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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of information disclosure statement filed 12 August 2025.
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, 6 – 14, and 18 -20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jae Young LEE (Publication number: US 2017/0344141 A1), hereafter LEE, in view of Hotelling et al; (Publication number: US 2006/0097991 A1), hereafter Hotelling.
Regarding claim 1:
LEE discloses a force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module (LEE ABSTRACT: Figure 1) comprising:
a cover glass arranged on one side of a touch display module driven in a touch type to protect the touch display module (LEE Figure 1 substrate 10 comprises of glass; [0051][0065 – 0066]);
a touch pattern portion provided on one surface of the cover glass facing the touch display module, and having a touch pattern that transmits a touch input signal to the touch display module (LEE Figure 1 – touch pattern disposed on one side of substrate 10 include sensing electrodes 21 and 22; [0065]); and
a force pattern portion provided on one surface of the cover glass to be adjacent to the touch pattern portion, and having a force pattern that transmits a force input signal to the touch display module when a certain force is applied to the cover glass (LEE Figure 1 – force pattern 31 and 32 disposed on one side of substrate 10 and adjacent to sensing electrodes)
LEE does not disclose transmitting the touch input signal when a menu pattern on the cover class is touched and transmitting the force input when the certain force is applied same menu pattern on the cover glass.
However, Hotelling discloses a multipoint touchscreen. More particularly, Hotelling discloses selecting item from a menu with another finger (Hotelling [0053]) by a touch screen 70 configured to detect data indicative of a coordinate or location of each sensing point as well as pressure externed on each sensing point as determined by a processor 56 (Hotelling [0056]).
As such, it would have been obvious to modify LEE to include transmitting the touch input signal when a menu pattern on the cover class is touched and transmitting the force input when the certain force is applied same menu pattern on the cover glass, as claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate the ability to intuitively navigate a displayed graphical user interface.
Regarding claim 6:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 1, wherein the force pattern is arranged along an outer perimeter of the touch pattern (LEE Figure 3A – split electrodes 31, 32 are arranged on outer perimeter of each sensing electrode).
Regarding claim 7:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 6, wherein the force pattern has a loop shape with one side open (see shape of split electrodes 31, 32 illustrated in Figure 3A).
Regarding claim 8:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 1, wherein a gap is formed between the touch pattern and the force pattern to prevent the touch pattern and the force pattern from being connected to each other (LEE Figure 3A – see separation between sensing electrodes 21, 22 and split electrodes 31, 32 as illustrated).
Regarding claim 9:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 1, wherein the touch pattern the force pattern are integrally formed on the cover glass (LEE Figure 1 sensing electrodes 21, 22 and split electrodes 31, 32 are formed on substrate 10).
Regarding claim 10:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 9, wherein the touch pattern and the force pattern are formed on one surface of the cover glass in a single layer (LEE Figure 3F and 3G – illustrate 32 and 22 in same layer and 21 and 31 same layer) by a deposition process (Hotelling [0063]).
Regarding claim 11:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 1, wherein the cover glass comprises: a transparent window formed to be transparent while forming a center portion and exposing a part of the touch display module (see Hotelling Figure 19 area between mask 372); and an opaque window formed around the transparent window to be semi- transparent or opaque, in which the menu pattern includes a plurality of menu patterns (Hotelling Figure 19 mask 372; Hotelling [0053]).
Regarding claim 12:
Claim 12 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 1. Further claim 12 includes additional features related to a set case forming an exterior structure, and a touch-type display module coupled to the set case so as to be driven by touch (LEE [0002]).
.
.
Regarding claim 13:
LEE (in view of Hotelling ) discloses the display device of claim 12, wherein a module arrangement recess portion in which the touch display module is placed is formed inside the set case, and the touch display module and the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module are attached to each other via an optically clear adhesive (OCA) film (LEE [0002][0075] the touch screen panel is made of non-elastic rigid substrate such as glass, the touch pressure sensed by the capacitive method; see also Hotelling Claim 11 adhesive layer).
Regarding claim 14:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) discloses the display device of claim 12, wherein a conductive polymer unit is arranged between the set case and the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module (LEE [0002][0075]; Hotelling mask 372).
Regarding claim 18:
Claim 18 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 7.
Regarding claim 19:
Claim19 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claims 8 – 10.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 11.
Claim(s) 2- 5 and 15 - 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jae Young LEE (Publication number: US 2017/0344141 A1), hereafter LEE, in view of Hotelling et al; (Publication number: US 2006/0097991 A1), hereafter Hotelling, in view of OEM et al; (Publication number: US 2017/0024042 A1), hereafter OEM.
Regarding claim 2:
LEE (in view of Hotelling) does no disclose the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 1, further comprising a common flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) commonly connected to the touch pattern of the touch pattern portion and the force pattern of the force pattern portion, and commonly and selectively transmitting the touch input signal and the force input signal.
However, OEM discloses a touch panel for improving cross structure of sensing pattern. More particularly, OEM discloses a common flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) commonly connected to the touch pattern of the touch pattern portion and the force pattern of the force pattern portion (OEM Figure 2 300; [0070]), and commonly and selectively transmitting the touch input signal and the force input signal (OEM [0084]).
It would have been obvious to further modify LEE (in view of Hotelling) to include a common flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) commonly connected to the touch pattern of the touch pattern portion and the force pattern of the force pattern portion, and commonly and selectively transmitting the touch input signal and the force input signal, a claimed. Those skilled in the art would appreciate including an overlap area in an area outside the viewing area thereby improving wiring of sensing patterns on a substrate.
Regarding claim 3:
LEE (in view of Hotelling and OEM) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 2, wherein the common FPCB is provided to extend outside of the cover glass while being connected to the touch pattern and the force pattern (see OEM Figure 2; [0070][0084]).
Regarding claim 4:
LEE (in view of Hotelling and OEM) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 3, further comprising a controller (OEM Figure 1 400) connected to the common FPCB and configured to control execution of a corresponding menu pattern based on the touch input signal or the force input signal transmitted through the common FPCB (OEM [0070][0084]).
Regarding claim 5:
LEE (in view of Hotelling and OEM) discloses the force touch pattern-integrated cover glass module of claim 4, wherein, when the menu pattern is pressed and touched with a certain pressure, the controller controls the execution of a corresponding menu pattern by primarily driving the touch pattern of the touch pattern on the touch pattern portion and then secondarily driving the force pattern of the force pattern portion (OEM [0046] when touch input sensing is performed, a touch input in an outer area occurs relatively later than a touch input in the central area, the central area corresponds to a touch input at an initial time point, and the outer area corresponds to a touch input after the initial time point).
Regarding claim 15:
Claim 15 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 2.
Regarding claim 16:
Claim 16 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 4.
Regarding claim 17:
Claim 17 is similarly rejected for those reasons discussed above in claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIHIR K RAYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 - 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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.
/MIHIR K RAYAN/ 12 June 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights