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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-12, 14-15, 18-20, 22-23, 25 and 27 are pending.
Claims 7, 9, 13, 16-17, 21, 24 and 26 are canceled.
Claims 1 is currently amended.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 19 and 22 are original.
Claims 4, 8, 10-12 14-15, 18, 20, 23, 25 and 27 are previously presented.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-12, 14-15, 18-20, 22-23, 25 and 27 are rejected herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that “neither Ku nor Xu discloses that the plurality of convex lenses are in direct contact with the black matrix.” Remarks/Arguments, page 8. This argument is not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Accordingly, attacking only Ku (US 20230267759 A1) and Xu (US 20190050621 A1) cannot show nonobviousness where the rejection is based on a combination of references including, inter alia, Kamada (US 12096659 B2). Notably, Kamada discloses lenses (149) in direct contact with the black matrix (BM). See, e.g., FIG. 2B.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that “[b]ecause the LENS of Ku is continuous, Ku and Xu cannot be combined.” Remarks/Arguments, page 8. This argument is not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Ku and Xu cannot be combined, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Notably, the combined teachings of Bouthinon (US 20210233975 A1), Ku and Xu, would have suggested, to those of ordinary skill in the art, a display substrate comprising: a plurality of convex lenses arranged on a side, away from the base substrate, of the black matrix; wherein the convex lenses and the second openings are arranged in a one-to-one correspondence mode, convex faces of the convex lenses face away from the photosensitive devices, and the convex lenses are configured to converge light rays, within a preset angle range, reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices via the second openings, wherein the plurality of convex lenses are not continuous, and one of the plurality of first openings is between adjacent convex lenses in a direction parallel to the base substrate. For a more detailed treatment of what the combined teachings of Bouthinon, Ku and Xu would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art, see the rejection of claim 1 hereinbelow.
Additionally, Applicant argues that the “[d]ependent claims are also patentable by virtue of their dependencies of the allowable base claim.” Remarks/Arguments, page 9. This argument is also not persuasive. Indeed, no base claim has been found or deemed allowable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10-12, 14-15, 18-20, 22-23, 25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouthinon (US 20210233975 A1) in view of Han (US 20220067340 A1), Ku (US 20230267759 A1), Xu (US 20190050621 A1) and Kamada (US 12096659 B2).
[AltContent: textbox (E1)][AltContent: textbox (E2)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (D1)][AltContent: textbox (D2)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (S)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: ][AltContent: ][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (O2)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (O1)][AltContent: textbox (10)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (L)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
459
741
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (OP2)]
[AltContent: textbox (OP1)]
ANNOTATED FIG. 10 OF BOUTHINON
Regarding claim 1, Bouthinon discloses (see generally, e.g., FIG. 2 and annotated FIG. 10 herein) a display substrate (90), comprising:
a base substrate (10);
a plurality of light-emitting devices (16), arranged on the base substrate (10);
a plurality of photosensitive devices (18), arranged between a layer (L) where the plurality of light-emitting devices (16) are located and the base substrate (10), wherein orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the plurality of photosensitive devices (18) are at gaps of adjacent orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the plurality of light-emitting devices (16) (see, e.g., FIG. 2); and
a plurality of color filters (92) and a matrix (94), arranged on a side (i.e., upper side), facing away from the base substrate (10), of the layer (L) where the plurality of light-emitting devices (16) are located;
wherein the matrix (94) has a plurality of first openings (O1) and a plurality of second openings (O2), the plurality of color filters (92) are correspondingly arranged in the plurality of first openings (O1) and cover the plurality of light-emitting devices (16), and orthographic projections (OP1), on the base substrate (10), of the plurality of second openings (O2) are overlapped with the orthographic projections (OP2), on the base substrate (10), of the plurality of photosensitive devices (18).
While Bouthinon discloses that the matrix (94) is opaque (see, e.g., paragraph [0149]), Bouthinon does not explicitly disclose that the matrix (94) is black.
However, in analogous art, Han discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 40 and paragraph [0292]) a black matrix (BM) used to block light.
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the matrix (94) of Bouthinon black as taught by Han according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to use a readily available and known material for its intended purpose and make the matrix (94) effectively light blocking.
Bouthinon in view of Han does not explicitly disclose:
the display substrate further comprises: a plurality of convex lenses arranged on a side, away from the base substrate, of the black matrix; wherein
the convex lenses and the second openings are arranged in a one-to-one correspondence mode, convex faces of the convex lenses face away from the photosensitive devices, and the convex lenses are configured to converge light rays, within a preset angle range, reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices via the second openings.
However, in analogous art, Ku discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 13) a plurality of convex lenses (LENS) arranged on a side, away from base substrate (FSUB), of a light-blocking matrix (LSCL); wherein
the convex lenses (LENS) and the second openings (LTH) are arranged in a one-to-one correspondence mode (see, e.g., FIG. 13), convex faces (i.e., upper faces) of the convex lenses (LENS) face away from the photosensitive devices (PD), and the convex lenses (LENS) are configured to converge light rays, within a preset angle range, reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices (PD) via the second openings (LTH). See also, e.g., paragraph [0090].
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to having included, in the display substrate (90) of Bouthinon, a plurality of convex lenses arranged on a side, away from base substrate (10) of Bouthinon, of the black matrix (94) of Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han as detailed herein), wherein the convex lenses and the second openings (O2) of Bouthinon are arranged in a one-to-one correspondence mode, convex faces of the convex lenses face away from the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon, and the convex lenses are configured to converge light rays, within a preset angle range, reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon via the second openings (O2) of Bouthinon as taught by Ku according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to more effectively direct and/or concentrate light rays reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon. See, e.g., paragraph [0090] of Ku.
Bouthinon in view of Han and Ku does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the plurality of convex lenses are not continuous, and one of the plurality of first openings is between adjacent convex lenses in a direction parallel to the base substrate.
However, in analogous art, Xu (see, e.g., FIGS. 20 and 21) discloses wherein the plurality of convex lenses (201) are not continuous and the convex lenses (201) are spaced apart from one another to be in one-to-one vertical alignment with the openings (2002) in the light-shielding material (2021) and the photosensitive devices (31).
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the plurality of convex lenses in Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han and Ku as detailed herein) to be not continuous with the lenses spaced apart from one another to be in one-to-one vertical alignment with the openings (O2) of Bouthinon and the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon as taught by Xu, such that one of the plurality of first openings (O1) of Bouthinon is between adjacent convex lenses in a direction parallel to the base substrate (10) of Bouthinon, according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to omit extraneous lenses where they are not needed to focus, converge or otherwise direct light rays reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon via the second openings (O2) of Bouthinon, thereby simplifying the device and/or the manufacturing thereof.
Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku and Xu does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the plurality of convex lenses are in direct contact with the black matrix.
However, in analogous art, Kamada (see, e.g., FIG. 2B) discloses wherein the plurality of convex lenses (149) are in direct contact with the black matrix (BM).
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the plurality of convex lenses in Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han, Ku and Xu as detailed herein) to be in direct contact with the black matrix (94) of Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han, Ku and Xu as detailed herein) as taught by Kamada according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to inhibit and/or guard against unwanted light passing through a gap between the between the lens and the black matrix. Note, Kamada discloses that “[a]n end portion of the light-blocking layer preferably overlaps with an end portion of the lens.” Col. 3, lines 37-38.
Regarding claim 2, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon further discloses wherein at least one second opening (O2) is arranged corresponding to a respective one of the photosensitive device (18).
Regarding claim 3, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 2 discloses the display substrate according to claim 2.
Bouthinon further discloses wherein an orthographic projection (OP1), on the base substrate (10), of the second opening (O2) is covered by an orthographic projection (OP2), on the base substrate (10), of the respective one photosensitive device (18).
Regarding claim 4, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 3 discloses the display substrate according to claim 3.
Bouthinon further disclose wherein a shape of the second opening (O2) is a regular polygon. See, e.g., FIG. 13.
Note, FIG. 13 shows an angular filter (102) which may optionally replace the filter (82) that is located in the second opening (O2). See, e.g., paragraph [0154]. The angular filter (102) is shown as a square, i.e., a regular polygon. Accordingly, the shape of the second opening (O2) is also a square, i.e., a regular polygon.
Regarding claim 5, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 4 discloses the display substrate according to claim 4.
Bouthinon further discloses wherein a length of a diagonal line, when the second opening (O2) is the regular polygon, of the second opening (O2) is 2 µm-20 µm.
Note, any number of “diagonal lines” can be drawn within a regular polygon. The claim language does not specify or recite which of those diagonal lines is the claimed diagonal line or which diagonal line the length relates to. Accordingly, under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), the claimed length may be for any diagonal line which may be drawn within a regular polygon. As disclosed by Bouthinon, the shapes of the second openings (O2) are squares, i.e., regular polygons. Bouthinon further discloses that the angular filter (102) which fits into the second opening (O2) has a 6 by 6 array of holes 108 at a pitch (p) of, e.g., 20 µm. See, e.g., FIG. 13 and paragraph [0164]. Accordingly, the second opening (O2) is disclosed as a square at least 120 µm by 120 µm. Necessarily, some diagonal line within such a square has a length of 2 µm-20 µm. Such a diagonal line reads on the claimed diagonal line.
Regarding claim 8, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Ku further discloses wherein:
orthographic projections, on the base substrate (FSUB), of the convex lenses (LENS) completely cover the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (FSUB), of the second openings (LTH), and
centers of the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (FSUB), of the convex lenses (LENS) are coincided with centers of the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (FSUB), of the second openings (LTH). See, e.g., FIG. 13 of Ku.
[AltContent: textbox (P2)][AltContent: textbox (P1)][AltContent: textbox (SUB)]
PNG
media_image2.png
421
702
media_image2.png
Greyscale
ANNOTATED FIG. 21 OF XU
Regarding claim 10, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 8 discloses the display substrate according to claim 8.
Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku and Kamada does not explicitly discloses:
wherein each of the convex lenses is configured to converge light rays with different angles within the preset angle range to at least two intersection points, an orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of one of the intersection points is coincided with a center of an orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of the each convex lenses, and orthographic projections, on the base substrate, of a rest of the at least two intersection points shift a distance relative to the center of the orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of the each convex lenses.
However, in analogous art, Xu discloses (see, e.g., annotated FIG. 21 herein and paragraph [0126]) wherein each of the convex lenses (201) is configured to converge light rays (a-g) with different angles within the preset angle range to at least two intersection points (P1, P2), an orthographic projection, on the base substrate (SUB), of one of the intersection points (P1) is coincided with a center of an orthographic projection, on the base substrate (SUB), of the each convex lenses (201), and orthographic projections, on the base substrate (SUB), of a rest of the at least two intersection points (P2) shift a distance relative to the center of the orthographic projection, on the base substrate (SUB), of the each convex lenses (201).
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to having configured the convex lens of Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as detailed herein) so as to converge light rays with different angles within the preset angle range to at least two intersection points, an orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of one of the intersection points is coincided with a center of an orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of the each convex lenses, and orthographic projections, on the base substrate, of a rest of the at least two intersection points shift a distance relative to the center of the orthographic projection, on the base substrate, of the each convex lenses as taught by Xu according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to effectively direct and/or concentrate desired light rays reflected by fingers to the photosensitive devices (18) of Bouthinon. See, e.g., paragraph [0126] of Xu.
Regarding claim 11, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku and Kamada does not explicitly disclose wherein a refractive index of the convex lenses is 1.6-1.8, and a curvature radius of the convex lenses is 5 µm-20 µm.
However, in analogous art, Xu discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 20 and paragraphs [0121]-[0122]) wherein a refractive index (n1) of the convex lenses (201) is 1.6-1.8 (e.g., 1.7), and a curvature radius (r) of the convex lenses (201) is 5 µm-20 µm (e.g., 6 µm).
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to having configured the convex lens of Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as detailed herein) so as to have a refractive index of the convex lenses be 1.7, and a curvature radius of the convex lenses be 6 µm as taught by Xu according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to have a desired focal length and to make manufacturing of the lens “relatively easy.” See, e.g., paragraph [0122] of Xu.
Regarding claim 12, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 11 discloses the display substrate according to claim 11.
Xu further discloses (see, e.g., annotated FIG. 21 herein and paragraphs [0121]-[0122]): a transparent bonding layer (18) arranged on a side (i.e., upper side), facing away from the base substrate (SUB), of a layer where the plurality of convex lenses (201) are located, and a refractive index (n2) (e.g., 1.5) of the transparent bonding layer (18) is smaller than the refractive index (n1) (e.g., 1.7) of the convex lenses (201).
Xu does not explicitly disclose that the refractive index of the transparent bonding layer is 1.35-1.45.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have lowered the refractive index of the bonding layer (18) of Xu to 1.35-1.45 according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to modify (i.e., increase) a radius of curvature (r) of the lens and thereby make manufacturing of the lens even more “relatively easy.” See, e.g., paragraph [0122] of Xu.
Regarding claim 14, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon further discloses: a plurality of light-filtering structures (82), wherein one light-filtering structure (82) is arranged in each second opening (O2), and the plurality of light-filtering structures (82) are configured to filter infrared light rays.
Note, Bouthinon discloses the light-filtering structures (82) can be made from a colored resin and make it possible to filter incident radiation that reaches each photosensitive device (18) and this makes it possible to acquire an image in a given wavelength range, e.g., green. See, e.g., paragraph [0148]. Accordingly, the light-filtering structures (82) are configured to filter infrared light rays.
Regarding claim 15, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 14 discloses the display substrate (90) according to claim 14.
Bouthin further discloses wherein a material of the light-filtering structures (82) is green resin (see, e.g., paragraph [0148]);
a surface (S), away from the base substrate (10), of the light-filtering structures (82) is flush with a surface (S), away from the base substrate, of the black matrix (92), and
a distance (D1) from the surface (S), away from the base substrate (10), of the light-filtering structures (82) to the base substrate (10) is greater than a distance (D2) from the surface (S), away from the base substrate (10), of the black matrix (92) to the base substrate (10).
Regarding claim 18, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon further discloses: a light-shading layer (94, 102) arranged on a side, facing the base substrate (10), of the black matrix (94), wherein the light-shading layer (94, 102) has a plurality of third openings (i.e., openings in which angular filters (102) are located, referred to and/or identified herein by O3 for shorthand); and
the plurality of third openings (O3) and the plurality of second openings (O2) are in one-to-one correspondence, and orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the third openings (O3) and the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the second openings (O2) are at least partially coincided.
Note, Bouthinon discloses a light-shading layer (94, 102). See, e.g., FIG. 11. As disclosed, according to another embodiment of Bouthinon, the black matrix (94) of FIG. 10 including second openings (O2) for the filters (82) is arranged in a layer above the light-shading layer (94, 102) of FIG. 11 including third openings (O3) for the angular filters (102). See, e.g., paragraph [0157]. When the embodiment of Bouthinon is configured as described in paragraph [0157], the respective orthographic projections would meet the claimed limitation(s) related thereto.
Regarding claim 19, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 18 discloses the display substrate according to claim 18.
Bouthinon further discloses wherein the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the third openings (O3) are in orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the second openings (O2) corresponding to the third openings (O3), and centers of the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the third openings (O3) are coincided with centers of the orthographic projections, on the base substrate (10), of the second openings (O2) corresponding to the third openings (O3).
Note, as shown in FIGS 10 and 11, the second openings (O2) for the filters (82) align vertically with the third opening (O3) for the angular filters (102). Accordingly, when the embodiment of Bouthinon is configured as described in paragraph [0157], the respective orthographic projections would meet the claimed limitation(s) related thereto.
Regarding claim 20, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 18 discloses the display substrate according to claim 18.
Bouthinon further discloses, wherein:
a shape of the third openings (O3) is a regular polygon, and
lengths of diagonal lines, when the third openings (O3) are the regular polygon, of the third openings (O3) are 2 µm-10 µm.
Note, any number of “diagonal lines” can be drawn within a regular polygon. The claim language does not specify or recite which of those diagonal lines are the claimed diagonal lines or which diagonal lines the lengths relate to. Accordingly, under the BRI, the claimed lengths may be for any diagonal lines which may be drawn within a regular polygon. As disclosed by Bouthinon, the shapes of the third openings (O3) are squares, i.e., regular polygons. Bouthinon further discloses that the angular filter (102) which fits into the third openings (O3) has a 6 by 6 array of holes 108 at a pitch (p) of, e.g., 20 µm. See, e.g., FIG. 13 and paragraph [0164]. Accordingly, the third openings (O3) are disclosed as squares at least 120 µm by 120 µm. Necessarily, some diagonal lines within such squares have lengths of 2 µm-10 µm. Such diagonal lines read on the claimed diagonal lines.
Regarding claim 22, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 18 discloses the display substrate according to claim 18.
Bouthinon further discloses wherein in a direction perpendicular to the base substrate (10), a thickness (h) of the light-shading layer (94, 102) is 3000 Ǻ-2 µm. See, e.g., FIGS. 10-12 and paragraphs [0157] and [0164].
Regarding claim 23, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 22 discloses the display substrate according to claim 22.
Bouthinon further discloses, wherein a material of the light-shading layer (94, 102) is same as a material of the black matrix (94), and the thickness (h) of the light-shading layer (94, 102) is 0.5 µm-2 µm. See, e.g., FIGS. 10-12 and paragraphs [0157], [0159] and [0164].
Regarding claim 25, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 18 discloses the display substrate according to claim 18.
Bouthinon further discloses an encapsulation layer (24) arranged between the layer (L) where the plurality of light-emitting devices (16) are located and a layer where the plurality of color filters (92) are located.
While Bouthinon discloses the light-shading layer (94, 102) and first electrodes (E1) and second electrodes (E2) of the light-emitting device (16), Bouthinon does not explicitly disclose that the light-shielding layer is between a layer where first electrodes of the light-emitting devices are located and the encapsulation layer; and wherein the light-shading layer and second electrodes of the light-emitting devices are arranged on same layer.
Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the light-shielding layer (94, 102) of Bouthinon on the same layer as where the second electrodes (E2) of Bouthinon are arranged according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to not have to form a separate distinct layer for the light-shielding layer (94, 102) thereby simplifying fabrication and/or maintaining a suitably compact and/or thin display substrate (90). When so configured, the light-shielding layer (94, 102) of Bouthinon is further between a layer where first electrodes (E1) of the light-emitting devices (16) are located and the encapsulation layer (24).
Regarding claim 27, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon further discloses a display apparatus (abstract), comprising the display substrate (90).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Lee (US 20220190041 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as applied to claim 1 discloses the display substrate according to claim 1.
Bouthinon in view of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada does not explicitly disclose wherein in a direction perpendicular to the base substrate, a thickness of the black matrix is 1 µm-5 µm.
However, in analogous art, Lee discloses (see, e.g., FIG. 9 and paragraph [0178]) a black matrix (191A) having a thickness of 1 µm.
It would have been obvious to and within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the thickness of the black matrix (94) of Bouthinon (i.e., as modified in accordance with the teachings of Han, Ku, Xu and Kamada as detailed herein) 1 µm in a direction perpendicular to the base substrate (10) of Bouthinon as taught by Lee according to known methods to yield predictable results, for example, in order to provide a black matrix (94) with a desired absorbance (see, e.g., paragraph [0178] of Lee) without unduly increasing an overall thickness of the base substrate (90) of Bouthinon, and thereby maintaining a suitably thin and/or compact device.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN P CORNELY whose telephone number is (571)272-4172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at (571) 272-1945. 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.
JOHN P. CORNELY
Examiner
Art Unit 2812
/J.P.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812