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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Long!, 759 F.2d 887,225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982);
In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 488, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). “Thus, the generic invention is ‘anticipated’ by the species of the patented invention’ and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 © or 1.321 (d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b)
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20, respectively, of US Patent US 12,321,519 B2.
Limitations of the present invention and corresponding US Patent US 12,321,519 B2 are listed in the following table for claim 1.
Claim 1 of Present Invention
Claim 1 of Patent No. US 12,321,519 B2
A touch panel, comprising:
A touch panel, comprising:
a touch structure;
a touch structure;
a tactile sensor stacked with the touch structure and configured to generate a standing wave on a surface of the touch panel during operation to realize tactile reproduction;
a tactile sensor stacked with the touch structure and configured to generate a standing wave on a surface of the touch panel during operation to realize tactile reproduction;
a first electrode layer located between the touch structure and the tactile sensor, wherein the first electrode layer is insulated from the tactile sensor and the touch structure, and the first electrode layer is grounded; and
a first electrode layer located between the touch structure and the tactile sensor, wherein the first electrode layer is insulated from the tactile sensor and the touch structure, and the first electrode layer is grounded;
a base substrate located between the touch structure and the tactile sensor.
wherein the tactile sensor comprises a third electrode layer, a piezoelectric layer and a fourth electrode layer stacked, the third electrode layer is close to a base substrate, and the piezoelectric layer comprises a plurality of independently arranged piezoelectric parts
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
The patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims,
respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2d 1869, “a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim’, In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, “Thus, the generic invention is ‘anticipated’ by the species of the patented invention” and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
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.
Claims 1 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 6739692 hereinafter JP 6739692) in view of Erdirin, Charles (CN 101825967 hereinafter Erdirin).
Referring to claim 1, JP 6739692 discloses a touch panel (tactile presentation touch display 1; Fig. 33-34), comprising:
a touch structure (See attachment highlighted section, display panel 300; Fig. 33-34);
tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34) stacked with the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and configured to generate a wave of the touch panel during operation to realize tactile reproduction (See attachment highlighted section; The tactile presentation control circuit 114 selects a tactile presentation signal waveform corresponding to the coordinates of the display screen and the tactile presentation knob 3 based on the input from the tactile formation condition conversion circuit 120. The “tactile presentation signal waveform” defines each waveform of the voltage signal Va and the voltage signal Vb. The difference in waveform between the voltage signal Va and the voltage signal Vb is typically the difference in frequency. The tactile presentation signal waveform is set inside or outside the tactile presentation control circuit 114. There may be one type of tactile presentation signal waveform or more than one type. When there is only one kind of tactile presentation signal waveform, the process of selecting the tactile presentation signal waveform is not necessary. When there are more than one type of tactile presentation signal waveform, the type of tactile presentation signal waveform is selected based on the input from the tactile sense formation condition conversion circuit 120.);
a first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as a first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) located between the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34), wherein the first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as the first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) is insulated (i.e. insulation substrates 101 and 201; Fig. 33-34) from the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34) and the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34), and the first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as the first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) is grounded (See attachment highlighted section; the potentials of the excitation electrode 202 and the detection electrode 203 of the touch panel 200 may be substantially constant potential, for example, the excitation electrode 202 and the detection electrode 203 may be connected to the ground potential with low impedance.); and
a base substrate (substrate 10a; Fig. 33-34) located between the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33) (substrate 10a is located between display panel 300 and tactile electrode 102).
However, JP 6739692 does not specifically disclose a standing wave on a surface.
In an analogous art, Erdirin discloses a standing wave on a surface ([0037]; Tactile sensor (such as a human finger) contacting with the surface of the elastic material 100 from the formed through standing wave pattern 102 in the elastic material 100 of elastic wave tactile interface 10 is tactile features to experience the tactile perception.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the technique of Erdirin to the system of JP 6739692 in order to generate tactile sensation using standing or travelling wave in the specific region of the elastic material of the elastic wave tactile interface, thus improve the user experience, wherein the haptic feedback is useful.
Referring to claim 19, JP 6739692 discloses a touch device (tactile presentation touch display 1; Fig. 33-34), comprising a touch panel (tactile presentation touch display panel 1; Fig. 33-34), the touch panel comprising:
a touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34);
a tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34) stacked with the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and configured to generate a wave of the touch panel during operation to realize tactile reproduction (See attachment highlighted section; The tactile presentation control circuit 114 selects a tactile presentation signal waveform corresponding to the coordinates of the display screen and the tactile presentation knob 3 based on the input from the tactile formation condition conversion circuit 120. The “tactile presentation signal waveform” defines each waveform of the voltage signal Va and the voltage signal Vb. The difference in waveform between the voltage signal Va and the voltage signal Vb is typically the difference in frequency. The tactile presentation signal waveform is set inside or outside the tactile presentation control circuit 114. There may be one type of tactile presentation signal waveform or more than one type. When there is only one kind of tactile presentation signal waveform, the process of selecting the tactile presentation signal waveform is not necessary. When there are more than one type of tactile presentation signal waveform, the type of tactile presentation signal waveform is selected based on the input from the tactile sense formation condition conversion circuit 120.);
a first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as a first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) located between the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34), wherein the first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as the first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) is insulated (i.e. insulation substrates 101 and 201; Fig. 33-34) from the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33-34) and the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34), and the first electrode layer (an excitation electrode 202 and a detection electrode 203 make up as the first electrode layer; Fig. 33-34) is grounded (See attachment highlighted section; the potentials of the excitation electrode 202 and the detection electrode 203 of the touch panel 200 may be substantially constant potential, for example, the excitation electrode 202 and the detection electrode 203 may be connected to the ground potential with low impedance.) and
a base substrate (substrate 10a; Fig. 33-34) located between the touch structure (display panel 300; Fig. 33-34) and the tactile sensor (tactile presentation panel 100 comprises a tactile electrode 102; Fig. 33) (substrate 10a is located between display panel 300 and tactile electrode 102).
However, JP 6739692 does not specifically disclose a standing wave on a surface.
In an analogous art, Erdirin discloses a standing wave on a surface ([0037]; Tactile sensor (such as a human finger) contacting with the surface of the elastic material 100 from the formed through standing wave pattern 102 in the elastic material 100 of elastic wave tactile interface 10 is tactile features to experience the tactile perception.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the technique of Erdirin to the system of JP 6739692 in order to generate tactile sensation using standing or travelling wave in the specific region of the elastic material of the elastic wave tactile interface, thus improve the user experience, wherein the haptic feedback is useful.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 6739692 hereinafter JP 6739692) in view of Erdirin, Charles (CN 101825967 hereinafter Erdirin), and Tanaka, Nobuhira (WO 2014/007088 hereinafter Tanaka).
Referring to claim 2, JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin as applied above does not specifically disclose wherein the base substrate is located between the tactile sensor and the first electrode layer.
In an analogous art, Tanaka discloses wherein the base substrate (base portion 110; Fig. 2) is located between the tactile sensor (121,122,123; Fig. 2) and the first electrode layer (conductive electrode plate 15; Fig. 2) (base portion 110 is between piezoelectric elements 121, 122, 123 and conductive electrode plate 15; Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the technique of Tanaka to the system of JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin in order to improve the stability and reliability of the piezoelectric.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 6739692 hereinafter JP 6739692) in view of Erdirin, Charles (CN 101825967 hereinafter Erdirin), Tanaka, Nobuhira (WO 2014007088 hereinafter Tanaka), and Maggiali et al. (WO 2014/001843 hereinafter Maggiali).
Referring to claim 3, JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin, and Tanaka as applied above does not specifically disclose further comprising a first connection layer located between the first electrode layer and the touch structure.
In an analogous art, Maggiali discloses further comprising a first connection layer (36; Fig. 3A) located between the first electrode layer (E layer; Fig. 3a) and the touch structure (30; Fig. 3a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the technique of Maggiali to the system of JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin, and Tanaka in order to provide a solution for the fabrication of a high-efficiency tactile control arrangement.
Referring to claim 10, JP 6739692 as modified by Maggiali discloses wherein a material of the first connection layer (Maggiali- adhesive material layer 36; Fig. 3a) comprises optical clear adhesive or optical clear resin (See Maggiali; highlighted section; The adhesive layers are formed from a film or deposition of thermoplastic polyurethane (hot melt) adhesive, for example, an ester and polyurethane composition having a thickness of about 100- 150 microns.).
However, Maggiali discloses the claimed invention except for “wherein a maximum thickness of the first connection layer in a range of 30 um to 50 um”. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to “wherein a maximum thickness of the first connection layer in a range of 30 um to 50 um”, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (JP 6739692 hereinafter JP 6739692) in view of Erdirin, Charles (CN 101825967 hereinafter Erdirin), and Maggiali et al. (WO 2014/001843 hereinafter Maggiali).
Referring to claim 4, JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin as applied above does not specifically disclose wherein the base substrate is located between the first electrode layer and the touch structure;
the touch panel further comprising a first insulating layer located between the tactile sensor and the first electrode layer;
the touch panel further comprising a first connection layer located between the base substrate and the touch structure.
In an analogous art, Maggiali discloses wherein the base substrate (34; Fig. 3a) is located between the first electrode layer (E electrode layer; Fig. 3a) and the touch structure (30; Fig. 3a);
the touch panel further comprising a first insulating layer (40; Fig. 3a) located between the tactile sensor (42; Fig. 3a) and the first electrode layer (E electrode layer; Fig. 3a);
the touch panel further comprising a first connection layer (36; Fig. 3a) located between the base substrate (34; Fig. 3a) and the touch structure (30; Fig. 3a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the technique of Maggiali to the system of JP 6739692 in view of Erdirin in order to provide a solution for the fabrication of a high-efficiency tactile control arrangement.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-9 and 11-18 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.
Referring to claim 5, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitation “further comprising a base substrate, wherein the touch structure, the tactile sensor and the first electrode layer are located on a same side of the base substrate;
the touch panel further comprising a first insulating layer located between the first electrode layer and the tactile sensor;
the touch panel further comprising a first connection layer located between the first electrode layer and the touch structure;
the touch panel further comprising a second electrode layer located on a side of the base substrate away from the first electrode layer, wherein the second electrode layer is grounded”.
Referring to claim 6, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitation “wherein the tactile sensor comprises a third electrode layer, a piezoelectric layer and a fourth electrode layer stacked, the third electrode layer is close to the base substrate, and the piezoelectric layer comprises a plurality of independently arranged piezoelectric parts; wherein:
the first electrode layer is designed as a whole surface”.
Referring to claims 9 and 11-18 are objected upon dependent claim 6.
Referring to claim 7, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitations “wherein the tactile sensor comprises a third electrode layer, a piezoelectric layer and a fourth electrode layer stacked, the third electrode layer is close to the base substrate, and the piezoelectric layer comprises a plurality of independently arranged piezoelectric parts; wherein:
the first electrode layer comprises a plurality of first electrodes arranged in one-to-one correspondence with the piezoelectric parts, and all of the first electrodes are electrically connected”.
Referring to claim 8, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitation “wherein a material of the first electrode layer comprises a transparent conductive material or a metal material;
wherein the transparent conductive material comprises at least one of indium tin oxide, indium zinc oxide or indium gallium zinc oxide;
wherein the metal material comprises at least one of platinum, copper or gold;
wherein when the material of the first electrode layer comprises the transparent conductive material, a film thickness of the transparent conductive material is in a range of 200nm to 500nm;
when the material of the first electrode layer comprises the metal material, a film thickness of the metal material is in a range of 100nm to 300nm”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT D AU whose telephone number is (571)272-5948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. General 8am-5pm.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
/SCOTT D AU/Examiner, Art Unit 2624