DETAILED ACTIO
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
i. Claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manca (2021/0103360; cited in Applicant’s 24 July 2025 IDS) and Kim et al. (2025/0077021; hereinafter Kim; cited in Applicant’s 27 August 2025 IDS) in view of Leigh et al. (2020/0319737; hereinafter Leigh; this combination of references hereinafter referred to as MKL).
Regarding claim 1, Manca discloses an input device [0031], comprising:
a plurality of sensor electrodes (Figure 3), including transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) and receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17); and
a processing system (Figure 1: Comprising 110) configured to:
drive the transmitter electrodes (Figure 3: Comprising T1…T17) using multiple code-division-multiplexing (CDM) drive matrices [0050], wherein
at least one of the subsets of the transmitter electrodes is driven using a CDM drive matrix ([0050]: e.g. CDM7);
obtain resulting signals via the receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17) based on the transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) being driven [0041] with the multiple CDM drive matrices [0050];
decode the resulting signals, wherein decoding the resulting signals includes performing a signal level recovery process ([0050]: Original signal recovery); and
determine presence, location and/or motion of one or more input objects [0045] based on the decoded resulting signals [0052].
Manca does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes are driven with sensing signals at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies, wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses touch sensing [0002] wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes (Figures 9 – 11: Among TXL1…TXLm) are driven with sensing signals (Comprising MTDS1…MTDS4) at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies ([0118]: Signals’ periods1 either matching or comprising integer multiples of synchronization signal period), wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies (Drive signals of respective period duration [0118]2 each comprising matrix-based code [0121]). This is among measures implemented to increase the reliability of touch recognition [0167].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes are driven with sensing signals at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies, wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies, in view of the teaching of Kim, to increase the reliability of touch recognition.
Manca in view of Kim does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the drive matrix is non-square.
In the same field of endeavor, Leigh distinguishes among varied sources of input [0030] wherein the drive matrix is non-square [0102].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the drive matrix is non-square, in view of the teaching of Leigh, to distinguish among varied sources of input.
Regarding claim 3, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 1. Manca discloses the device wherein the multiple CDM drive matrices are zero-row-sum CDM drive matrices [0050].
Regarding claim 7, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 1. Manca discloses the device wherein performing the signal level recovery process comprises: for each respective receiver electrode, adding a signal level recovery value to each of a plurality of readings corresponding to the respective receiver electrode (Each electrode’s original signals recovered by raw signal deconvolution [0050] comprising adding the product of a weight and random variable [0092]).
Regarding claim 9, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 1. Manca discloses the device wherein decoding the resulting signals further includes: performing a CDM decoding process ([0048]: Decoded/deconvolved); and performing a display noise removal process ([0092]: Comprising introduced display noise weight).
Regarding claim 11, Manca discloses an input device [0031], comprising:
a plurality of sensor electrodes (Figure 3), including transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) and receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17); and
a processing system (Figure 1: Comprising 110) configured to:
drive the transmitter electrodes (Figure 3: Comprising T1…T17) using multiple code-division-multiplexing (CDM) drive matrices [0050], wherein
at least one of the subsets of the transmitter electrodes is driven using a CDM drive matrix ([0050]: e.g. CDM7);
obtain resulting signals via the receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17) based on the transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) being driven [0041] with the multiple CDM drive matrices [0050];
decode the resulting signals [0048]; and
determine presence, location and/or motion of one or more input objects [0045] based on the decoded resulting signals [0052].
Manca does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes are driven with sensing signals at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies, wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses touch sensing [0002] wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes (Figures 9 – 11: Among TXL1…TXLm) are driven with sensing signals (Comprising MTDS1…MTDS4) at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies ([0118]: Signals’ periods3 either matching or comprising integer multiples of synchronization signal period), wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies (Drive signals of respective period duration [0118]4 each comprising matrix-based code [0121]). This is among measures implemented to increase the reliability of touch recognition [0167].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the processing system is configured to drive the transmitter electrodes using multiple frequencies, wherein respective subsets of the transmitter electrodes are driven with sensing signals at respective frequencies of the multiple frequencies, wherein each of the multiple CDM drive matrices corresponds to a respective frequency of the multiple frequencies, in view of the teaching of Kim, to increase the reliability of touch recognition.
Manca in view of Kim does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the drive matrix is non-square.
In the same field of endeavor, Leigh distinguishes among varied sources of input [0030] wherein the drive matrix is non-square [0102].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the drive matrix is non-square, in view of the teaching of Leigh, to distinguish among varied sources of input.
ii. Claims 2, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MKL, as respectively applied to claims 1, 11 above, and further in view of Oda et al. (2010/0321314; hereinafter Oda; cited in Applicants 24 July 2025 IDS).
Regarding claim 2, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 1.
Manca does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the multiple frequencies include a first frequency corresponding to a first subset of transmitter electrodes and a second frequency corresponding to a second subset of transmitted electrodes.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses touch recognition [0006] wherein the multiple frequencies include a first frequency (Figure 8: Corresponding to e.g. MTD2) corresponding to a first subset of transmitter electrodes (Figures 9 – 11: Comprising TXL2, TXL6…TXL{m–2}) and a second frequency (Figure 8: Corresponding to e.g. MTD3) corresponding to a second subset of transmitted electrodes (Figures 9 – 11: Comprising TXL3, TXL7, TXL{m–1}). This is among measures implemented to increase the reliability of touch recognition [0167].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the multiple frequencies include a first frequency corresponding to a first subset of transmitter electrodes and a second frequency corresponding to a second subset of transmitted electrodes, in view of the teaching of Kim, to increase the reliability of touch recognition.
MKL does not explicitly discloses the device wherein the first subset of transmitter electrodes does not overlap with the second subset of transmitted electrodes, and wherein the first and second subsets of transmitted electrodes are driven simultaneously.
In the same field of endeavor, Oda discloses pointer detection [0003] wherein the first subset of transmitter electrodes (Figure 5: Comprising e.g. Y.sub.58; transmitting signal with frequency f.sub.14) does not overlap with the second subset of transmitted electrodes (Comprising e.g. Y.sub.2; transmitting signal with frequency f.sub.0), and wherein the first and second subsets of transmitted electrodes are driven simultaneously ([0155]: Each positioned with supplying order 3, within respective transmission blocks 25). This is among measures implemented to increase the speed of pointer detection [0016].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the first subset of transmitter electrodes does not overlap with the second subset of transmitted electrodes, and wherein the first and second subsets of transmitted electrodes are driven simultaneously, in view of the teaching of Oda, to increase pointer speed.
Input device claim 15 is rejected as reciting limitations similar to those recited in input device claim 2.
iii. Claims 16, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manca in view of Leigh.
Regarding claim 16, Manca discloses an input device [0031], comprising:
a plurality of sensor electrodes (Figure 3), including transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) and receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17); and
a processing system (Figure 1: Comprising 110) configured to:
drive the transmitter electrodes (Figure 3: Comprising T1…T17) using a code-division-multiplexing (CDM) drive matrix [0050];
obtain resulting signals via the receiver electrodes (Comprising R1…R17) based on the transmitter electrodes (Comprising T1…T17) being driven [0041] with the CDM drive matrix ([0050]: e.g. CDM7);
decode the resulting signals, wherein decoding the resulting signals includes performing a signal level recovery process ([0050]: Original signal recovery); and
determine presence, location and/or motion of one or more input objects [0045] based on the decoded resulting signals [0052].
Manca does not explicitly disclose the device wherein the drive matrix is non-square.
In the same field of endeavor, Leigh distinguishes among varied sources of input [0030] wherein the drive matrix is non-square [0102].
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention for the device of Manca to be modified wherein the drive matrix is non-square, in view of the teaching of Leigh, to distinguish among varied sources of input.
Regarding claim 17, Manca in view of Leigh discloses the input device according to claim 16. Manca discloses the device wherein performing the signal level recovery process comprises: for each respective receiver electrode, adding a signal level recovery value to each of a plurality of readings corresponding to the respective receiver electrode (Each electrode’s original signals recovered by raw signal deconvolution [0050] comprising adding the product of a weight and random variable [0092]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 – 6, 8, 10, 12 – 14, 18 – 20 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.
Regarding claim 4, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 1.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the device wherein a first CDM drive matrix of the multiple CDM drive matrices is a square CDM drive matrix, and a second CDM drive matrix of the multiple CDM drive matrices is a non-square CDM drive matrix having more rows than columns.
Thus, claim 4 is objected to.
Input device claims 5, 6 depend from and inherit the limitations of input device claim 4.
Thus, input device claims 5, 6 are objected to.
Regarding claim 8, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 7.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the device wherein the signal level recovery value corresponds to a value less than a median value of a set of readings corresponding to the respective receiver electrode.
Thus, claim 8 is objected to.
Regarding claim 10, MKL discloses the input device according to claim 9.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the device wherein the CDM decoding process includes applying, to the obtained resulting signals, a pseudo inverse matrix corresponding to the non-square CDM drive matrix, wherein the pseudo inverse matrix is configured such that multiplication of the pseudo inverse matrix with the non-square CDM drive matrix corresponds to an identity matrix.
Thus, claim 10 is objected to.
Input device claims 12 – 14 recite limitations similar to those recited in input device claims 4 – 6, respectively.
Thus, input device claims 12 – 14 are objected to.
Regarding claim 18, Manca in view of Leigh discloses the input device according to claim 17.
The cited prior art fails to singularly or collectively disclose the device wherein the signal level recovery value corresponds to a value less than a median value of a set of readings corresponding to the respective receiver electrode.
Thus, claim 18 is objected to.
Input device claims 19, 20 depend from and inherit limitations recited from input device claim 18.
Thus, input device claims 19, 20 are objected to.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aaron Midkiff whose telephone number is (571)270-5875. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at (571)272-7764. 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.
/AARON MIDKIFF/
Examiner, Art Unit 2621
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621
1 Frequency = inverse (Period).
2 Figure 8.
3 Frequency = inverse (Period).
4 Figure 8.
Prosecution Insights