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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 11, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160365367 to Kimura et al..
As per claim 11, Kimura et al. teach a display device comprising:
at least one pixel including a plurality of sub-pixels (Fig. 38, groups of subpixels 368, paragraph 239, “view of the region 362 including nine pixels”); and
a sensor electrode (Fig. 38, 322b, paragraph 237, “conductive film 322b functioning as a common electrode”, paragraph 241, “The common electrodes can also function as the pair of electrodes of the touch sensor”) extending along a boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels and continuously surrounding a periphery of the at least one pixel,
wherein the sensor electrode has at least one cut-off portion at the boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels (Fig. 38, cut-off of upper part of vertical comb-like sections of the electrode, contiguous on one side and discontinuous on the other),
the sensor electrode includes
a first sensor electrode extending along the boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels (Fig. 38, vertical comb-like sections of the electrode, contiguous on one side and discontinuous on the other) and
a second sensor electrode continuously surrounding the first sensor electrode, being continuous from the first sensor electrode and not existing at the boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels (Fig. 38, 321 a1, contiguous segment of 231a1 adjacent to the boundary), and
the at least one cut-off portion is arranged at a boundary of the first sensor electrode with the second sensor electrode (Fig. 38, vertical comb-like sections of the electrode, contiguous on one side and discontinuous on the other).
As per claim 12, Kimura et al. teach the display device according to claim 11, wherein the plurality of sub-pixels includes a first sub-pixel displaying a first color, a second sub-pixel displaying a second color and a third sub-pixel displaying a third color, the first color is different from the second color and the third color, the second color is different from the third color (paragraph 255, “The subpixel 365a1 and the subpixel 365b1 are included in the first pixel 365a and the second pixel 365b, respectively. For example, each of the two subpixels is a subpixel exhibiting a red color, a subpixel exhibiting a green color, or a subpixel exhibiting a blue color”), the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel are arranged in a first direction, the first sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel are arranged in the first direction, and the second sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel are arranged in a second direction crossing the first direction Fig. 38, groups of subpixels 368, paragraph 239, “view of the region 362 including nine pixels”.
As per claim 20, Kimura et al. teach the display device according to claim 12, wherein the second sensor electrode continuously surrounds the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel (Fig. 38, 321 a1, contiguous segment of 231a1 adjacent to the boundary).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
As per claim 1, Kimura et al. (US 2016/0365367) teach a display device comprising: at least one pixel including a plurality of sub-pixels; and a sensor electrode (Fig. 38, 322b, paragraph 237, “conductive film 322b functioning as a common electrode”, paragraph 241, “The common electrodes can also function as the pair of electrodes of the touch sensor”) extending along a boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels and continuously surrounding a periphery of the at least one pixel, wherein the sensor electrode includes a first sensor electrode extending along the boundary of the plurality of sub-pixels and a second sensor electrode continuously surrounding the periphery of the at least one pixel and being continuous from the first sensor electrode (Fig. 38, 321 a1, contiguous segment of 231a1 adjacent to the boundary), wherein the first sensor electrode includes a first end portion, a third end portion, the first end portion of the first sensor electrode is spaced apart from the second sensor electrode, and the third end portion of the first sensor electrode is connected to the second sensor electrode (Fig. 38, vertical comb-like sections of the electrode, contiguous on one side and discontinuous on the other).
However, Kimura et al. do not teach wherein THE first sensor electrode further includes a second end portion and the second end portion of the first sensor electrode is spaced apart from the second sensor electrode.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 13-19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE R SOTO LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, from 8 am - 5 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at (571) 272-7603. 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.
/JOSE R SOTO LOPEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights