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
The applicant has amended their application as follows:
Amended: 1, 7, 11-16 and 19-20
Cancelled: None
Added: None
Therefore, claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 16 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (US 2023/0015262 A1, hereinafter “Shim”) in view of Jeon at el. (US 2023/0315239 A1, hereinafter “Jeon”).
As to claim 1, Shim (Fig. 2) discloses a sensing device (10) comprising:
a first sensor electrode (Fig. 4 element RE) extending in a first direction (Para. 0103); and
a second sensor electrode (TE) extending in a second direction (Para. 0099) and intersecting the first sensor electrode (TE; Para. 0102),
wherein the second sensor electrode (TE) comprises:
a first sensor pattern (Fig. 5, top TE) and a second sensor pattern (bottom TE), each of the first sensor pattern and the second sensor pattern not overlapping with the first sensor electrode (Para. 0112); and
a bridge pattern (CE) partially overlapping with the first sensor electrode (TE) and connecting the first sensor pattern (top TE) and the second sensor pattern (bottom TE), and
wherein the bridge pattern extends in a spiral form from a first end (CNT1) connected to the first sensor pattern (top TE) to a second end connected to the second sensor pattern (CNT1 on bottom TE; para. 0101, CE is a closed loop).
Shim does not disclose the bridge pattern further includes a node (CNT) connected to a sensing line (TEa), and the node connected to the sensing line overlaps the first sensor electrode.
However, Jeon (Fig. 9) teaches the bridge pattern (BRP) further includes a node (CNT) connected to a sensing line (EL2_1), and the node (CNT) connected to the sensing line (EL2_1) overlaps the first sensor electrode (SP2_1, SP2_2, CNP; Para. 0170, 0178, it is clear that the electrode line EL2_1 overlaps the first electrode SP2 at some capacity).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Jeon to include a temperature sensor in the device disclosed by Shim. The motivation would have been to detect a temperature change for a better touch detection (Jeong; Para. 0162).
As to claim 3, Shim (Fig. 5) discloses the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the bridge pattern has a single spiral structure (CE; a closed loop).
As to claim 4, Shim (Fig. 7) discloses the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the first sensor electrode (TE), the first sensor pattern, and the second sensor pattern are disposed in a first conductive layer(BF3), and
wherein the bridge pattern (CE) is located in a second conductive layer (SIL), and an insulating layer (IBL) is disposed between the first conductive layer (BF3) and the second conductive layer (SIL; Para. 0015).
As to claim 10, Shim discloses the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the bridge pattern and the first sensor pattern comprise different materials from each other (para. 0159).
Claim(s) 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim and Jeon as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cho et al. (US 2021/0117047 A1, hereinafter “Cho”).
As to claim 5, Shim (Fig. 6) discloses the display device of claim 4, wherein each of the first sensor electrode (RE) and the second sensor electrode (TE) comprises mesh lines (Para. 0117),
wherein the mesh lines form a mesh hole (EA2, EA3) in each of the first sensor electrode and the second sensor electrode (Para. 0117), and
wherein the mesh hole corresponds to a light-emitting region of the light-emitting element (Para. 0117).
Shim does not disclose the mesh hole is not formed in the bridge pattern.
However, Cho (Fig. 7A) teaches the mesh hole (EA3) is not formed in the bridge pattern (BRP2_1; Para. 0119, 0123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to simple substitute the bridge electrode of Cho for the closed loop bridge electrode of Shim devices of Sadler. The result of such a substitution would have yielded predictable results.
As to claim 9, Shim does not disclose the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the bridge pattern and the first sensor pattern comprise a same material.
However, Cho (Fig. 7A) teaches wherein the bridge pattern (BRP2) and the first sensor pattern (SP2) comprise a same material (Para. 0145).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Cho to use the same material for the electrodes and the bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Shim/Jeon. The combination would have merely yielded predictable results of performing touch input.
Claim(s) 2, 6-8, 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim in view of Jeon and Kim et al. (US 2017/0371471 A1, hereinafter “Kim”).
As to claim 2, Shim does not disclose the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the bridge pattern has a double spiral structure.
However, Kim teaches (Fig. 8) wherein the bridge pattern (335a) has a double spiral structure (Para. 0151).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a resistance element for a bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Shim/Jeon. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
As to claim 6, Shim (Fig. 4) discloses the sensing device of claim 1, wherein the first sensor electrode (RE) and the second sensor electrode (TE) sense a touch input based on a change in capacitance (Para. 0102).
Shim does not disclose wherein the bridge pattern has a resistance varying in response to pressure applied to the bridge pattern and senses the pressure.
However, Kim (Fig. 8) teaches the bridge pattern (335a) has a resistance varying in response to pressure applied to the bridge pattern and senses the pressure (Para. 0152-0153).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a resistance element for a bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Shim/Jeon. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
As to claim 7, Shim (Fig. 4) discloses the sensing device of claim 6, wherein the sensor comprises:
a first sensing line (TLa) connected to the first sensor electrode (TE);
a second sensing line (RL) connected to the second sensor electrode (RE).
Shin does not disclose a third sensing line connected to the bridge pattern, and
wherein the bridge pattern comprises a first portion and a second portion separated with respect to a node connected to the third sensing line.
However, Kim (Fig. 17) teaches a third sensing line (452) connected to the bridge pattern (435), and
wherein the bridge pattern (435) comprises a first portion (upper 435) and a second portion (lower 435) separated with respect to a node connected to the third sensing line (452).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a third sensing line in the device disclosed by Shim/Jeon. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
As to claim 8, Shim does not disclose the sensing device of claim 7, wherein at least one of the first portion and the second portion has a U-shape in a plan view.
However, Kim teaches wherein at least one of the first portion and the second portion has a U-shape in a plan view (Fig. 8 element 335).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a resistance element for a bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Shim/Jeon. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
As to claim 16, Shim (Fig. 2) discloses an electronic device (10), comprising:
a processor (200) providing input image data (Para. 0066);
a display module (100) displaying an image based on the input image data (Para. 0066); and
a power supply (200) supplying power to the display module (Para. 0066), wherein the display module comprises:
a display panel including pixels (Fig. 3 element SP); and
a sensor (TSU) arranged on the display panel (100) and sensing a touch input to the display module (Para. 0078),
wherein the sensor comprises:
a first sensor electrode (Fig. 4 element RE) extending in a first direction (Para. 0103); and
a second sensor electrode (TE) extending in a second direction (Para. 0099) and intersecting the first sensor electrode (TE; Para. 0102),
wherein the second sensor electrode (TE) comprises:
a first sensor pattern (Fig. 5, top TE) and a second sensor pattern (bottom TE), each of the first sensor pattern and the second sensor pattern not overlapping with the first sensor electrode (Para. 0112); and
a bridge pattern (CE) partially overlapping with the first sensor electrode (TE) and connecting the first sensor pattern (top TE) and the second sensor pattern (bottom TE),
wherein the bridge pattern extends in a spiral form from a first end (CNT1) connected to the first sensor pattern (top TE) to a second end connected to the second sensor pattern (CNT1 on bottom TE; para. 0101, CE is a closed loop), and
wherein the processor detects the touch input based on a change in capacitance (Para. 0078).
Shim does not disclose detects a pressure of the touch input based upon a change in resistance of the bridge pattern in response to the pressure applied to the bridge pattern, and
the bridge pattern further includes a node (CNT) connected to a sensing line (TEa), and the node connected to the sensing line overlaps the first sensor electrode.
However, Kim (Fig. 8) teaches detects a pressure of the touch input based upon a change in resistance of the bridge pattern (335a; Fig. 14) in response to pressure applied to the bridge pattern (Para. 0152-0153).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a resistance element for a bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Shim. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
Furthermore, Jeon (Fig. 9) teaches the bridge pattern (BRP) further includes a node (CNT) connected to a sensing line (EL2_1), and the node (CNT) connected to the sensing line (EL2_1) overlaps the first sensor electrode (SP2_1, SP2_2, CNP; Para. 0170, 0178, it is clear that the electrode line EL2_1 overlaps the first electrode SP2 at some capacity).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Jeon to include a temperature sensor in the device disclosed by Shim/Kim. The motivation would have been to detect a temperature change for a better touch detection (Jeong; Para. 0162).
As to claim 17, Shim (Fig. 7) discloses the display device of claim 16, wherein the first sensor electrode (TE), the first sensor pattern, and the second sensor pattern are disposed in a first conductive layer(BF3), and
wherein the bridge pattern (CE) is located in a second conductive layer (SIL), and an insulating layer (IBL) is disposed between the first conductive layer (BF3) and the second conductive layer (SIL; Para. 0015).
As to claim 19, Shim (Fig. 4) discloses the display device of claim 16, wherein the sensor comprises:
a first sensing line (TLa) connected to the first sensor electrode (TE);
a second sensing line (RL) connected to the second sensor electrode (RE).
Shin does not disclose a third sensing line connected to the bridge pattern, and
wherein the bridge pattern comprises a first portion and a second portion separated with respect to a node connected to the third sensing line.
However, Kim (Fig. 17) teaches a third sensing line (452) connected to the bridge pattern (435), and
wherein the bridge pattern (435) comprises a first portion (upper 435) and a second portion (lower 435) separated with respect to a node connected to the third sensing line (452).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim to include a third sensing line in the device disclosed by Shim. The motivation would have been to simultaneously perform a function of electrically connecting the electrodes and a function of a pressure sensor (Kim; Para. 0154).
As to claim 20, Shim in view of Kim disclose the electronic device of claim 19. Furthermore, Kim teaches wherein the processor detects the pressure based on a signal output through the third sensing line (Para. 0221).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim and Kim as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Cho.
As to claim 18, Shim (Fig. 6) discloses the display device of claim 17, wherein each of the first sensor electrode (RE) and the second sensor electrode (TE) comprises mesh lines (Para. 0117),
wherein the mesh lines form a mesh hole (EA2, EA3) in each of the first sensor electrode and the second sensor electrode (Para. 0117), and
wherein the mesh hole corresponds to a light-emitting region of the light-emitting element (Para. 0117).
Shim does not disclose the mesh hole is not formed in the bridge pattern.
However, Cho (Fig. 7A) teaches the mesh hole (EA3) is not formed in the bridge pattern (BRP2_1; Para. 0119, 0123).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to simple substitute the bridge electrode of Cho for the closed loop bridge electrode of Shim/Kim. The result of such a substitution would have yielded predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant‘s disclosure.
Hwang (US 2020/0150826 A1) discloses a resistance element in a touch electrodes (Fig. 4).
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 BIPIN GYAWALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, Will Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
BIPIN GYAWALI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2625
/BIPIN GYAWALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights