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 § 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.
Claims 1, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180129853) in the view of Han (US 20160048247).
Regarding claim 1: Lee teaches an electronic device (Figs. 1-2 #200), comprising: a position detection sensor in a device body; a display screen provided on an operation input surface side of the position detection sensor; and an electronic component provided on a back surface side opposite from the operation input surface side of the position detection sensor (Figs. 2-3 and paragraph [0083-0089] teach a position detection or touch sensor 220 formed on the rear side of the display screen 240; and an electronic component 250 provided on the back surface side opposite from the operation input surface side of the position detection sensor 220); and the display screen is configured to display an image at the location corresponding to the location of the electronic component, the image indicating an operation position of the electronic component (Fig. 5B-6 and paragraph [0142-0149] teach the display screen displays an image such as 555, 573, or 617 at the location corresponding to the location of the electronic component or fingerprint sensor indicating an operation position of the fingerprint sensor).
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein, the position detection sensor includes a plurality of position detection electrodes formed of loop coils arranged on an insulating substrate, wherein an effective detection region of the display screen for detecting a position indicated by a position indicator is based on a region provided with the plurality of position detection electrodes, at a location in the effective detection region corresponding to a location of the electronic component, a through hole having a predetermined shape corresponding to the electronic component is formed, the loop coil, at a portion intersecting the through hole, is arranged to pass around the through hole by following along a contour of the predetermined shape of the through hole.
However, Han teaches the position detection sensor includes a plurality of position detection electrodes formed of loop coils arranged on an insulating substrate, wherein an effective detection region of the display screen for detecting a position indicated by a position indicator is based on a region provided with the plurality of position detection electrodes (Figs. 2, 4, 6-8 and paragraph [0051-0052, 0060-0064, 0072-0085] teach the touch sensor includes a plurality of position detection electrodes formed of loop coils on an insulating substrate functioning to detection position indicated by a position indicator such as electronic pen as claimed), at a location in the effective detection region corresponding to a location of the electronic component a through hole having a predetermined shape corresponding to the electronic component is formed, the loop coil, at a portion intersecting the through hole, is arranged to pass around the through hole by following along a contour of the predetermined shape of the through hole (Figs. 5-9 and paragraph [0023, 0066, 0072-0085] teach at a location corresponding to a location of the electronic component such as light emitting device 540 a through hole such as 530/830 having a predetermined shape corresponding to the electronic component 540 is formed, the loop coil or electrodes 831/832 at a portion intersecting the through hole 830 is arranged to pass around the through hole by following along a contour of the predetermined shape of the through hole 830). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee’s invention by including above teachings of Han, because by shaping electrode in such way increases the capacitance detection around the hole, as taught by Han. The rationale would have been to use known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 6: Combination of Lee and Han teach wherein, in the position detection sensor, the loop coils are arranged in a predetermined direction at a predetermined array pitch, and a size of the through hole is greater than the predetermined array pitch (Han in Figs. 8A-B and paragraph [0051-0052, 0060-0064, 0072-0085]). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Lee and Han, same rationale applies here.
Regarding claim 8: Combination of Lee and Han teach wherein, in the position detection sensor, a portion of the loop coil passing around the through hole takes the shortest pass-around route (Han in Figs. 8A-B and paragraph [0051-0052, 0060-0064, 0072-0085]). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Lee and Han, same rationale applies here.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180129853), in the view of Han (US 20160048247), and further in the view of Yarosh (US 20180196575).
Regarding claim 4: Combination of Lee and Han teach comprising: a position detection circuit that detects a position indicated by the position indicator on the display screen based on signals from the loop coils of the position detection sensor (Han in Figs. 2, 4, 6-8 and paragraph [0051-0052]). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Lee and Han, same rationale applies here.
Combination of Lee and Han do not explicitly disclose the position detection circuit includes a position correction circuit that corrects a signal from the loop coil intersecting the through hole.
However, Yarosh teaches the position detection circuit includes a position correction circuit that corrects a signal from the electrodes intersecting the through hole (Figs. 1-2, 4-6 and paragraph [0015-0025, 0044-0052]). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Lee and Han by including above teachings of Yarosh, because correcting and/or adjusting signals near hole area of the touch sensor is very well-known and widely used technique because it helps to accurately determine the touch position, as taught by Yarosh. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Regarding claim 5: Combination of Lee, Han, and Yarosh teach comprising: a position detection circuit that detects a position indicated by the position indicator on the display screen based on signals from the loop coils of the position detection sensor (Han in Figs. 2, 4, 6-8 and paragraph [0051-0052]); and the position detection circuit includes a position correction circuit that detects a position indicated by the position indicator on the display screen near the through hole or inside the through hole (Yarosh in Figs. 1-2, 4-6 and paragraph [0015-0025, 0044-0052]). See claims 1 and 4 rejection for combination reasoning of Lee, Han, and Yarosh, same rationale applies here.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180129853), in the view of Han (US 20160048247), and further in the view of Morrison (US 20200167028).
Regarding claim 7: Combination of Lee and Han do not explicitly disclose wherein, in the position detection sensor, a plurality of the loop coils adjacent to each other, at a portion passing around the through hole taking similar pass-around routes, are arranged close to each other regardless of the predetermined array pitch.
However, Morrison teaches wherein, in the position detection sensor, a plurality of the electrodes adjacent to each other, at a portion passing around the through hole taking similar pass-around routes, are arranged close to each other regardless of the predetermined array pitch (Fig. 7 and paragraph [0093-0094, 0101-0102] teach a plurality of the electrodes A-J adjacent to each other, at a portion passing around the through hole (circular hole) taking similar pass-around routes, are arranged close to each other regardless of the predetermined array pitch). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Lee and Han by including above teachings of Morrison, because by shaping/routing electrodes in such way maintains touch detection accuracy around the hole, as taught by Morrison. The rationale would have been to use known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180129853), in the view of Han (US 20160048247), and further in the view of Hashida (US 20150331526).
Regarding claim 9: Combination of Lee and Han teach wherein the position detection sensor, in the effective detection region, detects a coordinate position in a first direction and a coordinate position in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, the loop coils include a plurality of first loop coils arranged in the second direction to detect the coordinate position in the first direction, and a plurality of second loop coils arranged in the first direction to detect the coordinate position in the second direction (Han in Figs. 2, 6-8 and paragraph [0017, 0072-0078] teach a plurality of loop coils to detect coordinate position arranged in both X-axis and Y-axis as claimed). See claim 1 rejection for combination reasoning of Lee and Han, same rationale applies here.
Combination of Lee and Han do not explicitly disclose the plurality of first loop coils and the plurality of second loop coils are arranged on both surfaces of the insulating substrate.
However, Hashida teaches the first direction electrodes and the second direction electrodes are formed by arranging conductors on both surfaces of the insulating substrate (Figs. 1 & 12 and paragraph [0029-0031, 0101] teach the first and second electrodes 50, 40 are formed on both surfaces of the substrate 34). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Lee and Han by including above teachings of Hashida, because arranging electrodes on both side of substrate is very well-known and widely used technique because it helps avoid any unnecessary interference between the electrodes, resulting in accurate touch detection. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20180129853), in the view of Han (US 20160048247), and further in the view of Shin (US 20220043481).
Regarding claim 10: Combination of Lee and Han do not explicitly disclose wherein the position detection sensor includes a magnetic shielding material.
However, Shin teaches wherein the position detection sensor includes a magnetic shielding material (Fig. 6 and paragraph [0116-0119]). It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify combination of Lee and Han by including above teachings of Shin, because utilizing a magnetic shielding member is very well-known and widely used technique because it helps shield a magnetic force of peripheral parts (e.g., other electronic parts inside the foldable housing 300), which may be recognized as noise except for a signal input from the stylus pen, resulting in accurate touch detection, as taught by Shin. The rationale would have been to use a known method or technique to achieve predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 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 AMIT CHATLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1610. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 5712707230. 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.
/AMIT CHATLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Prosecution Insights