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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Figure 2 in the reply filed on 5-13-2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5-13-2026.
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) 1-9, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura et al. (US App. 20240028174 hereinafter referred to as “Kit”) in view of Miyazaki (US App. 20180173340 referred to as “Miya”).
In regard to claim 1, Kit teaches a touch display apparatus (see at least Abstract) comprising: a base including an active area (see Figs. 1 and 2); a plurality of first touch electrode lines disposed on the base and extending in a first direction (See Fig. 2, item 31); a plurality of second touch electrode lines disposed on the base and extending in a second direction intersecting the first direction (See Fig. 2, item 33); and a plurality of dummy touch electrodes, each of which is disposed between the first touch electrode line and the second touch electrode line (See Fig. 2, item 35), wherein the plurality of dummy touch electrodes includes a plurality of patterned dummy touch patterns, respectively (See Fig. 2, item 35 is serpentine shaped).
Kit is not relied upon to teach base is a substrate; a plurality of sub-pixels disposed in the active area of the substrate.
However, Miya teaches base is a substrate (see Para. 47 and 60);
a plurality of sub-pixels disposed in the active area of the substrate (see Para. 61-63 and Figs. 3-4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display of Kit to include the sub-pixels of Miya to provide dummy touch that are not visually recognized in a display (See Para. 5-6). Examiner also notes Kit discloses the base product/process of dummy touch electrodes while Miya teaches the known technique of display subpixels in the active area of the touch area so as to yield predictable results of touch detection on the display in the device of Kit.
In regard to claim 15, Kit teaches a display apparatus (see at least Abstract) comprising: a base (see Figs. 1 and 2); a first touch electrode disposed on the base and including a first main electrode extending in a first direction and a first finger electrode protruding from the first main electrode in a second direction intersecting the first direction (See Fig. 2, item 31 has main portion and comb structure); a second touch electrode disposed on the base and including a second main electrode extending in the first direction and a second finger electrode protruding from the second main electrode in the second direction (See Fig. 2, item 33 has main portion and comb structure); and a dummy touch electrode surrounded by the first touch electrode and the second touch electrode, wherein the dummy touch electrode includes a plurality of patterned dummy touch patterns (See Fig. 2, item 35 is serpentine shaped).
Kit is not relied upon to teach base is a substrate.
However, Miya teaches base is a substrate (see Para. 47 and 60).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display of Kit to include the substrate of Miya to provide dummy touch that are not visually recognized in a display (See Para. 5-6). Examiner also notes Kit discloses the base product/process of dummy touch electrodes on a base while Miya teaches the known technique of display subpixels in the active area of the touch substrate so as to yield predictable results of touch detection substrate in the device of Kit.
Regarding claim 2, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Kit further teaches wherein one of the plurality of dummy touch electrodes extends in the first direction and has a first length, each of the plurality of dummy touch patterns extends in the first direction and have a second length, and the second length is a proportion of the first length (see Fig. 2, serpentine lengths are about half vertical than that in the horizontal).
However, Examiner notes the length of 15-20% are variables considered obvious and discoverable from routine optimization under MPEP 2144.05. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine the claimed percentages as a matter of routine optimization to yield predictable results of optimized application of the dummy touch electrodes to correspond with touch electrodes in Kit as modified by Miya.
Regarding claim 3, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Kit further teaches wherein each of the plurality of first touch electrode lines includes a first main electrode extending in the second direction and a first finger electrode protruding from the first main electrode in the first direction (See Fig. 2, item 31 has main portion and comb structure), and each of the plurality of second touch electrode lines includes a second main electrode extending in the second direction and a second finger electrode protruding from the second main electrode in the first direction (See Fig. 2, item 33 has main portion and comb structure).
Regarding claim 4, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Kit further teaches wherein the one of the plurality of dummy touch electrodes is surrounded by the first main electrode, the first finger electrode, the second main electrode, and the second finger electrode (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 4.
Kit further teaches wherein the one of the plurality of dummy touch electrodes is disposed between the first main electrode and the second main electrode in the first direction and between the first finger electrode and the second finger electrode in the second direction (see Fig. 2, dummy 35 is serpentine shape through comb of 31 and 33).
Regarding claim 6, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 5.
Kit further teaches wherein the first main electrode, the first finger electrode, the second main electrode, the second finger electrode, and the one of the plurality of dummy touch electrodes (See Fig. 2).
Kit is not relied upon to teach have a zigzag-shaped exterior.
However, Miya teaches have a zigzag-shaped exterior.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display of Kit to include electrode shape of Miya to provide dummy touch that are not visually recognized in a display (See Para. 5-6). Examiner also notes Kit discloses the base product/process of electrode shapes while Miya teaches the known technique of zigzag shapes in the active area of the touch substrate so as to yield predictable results of zigzag electrodes in the device of Kit.
Regarding claim 7, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 4.
Kit further teaches wherein the first main electrode and the second main electrode are repeatedly and alternately disposed in the first direction (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 7.
Kit further teaches wherein the first finger electrode protruding from the first main electrode and the second finger electrode protruding from the second main electrode are provided as a plurality of finger electrodes (see Fig. 2, comb shaped electrodes).
Regarding claim 9, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 3.
Kit further teaches wherein a length of the plurality of dummy touch patterns in the first direction is a proportion of a length of at least one of the first finger electrode and the second finger electrode in the first direction (see Fig. 2, serpentine lengths are about half vertical than that in the horizontal).
Kit is not relied upon to teach 15% to 20% .
However, Examiner notes the length of 15 to 20% are variables considered obvious and discoverable from routine optimization under MPEP 2144.05. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine the claimed percentages as a matter of routine optimization to yield predictable results of optimized application of the dummy touch electrodes to correspond with touch electrodes in Kit as modified by Miya.
Regarding claim 16, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 15.
Kit further teaches wherein the dummy touch electrode extends in the first direction and has a first length, each of the plurality of dummy touch patterns extends in the first direction and have a second length, and the second length is a proportion of the first length (see Fig. 2, serpentine lengths are about half vertical than that in the horizontal).
Kit is not relied upon to teach 15% to 20% .
However, Examiner notes the length of 15 to 20% are variables considered obvious and discoverable from routine optimization under MPEP 2144.05. As such it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine the claimed percentages as a matter of routine optimization to yield predictable results of optimized application of the dummy touch electrodes to correspond with touch electrodes in Kit as modified by Miya.
Regarding claim 17, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 15.
Kit further teaches wherein the dummy touch electrode is surrounded by the first main electrode, the first finger electrode, the second main electrode, and the second finger electrode (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 17.
Kit further teaches wherein the dummy touch electrode is disposed between the first main electrode and the second main electrode in the first direction and between the first finger electrode and the second finger electrode in the second direction (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 17.
Kit further teaches wherein the first main electrode and the second main electrode are repeatedly and alternately disposed in the first direction (see Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura et al. (US App. 20240028174 hereinafter referred to as “Kit”) in view of Miyazaki (US App. 20180173340 referred to as “Miya”) in further view of Wen et al. (US App. 20220357816).
Regarding claim 10, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 3.
Kit further teaches each of the first main electrode, the first finger electrode, the second main electrode, and the second finger electrode (see Fig. 2)
Kit and Miya are not relied upon to teach wherein each of the plurality of sub-pixels includes a light-emitting area and a non-light-emitting area disposed around the light-emitting area, and; touch electrodes is disposed in the non-light-emitting area.
However, Wen teaches wherein each of the plurality of sub-pixels includes a light-emitting area and a non-light-emitting area disposed around the light-emitting area, and; touch electrodes is disposed in the non-light-emitting area (see Fig. 10, electroluminescent layer is between touch electrodes).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch device of Kit as modified by Miya with the layering of Wen to allow for capacitive touch sensing (See Para. 4).
Claim(s) 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitamura et al. (US App. 20240028174 hereinafter referred to as “Kit”) in view of Miyazaki (US App. 20180173340 referred to as “Miya”) in further view of Miyasaka et al. (US Pat. 11893194).
Regarding claim 14, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Kit further teaches wherein the plurality of dummy touch electrodes (see Fig. 2).
Kit in view of Miya are not relied upon to teach are floating.
However, Miyasaka teaches are floating (see Abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch device of Kit as modified by Miya with the floating electrode of Miyasaka so as to reduce the pattern of the electrode (See Col. 20, Ln 20-20).
Regarding claim 20, Kit in view of Miya teaches all the limitations of claim 15.
Kit further teaches wherein the dummy touch electrode(see Fig. 2).
Kit in view of Miya are not relied upon to teach is floating.
However, Miyasaka teaches is floating (see Abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the touch device of Kit as modified by Miya with the floating electrode of Miyasaka so as to reduce the pattern of the electrode (See Col. 20, Ln 20-20).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW YEUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-4115. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm 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, William 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.
/MATTHEW YEUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights