SONY CORPORATION

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Aug 10, 2021

2020004045 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 10, 2021)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
15/989,745 05/25/2018 Hiroyuki MIZUNUMA 1946-0402A 8693
142241 7590 08/10/2021
Paratus Law Group, PLLC
1765 Greensboro Station Place
Suite 320
Tysons Corner, VA 22102
EXAMINER
TZENG, FRED
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2625
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/10/2021 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte HIROYUKI MIZUNUMA,
KAZUYUKI YAMAMOTO and IKUO YAMANO
____________

Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before KARL D. EASTHOM, KARA L. SZPONDOWSKI, and
SCOTT B. HOWARD, Administrative Patent Judges.

HOWARD, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellant1 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
final rejection of claims 12–27, which constitute all of the claims pending in
this application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.

1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in
37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Sony
Corporation. Appeal Br. 3.
Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745

2
THE INVENTION
The disclosed and claimed invention relates “to an information
processing apparatus including a touch sensor of a capacitive system, an
information processing method, and a program.” Spec. 1.2
Claim 12, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter (with formatting added for clarity):
12. An information processing apparatus, comprising:
a display;
a touch panel which includes an x-electrode sensor and a
y-electrode sensor that have capacitance changed in accordance
with an operation by an operation object made upon or in
proximity to an operation surface; and
a circuitry configured to
detect, based on change of capacitance, a
displacement of a coordinate value of an operation point
of the operation surface, wherein the operation point
corresponds to a point at which the operation object comes
into contact with or comes within a proximity range to the
operation surface, and
determine a press to the operation surface based on
whether or not a change of capacitance of at least one of
the x-electrode sensor and the y-electrode sensor at the
operation point exceeds a predetermined value and the
displacement of the coordinate value of the operation
point.

2 We refer to the Specification filed June 19, 2018 (“Spec.”); Final Office
Action mailed June 10, 2019 (“Final Act.”); Appeal Brief filed Nov. 21,
2019 (“Appeal Br.”); Examiner’s Answer mailed Mar. 24, 2020 (“Ans.”);
and the Reply Brief filed May 11, 2020 (“Reply Br.”).
Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745

3
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner as evidence in rejecting the
claims on appeal is:
Name Reference Date
Eriguchi et al.
(“Eriguchi”)
US 2010/0007628 A1 Jan. 14, 2010
Lee et al. (“Lee”) US 2011/0285642 A1 Nov. 24, 2011
REJECTIONS
Claims 12–19 and 21–27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
anticipated by Lee. Final Act. 3.
Claim 20 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Lee and Eriguchi. Final Act. 6.
ANALYSIS
Claim 12 recites “detect[ing], based on change of capacitance, a
displacement of a coordinate value of an operation point of the operation
surface,” and “determin[ing] a press to the operation surface based on . . .
the displacement of the coordinate value of the operation point.”
The Examiner finds that Lee’s control unit detecting the displacement
of a contact from coordinate information of its first and final contact points
based on change of capacitance teaches detecting displacement of a
coordinate value of an operation point, as well as detecting a press based in
part on the displacement of the coordinate value, as claimed. Final Act. 4
(citing Lee ¶¶ 96, 99). Specifically, the Examiner finds that Lee’s vector
coordinate information is generated based on capacitances generated in
sensing patterns of first and final contact points, and that “a movement path
Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745

4
from a first contact point to a final contact point is a displacement.” Ans. 3
(citing Lee ¶¶ 96, 99); see also id. at 4–7.
Appellant argues that “Lee is silent regarding the detection of any
displacement of a coordinate value of an operation point.” Appeal Br. 15.
Specifically, Appellant argues that, “even though Lee’s movement of a
cursor may result in a displacement of the cursor’s position on the screen,
Lee does not teach or suggest any actual detection of a displacement of a
coordinate value of an operation point of an operation surface, based on
change of capacitance.” Id.; see also Reply Br. 4.
We are not persuaded by Appellant’s argument that the Examiner
erred. As cited by the Examiner, Lee discloses “input device F moves on
two sensing patterns” and “generate[s] the capacitance” such that “as the
input device F moves, the capacitance of the first sensing pattern . . .
decreases and the capacitance of the fourth sensing pattern . . . increases.”
Lee ¶ 96. Then, the control unit “measures the change in capacitance
generated in the sensing patterns . . . and generates vector coordinate
information depending on movement path of the input device.” Id. In Lee,
“the vector coordinate information is generated on the basis of capacitances
generated in a sensing pattern of a first contact point and a sensing pattern of
a final contact point.” Id. ¶ 99. In other words, Lee describes generating
information (i.e., vector coordinate information) pertaining to the change in
coordinate location (i.e., movement path from the sensing pattern at a first
contact point to the sensing pattern at a final contact point) and on changes
in capacitance (i.e., changes in capacitance generated at the sensing pattern
at a first contact point to the sensing pattern at a final contact point).
Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745

5
Appellant also argues that Lee only discloses “determining a
coordinate information of a contact point on a touch screen by measuring a
change in capacitance, and computing a vector coordinate information based
on a change in the measured capacitance,” but does not perform any
“detection of displacement of the coordinate information.” Appeal Br. 15.
Here, Appellant’s argument acknowledges that Lee describes “computing a
vector coordinate information based on a change in the measured
capacitance.” Id.
Appellant does not persuasively explain why Lee’s computing vector
coordinate information, based on the change of capacitance along the
movement path between sensing patterns at a first contact point and a final
contact point, fails to describe the claimed “detect, based on change of
capacitance” (i.e., compute, based on change in capacitance), “a
displacement of a coordinate value of an operation point of the operation
surface” (i.e., vector coordinate information representing a movement path
between a first contact point and a final contact point), or “determin[ing] a
press” (i.e., computing vector coordinate information) “based on . . . change
of capacitance” (i.e., change of capacitance) “and the displacement of the
coordinate value of the operation point” (i.e., movement path between a first
contact point and a final contact point).
Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s rejection of independent
claim 12, along with the rejections of independent claims 26 and 27, and
dependent claims 13–25, which are not argued separately. See Appeal Br.
16–17.

Appeal 2020-004045
Application 15/989,745

6
CONCLUSION
We affirm the Examiner’s § 102 rejection of claims 12–19 and 21–27.
We affirm the Examiner’s § 103 rejection of claim 20.
DECISION SUMMARY
In summary:
Claims
Rejected
35
U.S.C.
§
Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
12–19, 21–27 102 Lee 12–19, 21–27
20 103 Lee, Eriguchi 20
Overall
Outcome
12–27

TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED