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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7, 10-11, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carsanaro et al. (US. Pub. No. 2008/0259046, hereinafter “Carsanaro”) in view of Besling et al. (US. Pub. No. 2016/0131550, hereinafter “Besling”).
As to claims 1 and 10, Carsanaro discloses a touch-based electronic device [figure 9, a touch-based electronic device], associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device, comprising:
a touch interface [figure 9, a touch interface comprising a touch substrate 30 and a touch surface (top surface of 30)] comprising a touch substrate and a touch surface provided on one side of the touch substrate; and
at least one strain-based force sensor module [figure 9, force sensor 80] comprising:
a printed circuit board (PCB) [figure 9, thin PCB 31 having a backside attached to an opposite side of 30 relative to the touch surface] having a backside attached to an opposite side of the touch substrate relative to the touch surface; and
a strain-based force sensor circuit disposed onto a frontside of the PCB and electrically coupled to the touch surface [figure 9, force sensor circuit 80-82 disposed onto a frontside of PCB], the strain-based force sensor IC is configured to:
detect a deformation of the touch interface when an external force is applied onto the touch surface [paragraph 41, where the piezo resistive sensor is replaced by a force sensing resistor. This type of sensor has a lower accuracy, but can be made as thin as 0.5 mm. Here the conductive plates of the sensor 80 is connected to or designed as a part of the flexfilm 31 under the display/touch lens 30. An activator 82 may be added to the underlying housing to ensure a correct force transfer into the center of the resistive material 81 to the sensor 80, paragraph 42, interpret the pressure data derived from four (4) corner mounted sensors 12, to calculate an exact (x,y) coordinate representing where the touch point was registered, and to analyze the (x,y) coordinate to determine whether it falls within any of the pre-designated areas assigned to discrete virtual programmable buttons]; and
generate an electrical signal quantifying the deformation of the touch interface [paragraph 34, The lens 11 supports one or more flexfilm connectors 14 or wires that connect internal force sensors 12 with the specific electronic components 17 as well as the main logic of the computing device, paragraph 41, where the piezo resistive sensor is replaced by a force sensing resistor. This type of sensor has a lower accuracy, but can be made as thin as 0.5 mm. Here the conductive plates of the sensor 80 is connected to or designed as a part of the flexfilm 31 under the display/touch lens 30. An activator 82 may be added to the underlying housing to ensure a correct force transfer into the center of the resistive material 81 to the sensor 80, paragraph 42, interpret the pressure data derived from four (4) corner mounted sensors 12, to calculate an exact (x,y) coordinate representing where the touch point was registered, and to analyze the (x,y) coordinate to determine whether it falls within any of the pre-designated areas assigned to discrete virtual programmable buttons].
Carsanaro doesn’t expressly disclose a strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a frontside of the PCB.
Besling teaches a strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a front side of a PCB [figure 1, a pressure sensor IC 102 is soldered onto a front side of a PCB 104, paragraph 21, a pressure sensor integrated circuit (IC) device 102 attached to a circuit board 104 is depicted. In the embodiment of FIG. 1, the circuit board is a printed circuit board (PCB) and the pressure sensor IC device is soldered to the PCB using solder balls 106].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the touch-based electronic device of Carsanaro to have the strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a frontside of the PCB, as taught by Besling, in order to cause the pressure sensor IC device to produce accurate data (Besling, paragraph 21).
As to claims 2 and 11, Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, discloses the touch-based electronic device of claim 1, associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device, wherein the strain-based force sensor IC comprises a plurality of strain-based force sensors [Carsanaro, figure 6, a plurality of force sensors 12, paragraph 42, four (4) corner mounted sensors 12].
As to claims 7 and 16, Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, discloses the touch-based electronic device of claim 1, associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device, wherein the at least one strain-based force sensor module is enclosed in a housing that encompasses the touch interface [Carsanaro, figure 2, force sensor 12 is enclosed in a housing that encompasses the touch interface].
As to claim 18, Carsanaro discloses a wireless device [paragraph 34, This assembly may be a peripheral connected to a computing device (such as a PC) by USB or other standard peripheral cable, or wirelessly] comprising:
a touch interface [figure 9, a touch interface comprising a touch substrate 30 and a touch surface (top surface of 30)] comprising a touch substrate and a touch surface provided on one side of the touch substrate; and
at least one strain-based force sensor module [figure 9, force sensor 80] comprising:
a printed circuit board (PCB) [figure 9, thin PCB 31 having a backside attached to an opposite side of 30 relative to the touch surface] having a backside attached to an opposite side of the touch substrate relative to the touch surface; and
a strain-based force sensor circuit (IC) disposed onto a frontside of the PCB and electrically coupled to the touch surface [figure 9, force sensor circuit 80-82 disposed onto a frontside of PCB], the strain-based force sensor IC is configured to:
detect a deformation of the touch interface when an external force is applied onto the touch surface [paragraph 41, where the piezo resistive sensor is replaced by a force sensing resistor. This type of sensor has a lower accuracy, but can be made as thin as 0.5 mm. Here the conductive plates of the sensor 80 is connected to or designed as a part of the flexfilm 31 under the display/touch lens 30. An activator 82 may be added to the underlying housing to ensure a correct force transfer into the center of the resistive material 81 to the sensor 80, paragraph 42, interpret the pressure data derived from four (4) corner mounted sensors 12, to calculate an exact (x,y) coordinate representing where the touch point was registered, and to analyze the (x,y) coordinate to determine whether it falls within any of the pre-designated areas assigned to discrete virtual programmable buttons]; and
generate an electrical signal quantifying the deformation of the touch interface [paragraph 34, The lens 11 supports one or more flexfilm connectors 14 or wires that connect internal force sensors 12 with the specific electronic components 17 as well as the main logic of the computing device, paragraph 41, where the piezo resistive sensor is replaced by a force sensing resistor. This type of sensor has a lower accuracy, but can be made as thin as 0.5 mm. Here the conductive plates of the sensor 80 is connected to or designed as a part of the flexfilm 31 under the display/touch lens 30. An activator 82 may be added to the underlying housing to ensure a correct force transfer into the center of the resistive material 81 to the sensor 80, paragraph 42, interpret the pressure data derived from four (4) corner mounted sensors 12, to calculate an exact (x,y) coordinate representing where the touch point was registered, and to analyze the (x,y) coordinate to determine whether it falls within any of the pre-designated areas assigned to discrete virtual programmable buttons].
Carsanaro doesn’t expressly disclose a strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a frontside of the PCB.
Besling teaches a strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a front side of a PCB [figure 1, a pressure sensor IC 102 is soldered onto a front side of a PCB 104, paragraph 21, a pressure sensor integrated circuit (IC) device 102 attached to a circuit board 104 is depicted. In the embodiment of FIG. 1, the circuit board is a printed circuit board (PCB) and the pressure sensor IC device is soldered to the PCB using solder balls 106].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the touch-based electronic device of Carsanaro to have the strain-based force sensor integrated circuit (IC) soldered onto a frontside of the PCB, as taught by Besling, in order to cause the pressure sensor IC device to produce accurate data (Besling, paragraph 21).
Claim(s) 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carsanaro in view of Besling in view of Zeijlon et al. (US. Pub. No. 2009/0090611, hereinafter “Zeijlon”).
As to claims 3 and 12, Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, discloses the touch-based electronic device of claim 1, associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device.
Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, doesn’t expressly disclose wherein the backside of the PCB is attached to the touch substrate via a pair of copper pads that electrically couple the strain-based force sensor IC to the touch surface.
Zeijlon teaches the concept of using copper pads to attach a PCB to a touch surface [paragraph 33, the touch system on a PCB where the pad is a copper area].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the touch-based electronic device of Carsanaro to wherein the backside of the PCB is attached to the touch substrate via a pair of copper pads that electrically couple the strain-based force sensor IC to the touch surface, as taught by Zeijlon, in order to allow a reduction of physical dimensions of the switch (Zeijlon, paragraph 10).
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carsanaro in view of Besling in view of Kotala et al. (US. Pub. No. 2012/0249467, hereinafter “Kotala”).
As to claims 5 and 14, Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, discloses the touch-based electronic device of claim 1, associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device.
Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, doesn’t expressly disclose wherein the backside of the PCB is attached to the touch substrate via a pair of solder joints that electrically couple the strain-based force sensor IC to the touch surface.
Kotala teaches the concept of using solder joints to attach a PCB to a touch surface [paragraph 27, resulting in the solder joints being less prone to breakage when the PCB 78 is flexed and mounted to the touch panel 76].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the touch-based electronic device of Carsanaro to wherein the backside of the PCB is attached to the touch substrate via a pair of solder joints that electrically couple the strain-based force sensor IC to the touch surface, as taught by Kotala, in order to protect against separation of PCB and touch panel (Kotala, paragraph 28).
Claim(s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carsanaro in view of Besling in view of Friza et al. (US. Pub. No. 2016/0345084, hereinafter “Friza”).
As to claims 8 and 17, Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, discloses the touch-based electronic device of claim 7, associated with its method for providing a strain-based force sensor module in a touch-based electronic device.
Carsanaro, as modified by Besling, doesn’t expressly disclose wherein a spacer is provided between the housing and the frontside of the PCB to act as a force transfer mechanism.
Friza teaches wherein a spacer is provided between a housing and a PCB to act as a force transfer mechanism [paragraph 29, The outer housing 116 supports the PCB 112 via spacer elements 114, wherein the spacer elements 114 may be made of electrically insulating material].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the touch-based electronic device of Carsanaro to wherein a spacer is provided between a housing and a PCB to act as a force transfer mechanism, as taught by Friza, in order to allow free access of sound waves to the sound channel (Friza, paragraph 29).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 9, 13 and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combination, teaches or fairly suggests the features presented in the combination limitations of dependent claims 4, 6, 9, 13 and 15, such as “wherein at least one of the pair of copper pads is vertically aligned with the strain-based force sensor IC to thereby provide rigid support for the strain-based force sensor IC”, recited by claim 4; “one or more stiffeners provided between the backside of the PCB and the touch substrate to enhance support for the at least one strain-based force sensor module”, recited by claim 6; “wherein the spacer has a smaller area than the PCB and a thickness between one-half millimeter and one millimeter”, recited by claim 9; “comprising vertically aligning the strain-based force sensor IC with at least one of the pair of copper pads”, recited by claim 13; and “comprising providing one or more stiffeners between the backside of the PCB and the touch substrate to enhance support for the strain-based force sensor module”, recited by claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Molne et al. (US. Pub. No. 2012/0200789) is considered as pertinent art to claims 1, 10 and 18 regarding pressure sensor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAN-YING YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-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, BENJAMIN LEE can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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.
/NAN-YING YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights