DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
This action is in response to application Response to Election/Restriction for 19237012 filed on 04/21/2026. Claims 1-18 are presented for examination, of which claims 1, 2 and 5-15 are withdrawn from consideration.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18337043, filed on 07/25/2023.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 2 in the reply filed on 04/21/2026 is acknowledged.
Prior Art Rejections
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
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.
Claims 3, 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hung et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2011/0187672 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Hung teaches a touch device (Hung, Fig. 11, device comprising the touch display panel 30C), comprising:
a display panel (Hung, Fig. 11, touch display panel 30C), comprising a first substrate (Hung, Fig. 11, overcoat 42’), a second substrate (Hung, Fig. 11, lower glass substrate 48), a display medium layer (Hung, Fig. 11, display unit structure 46), and a color filter layer (Hung, Fig. 11, color filter 44), wherein the first substrate has a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface (Hung, Fig. 11, top and bottom surfaces of overcoat 42’);
a conductive layer, disposed on the first surface of the first substrate, wherein the conductive layer is a patterned electrode layer (Hung, Fig. 11, ITO1’ on top surface of overcoat 42’ and have a specific pattern);
wherein the display medium layer and the color filter layer are disposed between the second surface of the first substrate and the second substrate (Hung, Fig. 11, display unit structure between the bottom surface of overcoat 42’ and lower glass substrate 48); and
a touch substrate, disposed on the first surface of the first substrate, wherein the touch substrate comprises a third substrate and a first touch electrode (Hung, Fig. 11, overcoat 42 along with ITO 1 are on the top surface of overcoat 42’).
Regarding claim 4, Hung teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further teaches the conductive layer serves as a drive electrode, and the first touch electrode serves as a sensing electrode (Hung, [0047]-[0048], the lower of the two ITOs transmits/drives a voltage and the top of the two ITO senses/detects).
Regarding claim 16, Hung teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further teaches the conductive layer comprises a transparent conductive layer (Hung, [0025], ITO is a transparent conductive layer).
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.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hung et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2011/0187672 A1) in view of Chen et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2013/0021289 A1)
Regarding claim 17, Hung teaches the limitations of claim 3. Hung does not seem to explicitly teach a polarizer disposed between the conductive layer and the first touch electrode.
However, in a related art of touch sensitive display, Chen teaches a touch sensitive display having a polarizer disposed between a conductive layer and a first touch electrode for a touch sensor (Chen, Fig. 22, ITO electrode 44, polarizer 92 and another ITO electrode 44 are arranged in sequential order).
Before the time of the first effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person ordinary skill in the art to arrange the polarizer between the electrodes as suggested by Chen for the touch sensitive display of Hung. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to compensate for the interference of display image by the touch electrode and to provide improved touch sensitive display (Chen, [0006]-[0007]).
Regarding claim 18, Hung in view of Chen teaches the limitations of claim 17 and further teaches an optical adhesive disposed between the polarizer and the first touch electrode (Chen, [0071], structure/layers can be bonded together with optically clear adhesive, i.e. between the two layers).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0222317 A1 to Abiru et al. discloses a similar invention as recited, specifically a polarizer between touch electrodes, see Fig. 3, polarizing plate 17 between electrodes 18 and 19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONG HUI LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm 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, BENJAMIN C. LEE can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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.
/DONG HUI LIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights