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 .
In response to this Office action, the Office respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the Office in prosecuting this application.
The Office has cited particular figures, elements, paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider each of the cited references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage disclosed by the Office.
Status of Claims
- Applicant’s Response filed July 23, 2026 is acknowledged.
- Claim(s) 18 is/are amended
- Claim(s) 10-17, 19 is/are withdrawn as non-elected
- Claim(s) 1-19 is/are pending in the application.
- Claim(s) 1-9, 18 is/are examined on the merits
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-17, 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on July 23, 2026.
Applicant’s election of Invention A in the reply filed on July 23, 2026, is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The application has claimed priority based on PCT International Application No. PCT/CN2024/138167 filed on December 10, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 3, 2025, April 1, 2026, July 23, 2026, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s preliminary amendment to the specification dated October 3, 2025.
The 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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3, line 3 recites the limitation " the single-frame ultrasonic echo signal ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because " the single-frame ultrasonic echo signal " is first introduced at claim 3, line 3.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 3 recites “The finger pressing state detection method according to claim 1, wherein the pre- processing an ultrasonic echo signal to obtain model input data comprises: carrying out space-domain multi-point sampling on the single-frame ultrasonic echo signal to obtain space-domain sampled data corresponding to the single-frame ultrasonic echo signal, converting the space-domain sampled data into a first data vector, and then obtaining model input data of the neural network model according to the first data vector; or converting an echo intensity feature value of the single-frame ultrasonic echo signal acquired at a current time step, and echo intensity feature values respectively corresponding to other time steps into a second data vector, and then obtaining model input data of the neural network model according to the second data vector, where the other time steps are time steps before the current time step. “.
Applicant’s disclosure paragraphs 0119-0145 appear to essentially recite verbatim the features recited in the claims. However, Applicant's specification fails to disclose corresponding algorithm, example or steps to enable a person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims because the metes and bounds for which protection is sought is not clear. Specifically, what are the metes and bounds of “single-frame ultrasonic echo signal”? How is a space-domain multi-point sampling performed? What does a space-domain sampled data set include? How is the space-domain sampled data converted into a first data vector? What corresponds to a first data vector? How is “model input data” obtained “according to the first data vector”? How is single-frame ultrasonic echo signal acquired at a current time step converted into a second data vector? What corresponds to a second data vector? How is “model input data” obtained “according to the second data vector”?
21. If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner's interpretation of the corresponding algorithm, example or steps, applicant must identify the corresponding algorithm, example or steps with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
Dependent claims 4-6 inherit the deficiencies of the parent claim.
Appropriate clarification is required for a thorough search and comparison with the prior arts. As such claims 3-6 will not be further considered with respect to the prior arts because it is not possible to guess Applicant’s intended claim language/features (see MPEP 2143.03 In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 165 USPQ 494 (CCPA 1970) (if no reasonably definite meaning can be ascribed to certain claim language, the claim is indefinite, not obvious) and In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859,134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962) (it is improper to rely on speculative assumptions regarding the meaning of a claim and then base a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 on these assumptions).).
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) 1-2, 7-8, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Akhbari et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190354238.
Consider claim 1, Akhbari teaches a finger pressing state detection method, comprising: pre-processing an ultrasonic echo signal to obtain model input data (see Akhbari figure 25, elements 2502, 2506, 2508, 2514 and paragraphs 0203-0205 where converting analog signal to digital signal corresponds to preprocessing to obtain input data for digital processing; figure 26, paragraph 0100, 0206-0208; figures 27-35 and paragraphs 0209-0239 where various techniques such as signal rectification, integration, mixing, modification, accumulation are described in order to prepare a received signal for processing to determine touch and paragraph 0297, 0334, 0349), where the ultrasonic echo signal is a corresponding ultrasonic echo signal after an ultrasonic array emits an ultrasonic signal to a pressing area (see Akhbari figures 25-35, and paragraphs 0203-0239 ); and
inputting the model input data into a trained neural network model, so that the neural network model outputs a finger pressing state (see Akhbari paragraphs 0082-0083, 0311-0352 specifically for example paragraph 0330 where recurrent neural network 5500 can be used for one or both of identifying touch events from an energy signal (e.g., as seen in block 5204 of FIG. 52) and identifying state classification from a touch event and/or an energy signal (e.g., as seen in block 5206 of FIG. 52).).
Consider claim 2, Akhbari teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches wherein: the neural network model includes a first classification decision layer and a multi-layer recurrent neural network, where output of the multi-layer recurrent neural network is connected with the first classification decision layer (see Akhbari figures 55-57 and paragraph 0331 where A recurrent neural network 5500 can pass input data 5502 through any number of nodes across any number of layers until the output data 5508 is generated. In some cases, output data (e.g., output data 5508) can comprise state classification information associated with a touch event. One or more hidden layers 5504, 5506 can be located between the input data 5502 and the output data 5508 and paragraphs 0345-0352 where recurrent neural network can be used to generate an output indicative of state based on receiving energy signals as an input); or
the neural network model includes a second classification decision layer and a single-layer recurrent neural network, where output of the single-layer recurrent neural network is connected with the second classification decision layer (see Akhbari figures 55-57 and paragraph 0331 where A recurrent neural network 5500 can pass input data 5502 through any number of nodes across any number of layers until the output data 5508 is generated. In some cases, output data (e.g., output data 5508) can comprise state classification information associated with a touch event. One or more hidden layers 5504, 5506 can be located between the input data 5502 and the output data 5508 and paragraphs 0345-0352 where recurrent neural network can be used to generate an output indicative of state based on receiving energy signals as an input).
Consider claim 7, Akhbari teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the finger pressing state output by the neural network model includes: a classification determined state or a classification undetermined state, wherein the classification determined state is any one of at least two types of pressing states (see Akhbari paragraph 0316-0318 where any suitable classification can be determined, such as the type of touch event that has occurred. Examples of suitable state classifications related to the type of touch event that has occurred include single tap, double tap, triple tap, n-tuple tap, hold (e.g., touch and hold), tap and hold (e.g., tap then touch and hold), press (e.g., longer than a tap), double press, press and hold (e.g., press then touch and hold), hold and press (e.g., touch and hold for a duration then press), and grip (e.g., holding with more surface area or other characteristics). A state classification can be determined, the state classification can be associated with the touch event based on trigger values. Examples of suitable state classifications related to other information associated with a touch event can include whether or not the user is wearing a glove, whether or not the user appears to be older or younger (e.g., based on distance between fingerprint ridges), whether or not the user appears to be a pre-identified user, or other such classifications. As an example, another classification can include hydration and/or perspiration of the user's finger and/or body. The system can detect the hydration and/or perspiration of the user, for example, by determining a lower ultrasound signal absorption than typical ultrasound signal absorption by the user. As a user's finger is dryer, the finger will absorb fewer ultrasound signals. Thus, different levels of thresholds for an amplitude and a variation over time can be used. For example, a wet finger may induce a more uniform drop in energy signal than a dry finger. Thus, a criteria of a magnitude of the energy signal (e.g., corresponding to a steep drop) can be used to distinguish between a dry finger and a wet finger. Further, the energy signal can be more consistent over time with a wet finger than a dry finger due to the additional water present in the wet finger. Thus, a criteria of the energy signal being within a specified range over a specified amount of time can be used to distinguish between a wet finger and the dry finger. Such a measurement can be performed using a variation (e.g., a standard deviation) of the energy signal over time. Accordingly, the feature information can include a magnitude of the energy signal and/or a variation of the energy signal. The determining of the inference can include comparing the magnitude and/or the variation to a respective threshold to determine whether the touch event is associated with a wet finger or a dry finger. depending on the orientation and placement of the sensor, any number of classifications can be used. In some cases, state classifications can be trained such that identification of state classifications at block 5206 can make reference to training data or a model generated using training data).
Consider claim 8, Akhbari teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and further teaches wherein: the at least two types of pressing states include a finger touch state and a finger non-touch state; or the at least two types of pressing states include a finger touch state, a finger non-touch state, a touch- to-non-touch critical state, and a non-touch-to-touch critical state (see Akhbari paragraph 0316-0318 where any suitable classification can be determined, such as the type of touch event that has occurred. Examples of suitable state classifications related to the type of touch event that has occurred include single tap, double tap, triple tap, n-tuple tap, hold (e.g., touch and hold), tap and hold (e.g., tap then touch and hold), press (e.g., longer than a tap), double press, press and hold (e.g., press then touch and hold), hold and press (e.g., touch and hold for a duration then press), and grip (e.g., holding with more surface area or other characteristics). A state classification can be determined, the state classification can be associated with the touch event based on trigger values. Examples of suitable state classifications related to other information associated with a touch event can include whether or not the user is wearing a glove, whether or not the user appears to be older or younger (e.g., based on distance between fingerprint ridges), whether or not the user appears to be a pre-identified user, or other such classifications. Where a non-touch state is implicit as evidenced by paragraph 0212 where touch events are identified based on differences between received signals during a non-contacting state and received signals during a contacting state and paragraph 0336 where non-touch events can facilitate training an additional recurrent neural network to reject false positive events. Non-touch events can include, for example, a touch event indicating no touch.).
Consider claim 18, Akhbari teaches an electronic device (see Akhbari paragraph 0143 where electronic product 1100 can be a smartphone or any other suitable device),
comprising an ultrasonic piezoelectric sensor (see Akhbari paragraph 0143 where ultrasound input device 1120 can be attached to a substrate consisting of one or more layers of a display 1140 or any other part of the consumer electronic device),
an analog-to-digital converter (see Akhbari paragraph 0099 where ASIC 304 can include electrical circuits and/or modules usable to perform various processes as disclosed herein, such as various analog and/or digital processing as described with reference to at least FIGS. 25-41.),
a data processing center (see Akhbari paragraph 0077 where ultrasound input device can comprise an ultrasound sensor coupled to a processor, such as an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) to provide a fully integrated system on a chip (SOC) that can receive touch inputs via ultrasonic detection), and
a central controller (see Akhbari paragraph 0108 where ASIC may transmit the digital signal to at least one or more of a memory, a processor, and a remote device. In other embodiments, the ASIC may include one or more signal processing modules and paragraph 0117-0122 where Computing device 724 can be coupled to processor 722 through a local or remote connection),
wherein the ultrasonic piezoelectric sensor, the analog-to-digital converter, and the data processing center are all connected with the central controller (see Akhbari paragraph 0117-0133 specifically for example paragraphs 0117-0122 where Computing device 724 can be coupled to processor 722 through a local or remote connection);
the ultrasonic piezoelectric sensor is used for responding to the central controller to emit an ultrasonic signal to a pressing area, and receiving an ultrasonic echo signal (see Akhbari paragraph 0320 where scheme 5300 can be performed partially or entirely on a processor coupled to an ultrasound sensor, such as processor 722 of FIG. 7. The method as described in FIG. 53 can be performed by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or any other suitable device and/or controller described herein and paragraphs 0367-0371 where methods described herein may be totally or partially performed with a computer system including one or more processors, which can be configured to perform the steps. Thus, embodiments can be directed to computer systems configured to perform the steps of any of the methods described herein, potentially with different components performing a respective step or a respective group of steps.);
the analog-to-digital converter is used for responding to the central controller to carry out digital-to- analog conversion on the ultrasonic echo signal (see Akhbari paragraph 0099 where ASIC 304 can include electrical circuits and/or modules usable to perform various processes as disclosed herein, such as various analog and/or digital processing as described with reference to at least FIGS. 25-41.); and
the data processing center responds to the central controller to realize the steps of the finger pressing state detection method (see Akhbari paragraph 0320 where scheme 5300 can be performed partially or entirely on a processor coupled to an ultrasound sensor, such as processor 722 of FIG. 7. The method as described in FIG. 53 can be performed by an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or any other suitable device and/or controller described herein and paragraphs 0367-0371 where methods described herein may be totally or partially performed with a computer system including one or more processors, which can be configured to perform the steps. Thus, embodiments can be directed to computer systems configured to perform the steps of any of the methods described herein, potentially with different components performing a respective step or a respective group of steps.) according to claim 1 (see articulated rejection of claim 1 above).
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) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akhbari et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190354238 in view of Piot et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20200310621 and Chang et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20100259493.
Consider claim 9, Akhbari teaches all the limitations of claim 7 and further teaches wherein after the inputting the model input data into a trained neural network model, so that the neural network model outputs a finger pressing state (see Akhbari paragraphs 0082-0083, 0311-0352 specifically for example paragraph 0330 where recurrent neural network 5500 can be used for one or both of identifying touch events from an energy signal (e.g., as seen in block 5204 of FIG. 52) and identifying state classification from a touch event and/or an energy signal (e.g., as seen in block 5206 of FIG. 52).), the method further comprises:
when the output finger pressing state is the classification determined state, taking the classification determined state as a final finger pressing state, and correspondingly updating the output classification determined state to a state memory sequence according to a time sequence (see Akhbari paragraph 0240 where For example, as depicted in FIG. 35, the signals depicted in plots 3508 and 3520 can be converted into outputs 3536 and 3538. These outputs can be recorded, plotted, or output over time as energy signal 3614. Output 3536, which is associated with no touch event, may be seen generally as regions where the energy signal is higher overall, whereas output 3538, which is associated with a touch event, may be seen generally as regions where the energy signal is lower overall. It is understood that the continuous output of the processed ultrasonic signals can be used to generate an energy signal that can then be used to determine whether or not a touch event occurred at a certain point in time.); and
Akhbari is silent regarding when the output finger pressing state is the classification undetermined state.
Akhbari does disclose in paragraph 0031 that “activation function can bound the output into a probabilistic form between any suitable bounds (e.g., 0 to 1, −1 to 1, −0.5 to 0.5, etc.). The output from a node 5510 can then be passed to one, some, or all nodes in a subsequent layer, or if at the final layer, can be passed to the output and used to generate the output data 5508 along with the other outputs from that same layer (e.g., through summation or other function)”.
In a related field of endeavor, Piot teaches a touch may not be identified as a known touch type initially (see Piot paragraph 0195 where if the touch is not identified as belonging to any known touch types, the touch can be classified as having an unknown type, and most probably deemed to be unwanted. As mentioned above, the touch may later be re-categorized as a known touch type once it has landed and stabilized (for these reasons, the classification of touches may be delayed for example on the order of tens of milliseconds)).
Piot is silent regarding how output is determined during delayed classification.
In a related field of endeavor, Chang teaches maintaining a recognized touch state unit it is determined that a touch is completely released as the touch is not detected for a time longer than a threshold touch release time (see Chang paragraph 0012).
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have modified Akhbari with the teachings of Piot to have delayed classification for unknown touches and to have maintained a recognized touch until a determination that a touch is completely release as disclosed by Chang so as to best classify unknown touch inputs by verifying that a touch has been released using known techniques with predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tang et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190354209 (ultrasonic touch feature extraction), Li et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20180060635 (point spread function estimation), Du, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20260024374 (ultrasonic detection), Drumm et al, U.S. Patent Publication No. 20190258353 (unwanted touch management).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dorothy H Harris whose telephone number is (571)270-7539. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4pm.
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.
/Dorothy Harris/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights