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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on PCT applications filed in China on 11/14/2022 and 03/09/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of at least one PCT application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figures are not “grouped together and arranged on the sheet(s) without wasting space” as required by 37 CFR 1.84(h). The Examiner suggests rotating and/or enlarging some figures, or grouping several figures onto the same page, to use up more of the space available on each sheet.
Shading does not conform to the standards set forth in 37 CFR 1.84(m) which recites “shading in views is encouraged if it aids in understanding the invention and if it does not reduce legibility. ... Spaced lines for shading are preferred. These lines must be thin, as few in number as practicable, and they must contrast with the rest of the drawings. ... Solid black shading areas are not permitted, except when used to represent bar graphs or color.”
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claim 1 recites “receiving a downlink signal from an active stylus in the second long horizontal blanking phase to the mth long horizontal blanking phase” in the last 2 lines. It is unclear whether this limitation requires a downlink signal to occur in each and every long horizontal blanking phase or whether this limitation merely requires a downlink signal to occur once within a time range spanning 2nd to mth long horizontal blanking phases. For the purpose of applying prior art, this limitation is herein construed as requiring a downlink signal to occur once within a time range spanning 2nd to mth long horizontal blanking phases.
A similar recitation in independent claim 11 is similarly indefinite.
Independent claim 16 recites “the touch display” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. The Examiner suggests --device, comprising an active stylus and a touch display--.
A similar recitation in independent claim 17 is similarly indefinite.
Other rejected claims are indefinite by virtue of dependency from at least one indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung et al (US 20200201505 A1).
As recited in independent claim 16, Jung et al show a touch display device 10, comprising an active stylus 20 and a touch display 110 (to the extent understood), wherein: the touch display 110 is configured to transmit an uplink signal (“in the first LHB period LHB1 … the beacon, included in the uplink signal, may be transmitted from the panel 110 to the active pen 20” [0176]) in the first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1; the active stylus 20 is configured to transmit (“active pen 20 may output the downlink signal” [0181]) at least one downlink signal (“the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20” [0176]) in response to the uplink signal (“output the downlink signal … in response to the beacon” [0181]); and the touch display 110 is further configured to receive the at least one downlink signal (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16, the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20 may be detected. The detection of the downlink signal by the touch sensor may be referred to as "active pen sensing."” [0176]) in at least one long horizontal blanking phase (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16” [0176]) of a second long horizontal blanking phase LHB2 to an mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16.
As recited in independent claim 17, Jung et al show a control method of a touch display device 10, wherein the touch display device 10 comprises an active stylus 20 and a touch display 110, and the control method comprises: transmitting (“transmitted from the panel 110” [0176]), by the touch display 110 in a first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1, an uplink signal (“in the first LHB period LHB1 … the beacon, included in the uplink signal, may be transmitted from the panel 110” [0176]); receiving, by the active stylus 20, the uplink signal (“to the active pen 20” [0176]); and transmitting (“active pen 20 may output the downlink signal” [0181]), by the active stylus 20, a downlink signal (“the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20” [0176]) in response to the uplink signal (“output the downlink signal … in response to the beacon” [0181]) in at least one long horizontal blanking phase (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16” [0176]) of a second long horizontal blanking phase LHB2 to an mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16; and receiving (“detected” [0176]), by the touch display 110, the downlink signal (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16, the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20 may be detected. The detection of the downlink signal by the touch sensor may be referred to as "active pen sensing."” [0176]).
As recited in claim 18, Jung et al show that the first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1 to the mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16 have equal duration (see appearance of LHB1-LHB16 in Fig. 7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al (US 20200201505 A1) in view of Bae et al (US 20180113559 A1).
As recited in independent claim 1, Jung et al show a control method of a touch display, wherein displaying of the touch display comprises a plurality of frame periods (see plural display frames in Fig. 6, for example), each frame period comprises an effective operation interval (see DP1-DP16 and LHB1-LHB16 (TP1-TP16) in Fig. 7, for example), the effective operation interval comprises a plurality of display refresh phases (DP1-DP16, for example) and a plurality of long horizontal blanking phases (LHB1-LHB16 (TP1-TP16), for example) that are alternately arranged (see arrangement of periods in Fig. 7, for example), the plurality of long horizontal blanking phases comprise a first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1 to an mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16, and m>2 (insofar as 16>2); and the control method comprises: transmitting an uplink signal (“in the first LHB period LHB1 … the beacon, included in the uplink signal, may be transmitted from the panel 110 to the active pen 20” [0176]) in the first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1; and receiving a downlink signal (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16, the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20 may be detected. The detection of the downlink signal by the touch sensor may be referred to as "active pen sensing."” [0176]) from an active stylus 20 in (to the extent understood) the second long horizontal blanking phase LHB2 to the mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16.
As recited in independent claim 1, Jung et al are silent regarding a frame blanking interval.
As recited in independent claim 1, Bae et al show a frame blanking interval DMY.
Moreover, the Examiner finds that a frame blanking interval was predictable before the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to include a frame blanking interval in the frame of Jung et al as taught by Bae et al. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to save power as taught by Bae et al (“FIG. 33 is a view illustrating LHB driving for reducing power consumption in the touch system” [0105]; “Due to such dummy periods DMY, an effect of reducing power consumption may also be obtained (see FIG. 33)” [0172]).
As recited in independent claim 11, Jung et al show a touch display 110, wherein displaying of the touch display 110 comprises a plurality of frame periods (see plural display frames in Fig. 6, for example), each frame period comprises an effective operation interval (see DP1-DP16 and LHB1-LHB16 (TP1-TP16) in Fig. 7, for example), the effective operation interval comprises a plurality of display refresh phases (DP1-DP16, for example) and a plurality of long horizontal blanking phases (LHB1-LHB16 (TP1-TP16), for example) that are alternately arranged (see arrangement of periods in Fig. 7, for example), the plurality of long horizontal blanking phases comprise a first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1 to an mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16, and m>2 (insofar as 16>2); and the touch display 110 is configured to: transmit an uplink signal (“in the first LHB period LHB1 … the beacon, included in the uplink signal, may be transmitted from the panel 110 to the active pen 20” [0176]) in the first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1; and receive a downlink signal (“in the remaining fifteen LHB periods LHB2 to LHB16, the downlink signal transferred from the active pen 20 may be detected. The detection of the downlink signal by the touch sensor may be referred to as "active pen sensing."” [0176]) from an active stylus 20 in (to the extent understood) the second long horizontal blanking phase LHB2 to the mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB16.
As recited in independent claim 11, Jung et al are silent regarding a frame blanking interval.
See teachings, findings, and rationale above for independent claim 1.
As recited in claim 4, Jung et al is silent regarding whether duration of intervals between the plurality of long horizontal blanking phases remains unchanged in different time periods.
The law is replete with cases in which when the mere difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range, variable or other numeric limitation within the claims, patentability cannot be found.
It furthermore has been held in such a situation, the Applicant must show that the particular numeric range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In this case, the instant disclosure does not set forth evidence ascribing unexpected results due to the claimed numeric limitations. See Iron Grip Barbell Co., Inc. v. USA Sports, Inc., 392 F.3d 1317, 1322, 73 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The patent claim at issue was directed to a weight plate having 3 elongated openings that served as handles for transporting the weight plate. Multiple prior art patents each disclosed weight plates having 1, 2 or 4 elongated openings. 392 F.3d at 1319, 73 USPQ2d at 1226. The court stated that the claimed weight plate having 3 elongated openings fell within the "range" of the prior art and was thus presumed obvious. 392 F.3d at 1322, 73 USPQ2d at 1228.
Moreover, the Examiner finds that unchanged durations were predictable at the time of Applicant’s disclosure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s disclosure to include unchanged durations in the frames of Jung et al. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to leave durations unchanged in order to avoid noticeable flicker as was well known in the art.
As recited in claim 5, Jung et al show that in the frame period, the plurality of long horizontal blanking phases comprise at least three (insofar as 16>3) long horizontal blanking phases LHB1-LHB16, and any two adjacent long horizontal blanking phases have equal duration of interval (see appearance of LHB1-LHB16 in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 6: See teachings above for claim 18.
As recited in claim 7, Jung et al teach that the duration of the uplink signal is equal (“the first LHB period LHB1 may be an uplink signal output period” [0178]) to the duration of the first long horizontal blanking phase LHB1.
As recited in claim 8, Jung et al show performing, in the second long horizontal blanking phase LHB2 to the mth long horizontal blanking phase LHB 16, touching detection (“receive a sensing signal from one touch electrode TE to be sensed, from among the one or more touch electrodes TE … the sensing signal may be a sensing signal for detecting a finger touch or a downlink signal output from the active pen 20” [0198], insofar as “detecting a finger touch” is construed as touching detection) if the touch display does not receive the downlink signal (“the active pen sensing may be performed in the second, third, and fifth to seventh LHB periods LHB2, LHB3, and LHB5 to LHB7, while the finger sensing may be performed in the fourth and eight LHB periods LHB4 and LHB8” [0177], insofar as the touch display does not receive the downlink signal from the active pen during LHB4 nor LHB8).
As recited in claim 10, Jung et al shows performing display drive (“perform display driving to display an image during predetermined display driving periods DP” [0129]) in the display refresh phase (DP1-DP16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 9, 12-15, and 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julie Anne Watko whose telephone number is (571)272-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 9AM-5PM, Wednesday 10:30AM-5PM, Thursday-Friday 9AM-5PM, and occasional Saturdays.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
JULIE ANNE WATKO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Julie Anne Watko/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
12/20/2025