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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,498,820 (hereinafter Kadowski). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the application are broader version of the allowable subject matter recited by Kadowski. Particularly, the claims of the Kadowski recite a touch sensor including a plurality of reference positions, wherein each of the reference positions are associated with one or more sensor electrodes. The claims of the application recite a plurality of reference positions, and the touch sensor includes a first group of sensor electrodes located relative to the plurality of reference positions. Further, the claims of the Kasowski recite a second scanning step and a second deriving step, where the application only requires a first scanning step and a first deriving step. While the claims are not identical, they fail to be patentably distinct from each other as explained below.
19/361441
12,498,820
Claim 1.
A method performed by a sensor controller for detecting coordinates of a pen on a panel surface of a touch sensor including a plurality of reference positions arranged along a first direction,
Claim 1.
A method performed by a sensor controller for detecting coordinates of a pen on a panel surface of a touch sensor including a plurality of reference positions arranged along a first direction,
a first scanning step of detecting a pen signal transmitted from the pen,
a first scanning step of detecting a first signal transmitted from a pen electrode in contact
with the panel surface,
by selecting a second group of sensor electrodes out of the first group of sensor electrodes, the second group of sensor electrodes having a second electrode position density per the unit of length along the first direction, wherein the second electrode position density is less than the first electrode position density;
by selecting a second group of sensor electrodes of the touch sensor included in a second range along the first direction, the second group of sensor electrodes located at three or more second reference positions different from the three or more first reference positions, wherein the second group of
sensor electrodes located at the three or more second reference positions have a second electrode
position density per the unit of length along the first direction, and the second electrode position
density is less than the first electrode position density, wherein the second range is greater than
the first range;
Claims 11 and 20 are similarly matched to the limitations of claim 1 of the patent.
Claims 2, 12.
A second scanning step of detecting the pen signal transmitted from the pen, by selecting
the first group of sensor electrodes, and
a second deriving step of deriving the coordinates of the pen on a basis of signal levels
detected at the first group of sensor electrodes selected in the second scanning step.
Claim 1.
a second scanning step of detecting a second signal transmitted from a pen electrode not
in contact with the panel surface, among the one or more pen electrodes, by selecting a second
group of sensor electrodes of the touch sensor included in a second range along the first
direction,
a second deriving step of deriving a coordinate on a basis of signal levels detected at the
three or more second reference positions in the second scanning step.
Claim 3.
The method according to claim 2, wherein
the sensor controller performs the first scanning step and the second scanning step on a
time-division basis.
Claim 2.
the sensor controller performs the first scanning step to detect the first signal transmitted
from the front end electrode and the second scanning step to detect the second signal transmitted
from the rear end electrode on a time-division basis, according to a schedule determined by a
signal transmission and reception protocol.
Claims 4, 14.
The method according to claim 2, wherein the sensor controller performs the first scanning step when a difference between a peak
level and another signal level among the signal levels detected at the first group of sensor electrodes selected in the second scanning step is equal to or less than a predetermined value.
Claim 4.
The method according to claim 1, wherein the sensor controller starts the second scanning step when a difference between a peak level and another signal level among the signal levels detected at the three or more first reference positions in the
first scanning step is equal to or less than a predetermined value.
Claims 5, 15.
The method according to claim 2, wherein the first scanning step is configured to
select, as positions of three or more sensor electrodes included in the second group, a reference
position closest to the coordinates derived in the second deriving step and at least two reference
positions on both sides of the selected reference position.
Claim 8.
The method according to claim 7, wherein the second scanning step is configured to select, as the three or more second reference positions, a reference position closest to the coordinate derived in the first deriving step and two or more reference positions each arranged at the interval of the defined number of reference positions from the selected reference position.
Claims 6, 16.
The method according to claim 1, wherein
a span of the second group of sensor electrodes is smaller than a span of the first group of
sensor electrodes.
Claim 5.
The method according to claim 1, wherein a span of the three or more
second reference positions is greater than a span of the three or more first reference positions
Claims 7, 17.
The method according to claim 1, wherein a span of the second group of sensor electrodes, the second group including N number of sensor electrodes, is greater than a span of the N number of sensor electrodes included in the first group of sensor electrodes.
Claim 5.
The method according to claim 1, wherein a span of the three or more second reference positions is greater than a span of the three or more first reference positions.
Claims 8, 18.
The method according to claim 7, wherein
the N number of sensor electrodes in the second group are arranged non-consecutively
among the plurality of reference positions.
Claim 6.
the three or more second reference positions are arranged non-consecutively among the
plurality of reference positions.
Claim 10.
The method according to claim 1, wherein the signal levels at three or more sensor electrodes of the second group of sensor electrodes are detected by statistically processing signal levels detected in the second group of sensor electrodes.
Claim 9.
The method according to claim 1, wherein the signal levels
at the three or more second reference positions are detected by statistically processing signal
levels detected in the second group of sensor electrodes.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the references used singularly or in combination teach or fairly suggest a sensor controller for detecting pen coordinates on a touch panel sensor including a plurality of reference positions arranged, wherein the touch sensor includes a first group of sensor electrodes located relative to the plurality of reference positions, and the first group of sensor electrodes having a first electrode position density per unit of length along a first direction, and selecting a second group of sensor electrodes from the first group of sensor electrodes, the second group of sensor electrodes having a second electrode position density per the unit of length along the first direction, wherein the second electrode position density is less than the first electrode position density.
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.”
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PARK et al. (USPGPub No. 2019/0163320) discloses a touch sensing device for determining a contact location of a pen by using a signal generated from a pen electrode, wherein the touch sensing device includes a plurality of electrodes that are selected based on the positioning of the pen such that the electrodes are selected based on the position profile of the pen contacting the touch sensing surface (see paragraphs 49-75, 124-138; Figs. 1-22).
ZACHUT (USPGPub No. 2010/0155153) discloses a digitizer capable of detecting input in a coarse detection mode and a fine detection mode by sampling portions of the touch sensing surface (see paragraphs 88-111; Figs. 1-14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALECIA DIANE ENGLISH whose telephone number is (571)270-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 7:00am-3:00am.
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.
/Alecia D English/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
571-270-1595
Prosecution Insights