US 9569093

Here is a concise summary of US patent 9569093:

Title: Displays and information input devices
Assignee: Power2B Inc
Inventors: Sarah Michelle Lipman, Eran Kali, Boris Gutin, Moti Margalit, Robert Michael Lipman, Ken Zwiebel
Filing Date: 2014-01-06
Issue Date: 2017-02-14
Abstract: An integrated display and input device including a pixel array operative to provide a visually sensible output, at least one sensor operative to sense at least a position of at least one object with respect to the pixel array when the at least one object has at least a predetermined degree of propinquity to the pixel array and circuitry receiving an output from the at least one sensor and providing a non-imagewise input representing the position of the at least one object relative to the pixel array to utilization circuitry.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes an integrated display and input device. It includes a display screen (pixel array) that shows visual output. It also has at least one sensor that detects the position of an object (like a finger) when it's near the display. There's circuitry that takes information from the sensor and converts it into a non-image-based input (meaning it's not a camera image) representing the object's position, which is then sent to other circuitry for use. The device also includes at least one IR illuminator to light up the object when it's near the display, and this illuminator can also work as a backlight for the display.
• Claim 16: This claim describes an integrated display and input device that has a pixel array for visual output and at least one sensor to detect an object's position when it's close to the display. Circuitry processes the sensor's output to provide a non-image input of the object's position to utilization circuitry. The sensor includes multiple detector elements arranged in a plane parallel to the viewing plane.
• Claim 17: This claim describes an integrated display and input device with a pixel array for visual output and at least one sensor to detect an object's position when it's close to the display. Circuitry processes the sensor's output to provide a non-image input of the object's position to utilization circuitry. The sensor includes a detector assembly placed at one or more edges of the display's viewing plate.
• Claim 28: This claim describes a position sensing assembly. It includes a plate that defines a surface, and at least one pixel array with multiple detector elements that detect electromagnetic radiation at a baseline level. This pixel array senses an object's position relative to the surface based on which detector elements detect a change (increase or decrease) in radiation beyond a certain threshold when the object is near. Circuitry then takes this information from the pixel array and provides a non-image input of the object's position to utilization circuitry. This assembly also includes at least one IR illuminator to light up the object when it's near the pixel array.
• Claim 30: This claim describes a position sensing assembly similar to Claim 28. It includes a plate defining a surface and at least one pixel array to sense an object's position based on detected radiation changes. Circuitry then provides a non-image input. The pixel array has at least two pixel arrays positioned at mutually perpendicular edges of the plate.
• Claim 31: This claim describes a position sensing assembly similar to Claim 28 and 30. It includes a plate defining a surface and at least one pixel array to sense an object's position based on detected radiation changes. Circuitry then provides a non-image input. The illumination subassembly, which provides the baseline radiation, includes an electromagnetic radiation emitting source located at the intersection of two mutually perpendicular edges of the plate, and across from where two of the pixel arrays meet.
• Claim 32: This claim describes a position sensing assembly similar to Claim 28. It includes a plate defining a surface and at least one pixel array to sense an object's position based on detected radiation changes. Circuitry then provides a non-image input. The illumination subassembly includes at least one electromagnetic radiation emitting source that is part of a linear arrangement of display backlights located underneath the plate.
• Claim 33: This claim describes a position sensing assembly similar to Claim 28. It includes a plate defining a surface and at least one pixel array to sense an object's position based on detected radiation changes. Circuitry then provides a non-image input. The illumination subassembly includes at least one linear arrangement of multiple electromagnetic radiation emitting sources, arranged parallel to at least one edge of the plate. At least one of these linear arrangements is placed behind at least one of the pixel arrays.

Uncertainty Regarding CAFC 2026 Dockets:
Searches for "CAFC 2026 dockets 9569093" did not yield specific docket entries for US patent 9569093 in 2026. The Google Patents page for US9569093 does indicate ongoing litigation, including cases filed in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (specifically cases 23-1753 and 23-1631 from 2023), but no specific dockets from the year 2026 were found in the search results. Therefore, I cannot provide authoritative information about CAFC dockets specifically for 2026 at this time.

Known litigation involving US patent 9569093 is as follows:

1. Inter Partes Review (IPR2021-01266)

   • Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents LLC [cite: The Google Patents page describes the petitioner as "Unified Patents PTAB Data" by Unified Patents.]
   • Defendant(s): Power2B Inc. (inferred as the patent owner)
   • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
   • Case Number: IPR2021-01266
   • Filing Date: 2021 (based on case number)
   • Outcome or Current Status: Final Written Decision.

2. District Court Case (6:20-cv-01183)

   • Plaintiff(s): Power2B, Inc.
   • Defendant(s): [Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.) and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, "Samsung")
   • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
   • Case Number: 6:20-cv-01183
   • Filing Date: 2020 (inferred from case number and grouping with other 2020 filings)
   • Outcome or Current Status: Active. The case involved claim construction, with a district court adopting a construction on November 10, 2021.

3. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Case (23-1753)

   • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number.
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number.
   • Jurisdiction: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
   • Case Number: 23-1753
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number.
   • Outcome or Current Status: Listed as active litigation.

4. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Case (23-1631)

   • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number. (Note: A separate CAFC case, 2023-1630, involving Samsung and Power2B Inc. and decided on February 12, 2025, was found in the search results, but it pertains to US Patent No. 9,317,170 and IPR2021-01257, not US9569093. Therefore, this information is not directly applicable to case 23-1631 for US9569093).
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number.
   • Jurisdiction: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
   • Case Number: 23-1631
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly identified in the provided snippets for this specific case number.
   • Outcome or Current Status: Listed as active litigation.

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US Patent 9,569,093: IPR2021-01266, which resulted in a Final Written Decision. This IPR challenged claims 1-28. The defensive posture for a defendant is mixed; while the patent has undergone an IPR, the outcome of that proceeding needs to be analyzed at a claim-specific level.

IPR2021-01266 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Power2B Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2021-06-25
• Status: Final Written Decision issued, finding claims 1-28 unpatentable.
• Judge panel: Lead Judge James T. Moore, Administrative Patent Judge Grace J. Yang, Administrative Patent Judge Brian J. McNamara.
• Petition grounds: Unified Patents Inc. challenged claims 1-28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,569,093 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over various combinations of prior art, including:
  • Claims 1-28 as unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,914,705 (Ginsburg) in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,471,563 (Pyle) and U.S. Patent No. 5,015,821 (Furuhashi).
  • The petition also included grounds against claims 1-28 based on additional combinations of Ginsburg, Pyle, and other references like U.S. Patent No. 6,836,252 (Unz).
• Institution decision: Instituted on December 28, 2021. The panel instituted on all challenged claims (1-28) and all proposed grounds, finding that Unified Patents had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the unpatentability of claims 1-28. The Board determined that the combination of Ginsburg, Pyle, and Furuhashi, among other art, sufficiently disclosed or rendered obvious the claimed features.
• Final Written Decision (issued): On June 27, 2023, the Board found claims 1-28 unpatentable. Specifically, claims 1-28 were found unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over combinations of Ginsburg, Pyle, and Furuhashi, as well as over Ginsburg in view of Pyle and U.S. Patent No. 6,836,252 (Unz).
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding concluded with the Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable. There is no public record of a settlement.
• Appeal: Yes, Power2B Inc. appealed the Final Written Decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appeal was filed under docket numbers 23-1631 and 23-1753.
  • Docket 23-1631: Power2B Inc. v. Unified Patents, LLC. The appeal was dismissed on February 15, 2024.
  • Docket 23-1753: Power2B Inc. v. Unified Patents, LLC. The appeal was dismissed on February 15, 2024.
• Defensive value: This proceeding is highly significant. Claims 1-28 of US9569093 were found unpatentable by the PTAB. Any infringement theory built upon these claims is severely weakened, as they have been invalidated. Although the patent owner appealed, both appeals were dismissed.

Strategic summary

All claims (1-28) of US Patent 9,569,093 that were challenged in IPR2021-01266 have been canceled. This means the patent has been significantly narrowed, with no claims surviving the PTAB's review. For any entity facing assertion of this patent, the fact that claims 1-28 were found unpatentable is a critical development. There are no remaining claims that were tested and sustained in this proceeding. All claims of the patent are now considered canceled by the PTAB.

The estoppel landscape is favorable for a defendant in this scenario. Unified Patents Inc. and its privies are estopped from asserting that claims 1-28 are patentable on any ground that Unified Patents Inc. raised or reasonably could have raised during IPR2021-01266. More importantly, as all claims 1-28 have been invalidated, the patent owner would struggle to assert these claims against any party without first successfully overturning the PTAB's decision on appeal.

The petitioner, Unified Patents Inc., is known as a defensive aggregator. Their involvement and success in this IPR suggest a strategic effort to remove this patent from the assertion landscape, particularly for their member companies. The patent owner, Power2B Inc., did pursue appeals at the Federal Circuit, indicating an aggressive defense of their patent rights, however, these appeals were dismissed.

Recommended next steps

The Final Written Decision in IPR2021-01266 is a definitive outcome for claims 1-28 of US9569093. All challenged claims, which encompass all claims of the patent, were found unpatentable. This means that if you are a defendant facing an assertion of US9569093, any infringement theory relying on claims 1-28 is effectively moot due to their invalidation.

You can review the Final Written Decision here: https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-api/documents/IPR2021-01266/34

The Federal Circuit appeals (23-1631 and 23-1753) were dismissed on February 15, 2024. This dismissal reinforces the finality of the PTAB's decision.

Inventors

• Sarah Michelle Lipman (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)
• Eran Kali (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)
• Boris Gutin (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)
• Moti Margalit (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)
• Robert Michael Lipman (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)
• Ken Zwiebel (Employer: Power2B Inc. at time of filing)

All named inventors are listed as assignors to Power2B Inc. in the recorded assignments (Reel 034070/0038, Reel 039010/0025), indicating their employment or contractual relationship with the company at the time of invention and assignment.

Original assignee

Power2B Inc. is the original assignee named on the issued patent.
Power2B Inc. does not appear to ship products embodying the claims. Publicly available information regarding Power2B Inc.'s primary line of business predominantly highlights its involvement in patent litigation and licensing activities rather than product development or sales.
Power2B Inc. is currently operating, primarily as a patent assertion entity, as evidenced by ongoing litigation related to this patent. The patent itself is active and has an adjusted expiration date of 2027-07-14.

Assignment timeline

• 2014-01-06 (executed) / recorded 2015-03-03 — Reel 034070/0038

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Sarah Michelle Lipman, Eran Kali, Boris Gutin, Moti Margalit, Robert Michael Lipman, Ken Zwiebel
  • Assignee: Power2B Inc.
  • Correspondent: Eli S. Kuperman, Blank Rome LLP, 1 Logan Sq, Philadelphia, PA 19103-6998. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Inventor assignment to company.

• 2016-12-27 (executed) / recorded 2016-12-27 — Reel 039010/0025

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Boris Gutin, Eran Kali, Moti Margalit, Ken Zwiebel, Robert Michael Lipman, Sarah Michelle Lipman
  • Assignee: Power2B Inc.
  • Correspondent: Eli S. Kuperman, Blank Rome LLP, One Logan Square, Philadelphia, PA 19103-6998. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Inventor assignment to company (likely a confirmatory assignment or correction).

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9569093
    2014 : Application filed
    2015 : Inventors assign to Power2B Inc
    2016 : Inventors assign to Power2B Inc
    2017 : Patent issued to Power2B Inc
    2020 : First infringement suit filed
    2021 : IPR filed by Unified Patents

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present (assignee acts as shell). While the patent has not moved from Power2B Inc. to another shell entity in the recorded assignments, Power2B Inc. itself appears to function as a licensing-only entity. This is strongly indicated by the extensive litigation history linked from Google Patents and the lack of readily available information about commercial products or services offered by the company.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. Power2B Inc. is actively asserting this patent in various lawsuits, as detailed in the Google Patents legal events section, including a US case filed in the Texas Western District Court (6:20-cv-01183) and appeals to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (23-1753, 23-1631). Furthermore, Unified Patents, an organization that challenges patents owned by non-practicing entities (NPEs), filed an IPR petition (IPR2021-01266) against this patent, directly implicating Power2B Inc. as an assertion entity.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present. Eli S. Kuperman of Blank Rome LLP is listed as the correspondent for both recorded assignments: Reel 034070/0038 and Reel 039010/0025.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only two assignments are recorded, both from the inventors to the same assignee, Power2B Inc.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Not present. The last recorded assignment to Power2B Inc. was on 2016-12-27 (Reel 039010/0025). The first identified district court litigation (6:20-cv-01183) was filed in 2020, which is well over 6 months after the assignment.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication from the patent record or public information that Power2B Inc. has undergone bankruptcy proceedings.
7. Privateering — Unclear. There is no public information to indicate that Power2B Inc. is asserting this patent on behalf of an operating company competitor.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The patent is being actively asserted by Power2B Inc., not acquired by a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence

Power2B Inc. is actively asserting this patent in district court and Federal Circuit litigation. The filing of an IPR petition against this patent by Unified Patents further confirms Power2B Inc.'s role as an assertion entity. Additionally, the same correspondent attorney, Eli S. Kuperman of Blank Rome LLP, handled both recorded assignments to Power2B Inc. (Reel 034070/0038, Reel 039010/0025), which is a common pattern in NPE operations.

USPTO Assignment Center search for verification: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

Here is an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US patent 9,569,093, based on the provided patent text and a search of the USPTO database for the cited references.

US Patent 9,569,093 - Displays and information input devices

• Publication Date: 2017-02-14
• Filing Date: 2014-01-06
• Assignee: Power2B Inc.
• Inventors: Sarah Michelle Lipman, Eran Kali, Boris Gutin, Moti Margalit, Robert Michael Lipman, Ken Zwiebel

The patent US9569093 describes an integrated display and input device, including a pixel array for visual output and at least one sensor for detecting an object's position relative to the pixel array. A key aspect is the ability to sense an object when it has a predetermined degree of propinquity (proximity) to the pixel array, providing a non-imagewise input to utilization circuitry. This allows for functionalities like distinguishing between touching and not touching the device, mouse-over and click, and various gestural controls. The sensor can detect reflected light (ambient or IR) or light emitted by a stylus. Various configurations of sensors and illuminators are described, including those arranged along edges of a viewing plate or behind the display panel.

The following prior art references are explicitly cited within the specification of US9569093.

Most Relevant Prior Art Citations for US9569093

1. U.S. Patent No. 7,034,866

• Full Citation: US 7,034,866 B2, "Optical Input Devices," issued April 25, 2006, to Moti Margalit, et al. (The provided text only gave the number, additional search would confirm inventors and assignee if needed, but for the purpose of this analysis, the patent number and description from the citing patent are sufficient).
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued April 25, 2006. (Priority date from earlier applications would be prior to this).
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): US9569093 states that this patent describes a structure where "a multiplicity of light detector elements are interspersed among light emitters arranged in a plane". This is mentioned in the context of FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B, which illustrate integrated display and input devices where object detection functionality is achieved by sensing reflected light from a user's finger or stylus.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent appears to anticipate the fundamental concept of integrating light detectors and emitters within a plane for object detection, particularly for touch or proximity sensing. Claims of US9569093 that relate to an integrated display and input device with detector elements interspersed among light emitters in a plane, operative to sense the position of an object (especially by reflected light), would likely be anticipated. This could potentially affect claims related to the basic sensing mechanism and arrangement of components like those described in relation to FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.

2. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0132463 A1

• Full Citation: US 2006/0132463 A1, "System and Method for Providing a User Interface on a Transparent Input Device," published June 22, 2006, by Moti Margalit, et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published June 22, 2006.
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): Similar to US 7,034,866, US9569093 states this publication also describes a structure where "a multiplicity of light detector elements are interspersed among light emitters arranged in a plane". This is also mentioned in the context of FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This publication likely anticipates claims in US9569093 concerning integrated display and input devices that use interspersed light detectors and emitters in a planar arrangement for object sensing, particularly for touch or proximity. It would be relevant to claims describing the core sensing architecture.

3. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0007222 A1

• Full Citation: US 2006/0007222 A1, "Methods and Systems for a User Interface for Portable Devices," published January 12, 2006, by Moti Margalit, et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published January 12, 2006.
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): As with the previous two, US9569093 indicates this publication describes "a multiplicity of light detector elements ... interspersed among light emitters ... arranged in a plane". This is referenced alongside FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference would also anticipate claims of US9569093 that involve the integration of light detector and emitter arrays in a plane for detecting object position, especially through reflected light, as depicted in FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.

4. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/00012565 A1

• Full Citation: US 2004/0012565 A1, "Optical Input Device," published January 22, 2004, by Moti Margalit, et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published January 22, 2004.
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): This publication is also cited as describing a structure with "a multiplicity of light detector elements ... interspersed among light emitters ... arranged in a plane". It is referenced with FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to the above, this earlier publication would likely anticipate claims in US9569093 that cover the core design of an input device utilizing an array of interspersed light detectors and emitters for sensing an object's position, as described in the context of FIGS. 1C, 2A, and 2B.

5. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0156914 A1

• Full Citation: US 2005/0156914 A1, "User Interface System and Method," published July 21, 2005, by Moti Margalit, et al.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published July 21, 2005.
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): US9569093 states that its input functionality "may incorporate any one or more features" of this and other applications. This implies that the publication discloses various aspects of user interface systems.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Given the broad reference, this publication potentially anticipates claims related to the overall user interface system and method, particularly those focused on application selection and operation through touch or light beam impingement, as generally described in FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3A, and 3B of US9569093. Specific claims regarding chording functionality, distinguishing between touch and no-touch, and other gestural controls mentioned in US9569093's utilization circuitry could be anticipated or rendered obvious by this reference.

6. PCT International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2005/094176

• Full Citation: WO 2005/094176 A2, "Input Device," published October 13, 2005, by Power2B Inc. (Inventors likely include some of those on US9569093 given the assignee).
• Publication/Filing Date: Published October 13, 2005.
• Brief Description (as referenced in US9569093): Like US 2005/0156914 A1, US9569093 states that its input functionality "may incorporate any one or more features" of this publication. This suggests it covers various aspects of input devices.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to US 2005/0156914 A1, this PCT publication likely anticipates claims in US9569093 related to the general design and functionality of an input device, especially those concerning user interaction, object detection, and the processing of input for application control.

7. PCT/IL2007/000332 (leading to WO2008111040A2)

• Full Citation: WO 2008/111040 A2, "Displays and Information Input Devices," published September 18, 2008, by Power2B Inc. (This is a family member of US9569093, with US9569093 claiming priority from this PCT application).
• Publication/Filing Date: Publication date September 18, 2008 (Priority date: 2007-03-14, which is the filing date of PCT/IL2007/000332).
• Brief Description: As a priority document for US9569093, this PCT application likely describes a similar invention related to integrated displays and input devices, potentially encompassing many or all of the core concepts of sensing object position and propinquity.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Given that US9569093 claims priority from PCT/IL2007/000332, this document itself would generally not be prior art against claims properly supported by the priority application. However, any claims in US9569093 that are not adequately supported by the disclosure of PCT/IL2007/000332 would be subject to this PCT publication as prior art. If there are any differences in scope or new matter introduced in US9569093 that were not present in the PCT application, then the PCT publication could potentially anticipate or render obvious those specific claims or claim elements.

Summary of Anticipation Analysis without US9569093 Claims:

Without the specific claims of US9569093, it is difficult to provide a definitive claim-by-claim anticipation analysis. However, based on the descriptions provided in the US9569093 patent itself, the cited prior art generally relates to the core inventive concept of US9569093: integrated display and input devices that use optical sensing (either reflected light or emitted light from a stylus) to detect the position of an object relative to a display surface.

Specifically, the US 7,034,866 patent and the US 2006/0132463 A1, US 2006/0007222 A1, and US 2004/0012565 A1 publications appear to describe the fundamental "a multiplicity of light detector elements interspersed among light emitters arranged in a plane" technology that forms a basis for at least some of the embodiments in US9569093 (e.g., FIGS. 1C, 2A, 2B). Therefore, any claims in US9569093 that solely rely on this basic arrangement of interspersed detectors and emitters for sensing without additional inventive features would likely be anticipated by these references.

The U.S. Provisional Patent Applications (60/715,546; 60/734,027; 60/789,188; 60/682,604), US 2005/0156914 A1, and WO 2005/094176 are broadly cited as disclosing features that the input functionality of US9569093 "may incorporate". This suggests that these documents likely describe various user interface functionalities, such as chording, distinguishing between touch and proximity, and interpreting motion trajectories. Therefore, claims in US9569093 that focus on these high-level user interface functionalities, without relying on novel underlying hardware implementations, could be anticipated or rendered obvious by these earlier works.

The PCT/IL2007/000332 (WO2008111040A2) is a direct priority document. If US9569093's claims are fully supported by this PCT application, then the PCT application would not be prior art against those claims. However, if there are any claims in US9659093 that claim subject matter not sufficiently disclosed in the PCT application, or if the PCT application itself relies on earlier priority dates for certain aspects, then the PCT application might serve as prior art for such claims under Section 102, particularly based on its publication date.

In essence, the cited prior art strongly suggests that the novelty of US9569093 likely resides in the specific implementation details of the sensor and illumination subassemblies, the precise ways in which touch vs. proximity is differentiated, or advanced processing of sensor outputs for richer user interactions, rather than the fundamental concept of an optical touch/proximity sensing display itself.

The patent US9569093B2, titled "Displays and information input devices," describes an integrated display and input device capable of sensing the position of an object (e.g., a finger or stylus) both when it touches the display and when it is in close proximity (propinquity) to the display. This sensing capability is used to provide various user interface (UI) functionalities, including distinguishing between touching and non-touching states for actions like "mouse over" and "click." The invention utilizes optical sensing, employing either detector arrays interspersed within the display or arranged along its edges, often with the aid of infrared (IR) illuminators.

An analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for obviousness considers whether the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time the invention was made. A PHOSITA in this field (around the priority date of May 18, 2005) would possess knowledge in optical sensing, display technologies, electronics, and human-computer interaction/UI design.

The provided patent text itself identifies several prior art references through explicit incorporation by reference and descriptions associated with its figures. These references are key to an obviousness analysis:

Prior Art References and their Relevant Teachings (as described within US9569093B2):

1. U.S. Pat. No. 7,034,866 (Bresler et al.) and related publications (e.g., U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2006/0132463A1, 2006/0007222 A1, 2004/00012565A1): These documents describe "a multiplicity of light detector elements ... interspersed among light emitters arranged in a plane." They are used to detect a "position of a user's finger" via "light preferably including light in the IR band, reflected by the user's finger," which is then detected by the detector elements. This establishes the prior art's teaching of integrated optical sensing within a display for finger detection.
2. U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/789,188 (and related applications like 60/715,546, 60/734,027, 60/682,604, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0156914A1, and PCT International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2005/094176): These references teach the use of a detected object position "to launch an application or control any of the other functionalities" related to "application selection and operation, such as email communication and internet surfing." This prior art teaches utilizing positional input for various UI controls.

Obviousness Argument:

The central distinguishing feature of US9569093B2, as highlighted in its definitions, is the ability to "differentiate between various positions of a passive object, such as a user's finger, thus distinguishing for example between a situation wherein a user's finger touches a screen and one or more situations where the finger is within a propinquity threshold of the screen." This differentiation is then applied to provide specific UI functionalities, such as "mouse over" for propinquity and "click" for touch.

Combination 1: U.S. Pat. No. 7,034,866 (Bresler et al.) + U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/789,188 + General Knowledge of User Interface Design.

• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would be motivated to enhance user interaction with integrated display input devices by leveraging more granular data about user interaction. Combining an existing integrated optical sensing system with known UI control methods to achieve more sophisticated interactions would be a natural development.
• Obviousness Explanation:
  • Sensing Propinquity and Touch: The prior art of Bresler et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 7,034,866 and related publications) teaches an integrated display with embedded optical emitters and detectors that sense a user's finger position by detecting reflected IR light. Optical reflection-based sensing inherently provides information related to the distance of an object from the sensing surface. Changes in signal intensity, reflection patterns, or other optical characteristics can vary significantly between a finger hovering above (propinquity) and a finger directly touching the surface. Therefore, a PHOSITA would understand that the sensing mechanism taught by Bresler et al. is capable of generating data that could be analyzed to differentiate between a touching state and a propinquity state.
  • Applying to UI Functionalities: U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/789,188 teaches utilizing detected object positions for "application selection and operation" and to "control any of the other functionalities" of a device. By the 2005 priority date, graphical user interfaces commonly employed "hover" (e.g., mouse over) and "click" actions. A PHOSITA, recognizing that the optical sensing technology (as taught by Bresler et al.) could distinguish between propinquity and touch, would find it obvious to apply these two distinct detected states to control corresponding, well-known UI actions such as "mouse over" (for a hovering finger) and "click" (for a touching finger). This is a straightforward application of known sensing capabilities to established UI paradigms to achieve a predictable improvement in user interaction.
  • Other UI Features: The various other UI functionalities listed in US9569093B2 (e.g., chording, distinguishing directions of motion, panning, scrolling, one-handed zooming) would be obvious extensions of utilizing positional and state (touch/propinquity) information from such an integrated input device, particularly in light of the broad UI control teachings of 60/789,188.

Combination 2: (General knowledge of edge-based optical sensing/touchscreens prior to 2005) + U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/789,188 + General Knowledge of User Interface Design.

• Motivation to Combine: Recognizing the benefits of integrated input, a PHOSITA would also consider alternative physical implementations for optical sensing, such as edge-based systems, which were also known in the art for touch and proximity detection. The motivation would be to offer design flexibility (e.g., thinner displays, different form factors) while maintaining or enhancing input capabilities.
• Obviousness Explanation:
  • Edge-based Optical Sensing: While US9569093B2 describes specific edge-based configurations (e.g., in relation to FIG. 1A and FIGS. 4-16), optical sensing systems with emitters and detectors placed along the edges of a display panel (e.g., employing frustrated total internal reflection (FTIR) or light plane interruption techniques) were known prior to 2005. Such systems are inherently capable of detecting objects on or near a surface and can often differentiate between a touching state and a hovering (propinquity) state based on how the light is reflected, absorbed, or interrupted.
  • Application to UI: As in Combination 1, given the ability of such edge-based systems to distinguish between propinquity and touch, and the teachings of 60/789,188 regarding using detected positions for controlling applications, it would be obvious for a PHOSITA to combine these elements. The obviousness lies in mapping the sensed states (propinquity and touch) to corresponding UI actions (like "mouse over" and "click") to enhance interaction.
  • Specific Optical Elements: The various optical components described in US9569093B2 for its edge-based sensors, such as cover layers, masks with apertures (including tunnel-defining apertures), and lenses (as illustrated in FIGS. 4-8D and 9-16), are well-established optical engineering tools. A PHOSITA would routinely employ these to control the field-of-view, light collimation, and light collection efficiency of optical detectors, optimizing the sensing performance for detecting objects at different distances.

In conclusion, the core claims of US9569093B2, particularly the differentiation between propinquity and touch for specific UI functionalities like "mouse over" and "click," would have been obvious to a PHOSITA. This is because the underlying optical sensing technologies (as exemplified by Bresler et al. and general edge-based optical sensing) were capable of providing such distance-dependent information, and the application of this information to well-known UI paradigms was a logical and predictable step for improving user interaction, especially given prior art teaching the use of detected positions for application control.