conductor is composed of any of conductive ink, a conductive resin, a metal film, a metal sheet, a metal plate, a metal mesh, a conductive woven fabric, a conductive knitted fabric, and a conductive non-woven fabric (see Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1, e.g., Sagawai, paragraph 23, second sensor electrodes 6 correspond to a sensing area for detecting approach of the operation body, is disposed in an inner surface of the case 1 (a lower surface of the top plate), and is formed of a metallic foil (such as a copper foil), a metallic plate, or plating)).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sagawai in view of Oshima, or alternatively, over Sagawai in view of Oshima and further in view of US 2011/0175671 to Reynolds (Reynolds), or alternatively, over Sagawai in view of Oshima and Reynolds and further in view of US 2014/0047629 to Stauber et al. (Stauber).
Regarding claim 4, Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1 appears to disclose that the sensor electrode is fixed to a part of the conductor via the dielectric (see Sagawai in view of Oshima as applied to claim 1, Sagawai, Fig. 5, the portion of the case (dielectric) disposed between first sensor electrode 4A and second sensor electrode 6A serves to indirectly fix the first sensor electrode 4A to the second sensor electrode 6A). To the extent that the term “fixed” could be interpreted to require direct fixation, Reynolds relates to input devices, such as proximity sensor devices, that include a floating electrode that is ohmically insulated from other electrical elements during operation (Reynolds, Abstract). Reynolds discloses providing an insulating layer 213 between a floating electrode 201 and sensor electrodes 202 and 203 (Reynold, e.g., Fig. 2A and paragraph 41). In Reynolds arrangement of Fig. 2A, sensor electrodes 202 and 203 are directly fixed to a part of the floating electrode 201 via the insulating layer 213. It 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 to modify Sagawai in view of Oshima such that the sensor electrode is directly fixed to a part of the conductor via the dielectric. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Reynolds, ohmic insulation and transcapacitance between the electrodes may be provided.
Regarding the recitation wherein the detection region is a toilet seat, the conductor is provided on a back side of the toilet seat, the term “detection region” does not appear to affirmatively set forth a required element of the claimed electrostatic capacitance sensor. In particular, with respect to the claim 1 recitation a detection device for detecting a contact or approach action of a detectable object with respect to a detection region, the “detection region” appears to merely represent a region/space that is intended to be sensed by the electrostatic capacitance sensor (e.g., wherever the electrostatic capacitance sensor is placed for use). Claim 4 does not affirmatively set forth a toilet seat as an element of the claimed electrostatic capacitance sensor. Accordingly, the recitation wherein the detection region is a toilet seat, the conductor is provided on a back side of the toilet seat is regarded as merely setting forth a manner of using the claimed electrostatic capacitance sensor and therefore fails to patentably distinguish over Sagawai in view of Oshima and/or over Sagawai in view of Oshima and Reynolds.
For the sake of compact prosecution, even assuming arguendo that the language wherein the detection region is a toilet seat, the conductor is provided on a back side of the toilet seat could be regarded as carrying patentable weight, Stauber discloses use of a capacitive sensor having a detection region that is a toilet seat, with the capacitive sensor being provided on a back side of the toilet seat (Stauber, e.g., Fig. 7 and paragraph 48, seat object sensor 120, for detecting the presence or absence of an object adjacent the seat 14, is electrically coupled to the seat heating elements 118; also see paragraph 51, seat object sensor 120 is capable of sensing the presence, or absence, of an object that is located adjacent or near the seat 14 and is preferably a tuned capacitive sensor circuit that is operationally coupled to the logic controller 44; as an object encounters the seat 14, for example, the hand of a user, the capacitance of the seat object sensor 120 is altered; this change in capacitance is monitored by the logic controller 44 and used as an input to the programmed logic of the logic controller 44). It 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 to modify Sagawai in view of Oshima and Reynolds such that the detection region is a toilet seat, the conductor is provided on a back side of the toilet seat. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Stauber, detecting the presence or absence of an object adjacent the seat may be performed.
Claims 5-6 depend from claims 2-3, respectively, and each recites features identical to those of claim 4. Claims 5-6 are therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Sagawai in view of Oshima, or alternatively, over Sagawai in view of Oshima and Reynolds, or alternatively, over Sagawai in view of Oshima, Reynolds and Stauber, for the same reasons discussed above in connection with claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2010/0259283 to Togura relates to a capacitive proximity sensor and proximity sensing method for sensing proximity of a sense target such as a human body based on a variation in capacitance, see, e.g., Fig. 2.
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 DANIEL R MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1964. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863