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 Amendment
1. Amendment filed on 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 8, and 13 have been amended and claim 9 has been canceled.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
3. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 8, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohamed et al (US 2021/0200349) in view of Park et al (US 2018/0253167).
As to claim 1, Mohamed teaches an indicated position detecting device for detecting a position indicated by an indicator, the indicated position detecting device comprising:
a first transmission circuit (driving channel 620a outputting transmission signal TXSa, Fig. 6, Fig. 3); and a second transmission circuit (driving channel 620b outputting transmission signal TXSb, Fig. 6, Fig. 3),
wherein the first transmission circuit (driving channel 620a, fig. 6), in operation, transmits a first transmission signal (signal TXSa, fig. 6) related to first processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator ([0076]),
wherein the second transmission circuit (driving channel 620b, fig. 6), in operation, transmits a second transmission signal (signal TXSb, Fig. 6) related to second processing different from the first processing ([0053] a plurality of driving signals TXS … may be separated through a demodulation process. The receiving circuit 124 may separate influences of a touch for the driving signals TXS by demodulating the response signal RXS received through the receiving electrode RXE),
wherein a waveform of the first transmission signal and a waveform of the second transmission signal are orthogonal to each other in a same period ([0054] Here, the driving signals TXS modulated to be orthogonal to each other may be driving signals respectively representing different codes… The respective driving signals TXS have codes orthogonal to each other and when multiplying two codes which are orthogonal to each other, the result may be 0), and
Mohamed does not teach wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer as claimed.
However, Park teaches wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer (as illustrated in fig. 8, the first waveform from VDRV1 has a wave number of zero, whereas the second waveform from VDRV2 has a wave number of one. Therefore, subtracting the wave number of VDR2 from that of VDR1 yields a value of -1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed to teach, wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer, as suggested by Park. The motivation would have been in order to provide “an exact position of the contact object ” ([0005]).
As to claim 2, Mohamed in view of Park teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal in the same period is a positive or negative integer (Park: as illustrated in fig. 8, the first waveform from VDRV1 has a wave number of zero, whereas the second waveform from VDRV2 has a wave number of one. Therefore, subtracting the wave number of VDR2 from that of VDR1 yields a value of -1).
As to claim 4, Mohamed in view of Park teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein a transmission period of the first transmission signal at least partially overlaps a transmission period of the second transmission signal (Mohamed: [0051] The driving circuit 122 may multi-drive a plurality of transmitting electrodes TXE. Here, multi-driving may mean simultaneously driving the plurality of transmitting electrodes TXE, fig. 3).
As to claim 5, Mohamed in view of Park teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein a start time point and an end time point of the transmission period of the first transmission signal (Mohamed: signal TXSa, fig. 3) are same as a start time point and an end time point of the transmission period of the second transmission signal (Mohamed: signal TXSb, Fig. 3).
As to claim 8, Mohamed teaches an indicated position detecting device for detecting a position indicated by an indicator, the indicated position detecting device comprising:
a first transmission circuit (driving channel 620a outputting transmission signal TXSa, Fig. 6, Fig. 3);
a second transmission circuit (driving channel 620b outputting transmission signal TXSb, Fig. 6, Fig. 3);
a first reception circuit (a readout circuit 222, and an analog-digital converter (ADC) 224 connected one of the receiving electrodes RXE, fig. 2); and
a second reception circuit (a readout circuit 222, and an analog-digital converter (ADC) 224 connected to another of the receiving electrodes RXE, fig. 2), wherein the first transmission circuit, in operation, transmits a first transmission signal (signal TXSa, fig. 6) related to first processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator ([0076]),
wherein the second transmission circuit (driving channel 620b, fig. 6), in operation, transmits a second transmission signal (signal TXSb, Fig. 6) related to second processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator ([0076]),
wherein the first reception circuit, in operation, receives a first reception signal related to the first processing (a readout circuit 222, and an analog-digital converter (ADC) 224 connected one of the receiving electrodes RXE, fig. 2 illustrates transmitting electrode, TXE through which signal TXSa is transmitted overlaps with the plurality of receiving electrodes RXE including one of the receiving electrodes RXE),
wherein the second reception circuit, in operation, receives a second reception signal related to the second processing (a readout circuit 222, and an analog-digital converter (ADC) 224 connected to another of the receiving electrodes RXE, fig. 2 illustrates transmitting electrode, TXE through which signal TXSb is transmitted overlaps with the plurality of receiving electrodes RXE including the other of the receiving electrodes RXE), and
wherein a waveform of the first reception signal and a waveform of the second reception signal are orthogonal to each other in a same period (as shown in fig. 3, the receiving signals have codes when multiplying two codes which are orthogonal to each other, the result may be 0), and
Mohamed does not teach wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second reception signal from a wave number of the first reception signal in the same period is a positive or negative integer as claimed.
However, Park teaches wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second reception signal from a wave number of the first reception signal in the same period is a positive or negative integer (as illustrated in fig. 8, the first waveform from VDRV1 has a wave number of zero, whereas the second waveform from VDRV2 has a wave number of one. Therefore, subtracting the wave number of VDR2 from that of VDR1 yields a value of -1. Examiner’s note: Since the transmitted signals are orthogonal to each other, the received signals also remain orthogonal to each other even though the signals are attenuated by the finger or stylus. Additionally, the wave numbers of the received signals remain the same as those of the corresponding transmitted signals).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed to teach, wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second reception signal from a wave number of the first reception signal in the same period is a positive or negative integer, as suggested by Park. The motivation would have been in order to provide “an exact position of the contact object ” ([0005]).
9. (Canceled)
As to claim 13, Mohamed teaches an indicated position detecting method for detecting a position indicated by an indicator, the indicated position detecting method comprising:
transmitting a first transmission signal (signal TXSa, fig. 6) related to first processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator ([0076]); and
transmitting a second transmission signal (signal TXSb, Fig. 6) related to second processing different from the first processing ([0053] a plurality of driving signals TXS … may be separated through a demodulation process. The receiving circuit 124 may separate influences of a touch for the driving signals TXS by demodulating the response signal RXS received through the receiving electrode RXE),
wherein a waveform of the first transmission signal and a waveform of the second transmission signal are orthogonal to each other in a same period ([0054] Here, the driving signals TXS modulated to be orthogonal to each other may be driving signals respectively representing different codes… The respective driving signals TXS have codes orthogonal to each other and when multiplying two codes which are orthogonal to each other, the result may be 0), and
Mohamed does not teach wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer as claimed.
However, Park teaches wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer (as illustrated in fig. 8, the first waveform from VDRV1 has a wave number of zero, whereas the second waveform from VDRV2 has a wave number of one. Therefore, subtracting the wave number of VDR2 from that of VDR1 yields a value of -1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed to teach, wherein a value obtained by subtracting a wave number of the second transmission signal from a wave number of the first transmission signal is a positive or negative integer, as suggested by Park. The motivation would have been in order to provide “an exact position of the contact object ” ([0005]).
4. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohamed et al (US 2021/0200349) in view of Park et al (US 2018/0253167) and further in view of Pai et al (US 2020/0150827).
As to claim 3, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
However, Pai teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein the first processing is processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator by an electromagnetic induction system, and the second processing is processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator by a capacitive system ([0016] which show a complex transparent touch sensor structure with both a capacitive touch sensor and an electromagnetic touch sensor, fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, detecting the position indicated by the indicator by using an electromagnetic induction system, as suggested by Pai. The motivation would have been in order to provide, “a transparent touch sensor using a transparent conductive film with low local impedance, which can decrease thickness of a transparent conductive film to increase transmittance and save material cost. Also, this can increase conductivity and signal transmission efficiency of a local area” ([0005]).
5. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohamed et al (US 2021/0200349) in view of Park et al (US 2018/0253167) and further in view of Yoshitomi et al (US 2023/0376128).
As to claim 6, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
However, Yoshitomi teaches the indicated position detecting device, further comprising: a display, wherein: the first processing is processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator on the display by an electromagnetic induction system ([0051] an electromagnetic induction type touch sensor and detects the position of the pen), and the second processing is processing of driving the display ([0220] the information processing system 100 (100a) may be so configured as to include a display device, fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, the first processing and the second processing, as suggested by Yoshitomi. The motivation would have been in order to improve user experience ([0012]).
6. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohamed et al (US 2021/0200349) in view of Park et al (US 2018/0253167) and further in view of Huang et al (US 2019/0384445).
As to claim 7, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
Huang teaches the indicated position detecting device further comprising: a display, wherein: the first processing is processing of detecting the position indicated by the indicator on the display by a capacitive system, and the second processing is processing of driving the display ([0124] Touch-display-integration may be implemented by time division multiplexing, Fig. 9 illustrates a display phase and touch phase in one frame).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, the capacitive system and the display, as suggested by Huang. The motivation would have been in order to reduce the cost, the volume and the weight of the display panel ([0008]).
7. Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohamed et al (US 2021/0200349) in view of Park et al (US 2018/0253167) and further in view of Reynolds et al (US 2017/0315662).
As to claim 10, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
However, Reynolds teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein the first reception circuit, in operation, receives the first reception signal in a transmission period of the second transmission signal ([0092] The sensor electrodes (e.g., sensor electrodes 304 or 414) and the force electrode(s) (e.g., force electrode 312 or 412) can be driven with orthogonal (e.g., approximately 90 degree out-of-phase) signals, [0071] quadrature demodulation of orthogonal waveforms can be used to obtain simultaneous and independent touch and force measurements. Examiner’s note: paragraphs [0071] and [0092] describe that orthogonal waveforms of received signals are generated while orthogonal signals of driven signals are transmitted).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, wherein the first reception circuit, in operation, receives the first reception signal in a transmission period of the second transmission signal, as suggested by Reynolds. The motivation would have been in order to improve “input device that allows differentiating between the touch and force signals” ([0005]).
As to claim 11, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
However, Reynolds teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein the second reception circuit, in operation, receives the second reception signal in a transmission period of the first transmission signal ([0092] The sensor electrodes (e.g., sensor electrodes 304 or 414) and the force electrode(s) (e.g., force electrode 312 or 412) can be driven with orthogonal (e.g., approximately 90 degree out-of-phase) signals, [0071] quadrature demodulation of orthogonal waveforms can be used to obtain simultaneous and independent touch and force measurements. Examiner’s note: paragraphs [0071] and [0092] describe that orthogonal waveforms of received signals are generated while orthogonal signals of driven signals are transmitted).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, wherein the second reception circuit, in operation, receives the second reception signal in a transmission period of the first transmission signal, as suggested by Reynolds. The motivation would have been in order to improve “input device that allows differentiating between the touch and force signals” ([0005]).
As to claim 12, Mohamed in view of Park do not teach the indicated position detecting device as claimed.
However, Reynolds teaches the indicated position detecting device, wherein a guard interval is provided between a reception period of the first reception signal and a reception period of the second reception signal ([0071] quadrature demodulation of orthogonal waveforms can be used to obtain simultaneous and independent touch and force measurements. Examiner’s note: paragraph [0071] describes that the received waveforms are out-of- phase with each other).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Mohamed in view of Park to teach, wherein a guard interval is provided between a reception period of the first reception signal and a reception period of the second reception signal, as suggested by Reynolds. The motivation would have been in order to improve “input device that allows differentiating between the touch and force signals” ([0005]).
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 AMEN W BOGALE whose telephone number is (571)270-1579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:AM-6:PM.
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, Nitin Patel can be reached at (571)272-7677. 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.
/AMEN W BOGALE/Examiner, Art Unit 2628
/NITIN PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights