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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 04/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the prior art fails to teach a first refractive index matching layer between the conductive layer and the display panel and a second refractive index matching layer between the first refractive index matching layer and the display panel. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In interpretation 1, the following annotated Figure 3 of Saenger Nayver is relied upon to teach the argued limitations:
[AltContent: textbox (Element 80 = second refractive index matching layer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Element 38 = first refractive index matching layer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Element 70 = Conductive layer)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Figure A: Interpretation 1)]
PNG
media_image1.png
685
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that the substrates (elements 22 and 26) are considered to be a part of the display panel, and consequently, the depicted first refractive index matching layer (element 38) is between the conductive layer (element 70) and a portion of the display panel (element 26). Furthermore, the depicted second refractive index matching layer (element 80) is between the depicted first refractive index matching layer (element 38) and a portion of the display panel (element 26).
In interpretation 2, designated as Saenger Nayver alt in the office action, the following annotated Figure 3 of Saenger Nayver is relied upon to teach the argued limitations:
[AltContent: textbox (Examiner’s added thick line representing an additional 80, antireflective coating based on [0035]: “antireflection coating 80 may additionally or alternatively be positioned on the second surface 22B = first refractive index matching layer)][AltContent: textbox (Element 80 = second refractive index matching layer)][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (Element 70 = Conductive layer)][AltContent: textbox (Figure B: Interpretation 2)]
PNG
media_image1.png
685
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner notes that the substrates (elements 22 and 26) are considered to be a part of the display panel, and consequently, the depicted first refractive index matching layer (Examiner’s added thick line representing an additional element 80) is between the conductive layer (element 70) and a portion of the display panel (element 22). Furthermore, the depicted second refractive index matching layer (element 80) is between the depicted first refractive index matching layer (Examiner’s added thick line representing an additional element 80) and a portion of the display panel (element 26).
Thus, in both interpretation 1 and interpretation 2, Examiner maintains the prior art teaches the limitations of claims 1 and 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saenger Nayver et al. (2016/0370586, of record) in view of Shin et al. (2020/0144356, of record).
Regarding claim 1, Saenger Nayver discloses an electronic device (Figure 3, 10, electro-optic assembly), comprising: a display panel (at least Figure 1, 14, heads up display system), comprising: a first substrate (22, first substrate); and a second substrate above the first substrate (26, second substrate); a conductive layer above the display panel (at least 70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium; [0037] teaches 70, transreflective coating, is electrically conductive); a first refractive index matching layer between the conductive layer and the display panel (38, electrochromic medium); a second refractive index matching layer between the first refractive index matching layer and the display panel (80, antireflection coating, adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium); wherein a refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer is smaller than a refractive index of the conductive layer ([0037] teaches the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, may be from 1.37 to 4; [0039] provides specific values of 2.07 and 2.34; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 38, electro-optic medium may be 1.2 or greater, and additionally provides a specific value of 1.45; thus the refractive index of 38, electrochromic medium, is smaller than the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating), wherein a refractive index of the second refractive index matching layer is greater than or equal to the refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer ([0044] teaches the refractive index of the TCO or ITO of 80, antireflection coating, may be less than 2.0; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 38, electro-optic medium may be 1.2 or greater; thus the refractive index of 80, antireflection coating, is larger than the refractive index of 38, electrochromic medium); wherein a thickness of the conductive layer is between 50 Å and 230 Å (Table 1 depicts the thickness of a single layer transreflective coating made of Cr to be 4.7 nm which converts to 47 angstroms; [0035] teaches 80, antireflection coating, may be provided on 22B, second surface; [0047-0048] teach 80, antireflection coating, may be a single layer of a metallic material with a typical thickness between 0.1 and 5 nm, which converts to 1 and 50 angstroms, respectively; thus the combined thickness includes values in the claimed range).
Saenger Nayver fails to teach a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer. Saenger Nayver and Shin are related because both teach an electronic device.
Shin teaches an electronic device (Figure 5) comprising: a conductive pattern (470, side electrode) electrically connecting the conductive layer (430, pad electrode) and the display panel (200, sub-pixel structure; [0064]), wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer (Examiner notes that 470, side electrode, at least indirectly contacts 110, lower substrate, 410, upper substrate, 430, contact electrodes, and 200, sub-pixel structure, among other elements).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Saenger Nayver to have incorporated the teachings of Shin and provide a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer. Doing so would allow for an increase in the maximum display area and a decrease in the minimum non-display area.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer is between the refractive index of the conductive layer and a refractive index of the second substrate ([0045] teaches the refractive index of 26, second substrate, is 1.5; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 38, electro-optic medium may be greater than 1.5; [0039] teaches the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, to be 2.07).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the conductive layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the conductive layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a portion or entire of the non-display area (Figure 3, 70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, is adjacent to 30, seal, and is therefore considered to cover a portion of 30, seal).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the first refractive index matching layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the first refractive index matching layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a portion or entire of the non-display area (Figure 3, 38, electrochromic medium, is adjacent to 30, seal, and is therefore considered to cover a portion of 30, seal).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the refractive index of the second refractive index matching layer is between the refractive index of the conductive layer and a refractive index of the second substrate ([0044] teaches the refractive index of the TCO or ITO of 80, antireflection coating, may be less than 2.0; [0037] teaches the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, may be from 1.37 to 4; [0045] teaches the refractive index of 26, second substrate, is 1.5; thus the refractive index of 80, antireflection coating, is viewed to include values which are between the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, and 26, second substrate).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the second refractive index matching layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 80, antireflection coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the display panel comprises a display area (central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a non-display area surrounding the display area (portion of 10, electro-optic assembly, that includes 30, seal), and the second refractive index matching layer covers the entire display area (Figure 3, 80, antireflection coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, covers the entire central area surrounded by 30, seal) and a portion or entire of the non-display area (Figure 3, 80, antireflection coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium, is adjacent to 30, seal, and is therefore considered to cover a portion of 30, seal).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein a thickness of the second refractive index matching layer is between 50 Å and 2000 Å (at least [0043] teaches 80, antireflection coating, has a thickness of 145 nm, which converts to 1450 angstroms).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second refractive index matching layer comprises a material selected from a group consisting of silicon oxides (SiOx), silicon nitrides (SiNx), silicon oxynitrides (SiOxNy), titanium oxides (TiOx), niobium oxides (Nb.sub.xO.sub.y), indium tin oxides (ITO) and a combination thereof (at least [0047]).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the conductive layer comprises a transparent conductive material (at least [0039]).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, further comprising another conductive layer between the second substrate and the conductive layer (80, antireflection coating, adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium; [0043] teaches 80, antireflection film, may be a transparent conductive oxide).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 17, wherein a thickness of the another conductive layer is between 50 Å and 230 Å ([0047-0048] teach 80, antireflection coating, may be a single layer of a metallic material with a typical thickness between 0.1 and 5 nm, which converts to 50 angstroms).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Saenger Nayver discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 17, wherein the first refractive index matching layer is between the conductive layer and the another conductive layer (Figure 3, 38, electrochromic medium, is between 70, transreflective coating, and 80, antireflective coating).
Regarding claim 1, in an alternative interpretation henceforth referred to as “Saenger Nayver alt”, Saenger Nayver alt discloses an electronic device (Figure 3, 10, electro-optic assembly), comprising: a display panel (at least Figure 1, 14, heads up display system), comprising: a first substrate (22, first substrate); and a second substrate above the first substrate (26, second substrate); a conductive layer above the display panel (70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium; [0037] teaches 70, transreflective coating, is electrically conductive); a first refractive index matching layer between the conductive layer and the display panel (80, antireflective coating, on 22B, second surface; [0035] teaches an additional 80, antireflective coating, may be positioned on 22B, second surface); a second refractive index matching layer between the first refractive index matching layer and the display panel (80, antireflection coating, on 26A, third surface); wherein a refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer is smaller than a refractive index of the conductive layer ([0037] teaches the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, may be from 1.37 to 4; [0039] provides specific values of 2.07 and 2.34; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 80, antireflective coating may be 2.0 or less; thus the refractive index of 80, antireflective coating, is smaller than the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating), wherein a refractive index of the second refractive index matching layer is greater than or equal to the refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer (the refractive indexes of both 80, antireflection coatings, are viewed to be equal)wherein a thickness of the conductive layer is between 50 Å and 230 Å (Table 1 depicts the thickness of a single layer transreflective coating made of Cr to be 4.7 nm which converts to 47 angstroms; [0035] teaches 80, antireflection coating, may be provided on 22B, second surface; [0047-0048] teach 80, antireflection coating, may be a single layer of a metallic material with a typical thickness between 0.1 and 5 nm, which converts to 1 and 50 angstroms, respectively; thus the combined thickness includes values in the claimed range).
Saenger Nayver alt fails to teach a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer. Saenger Nayver alt and Shin are related because both teach an electronic device.
Shin teaches an electronic device (Figure 5) comprising: a conductive pattern (470, side electrode) electrically connecting the conductive layer (430, pad electrode) and the display panel (200, sub-pixel structure; [0064]), wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer (Examiner notes that 470, side electrode, at least indirectly contacts 110, lower substrate, 410, upper substrate, 430, contact electrodes, and 200, sub-pixel structure, among other layers).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Saenger Nayver alt to have incorporated the teachings of Shin and provide a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the conductive pattern contacts the first substrate, the second substrate, the conductive layer, and the first refractive index matching layer and the second refractive index matching layer. Doing so would allow for an increase in the maximum display area and a decrease in the minimum non-display area.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Saenger Nayver alt discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first refractive index matching layer comprises a material selected from a group consisting of silicon oxides (SiOx), silicon nitrides (SiNx), silicon oxynitrides (SiOxNy), magnesium fluorides (MgF.sub.2), and a combination thereof (at least [0047]).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Saenger Nayver alt discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first refractive index matching layer is between 50 Å and 2000 Å (at least [0043] teaches 80, antireflection coating, has a thickness of 145 nm, which converts to 1450 angstroms).
Regarding claim 21, Saenger Nayver discloses an electronic device (Figure 3, 10, electro-optic assembly), comprising: a display panel (at least Figure 1, 14, heads up display system), comprising: a first substrate (22, first substrate); and a second substrate above the first substrate (26, second substrate); a conductive layer above the display panel (at least 70, transreflective coating, which is adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium; [0037] teaches 70, transreflective coating, is electrically conductive); a first refractive index matching layer between the conductive layer and the display panel (38, electrochromic medium); a second refractive index matching layer between the first refractive index matching layer and the display panel (80, antireflection coating, adjacent to 38, electrochromic medium); wherein a refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer is smaller than a refractive index of the conductive layer ([0037] teaches the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating, may be from 1.37 to 4; [0039] provides specific values of 2.07 and 2.34; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 38, electro-optic medium may be 1.2 or greater, and additionally provides a specific value of 1.45; thus the refractive index of 38, electrochromic medium, is smaller than the refractive index of 70, transreflective coating), wherein a refractive index of the second refractive index matching layer is greater than or equal to the refractive index of the first refractive index matching layer ([0044] teaches the refractive index of the TCO or ITO of 80, antireflection coating, may be less than 2.0; [0044] teaches the refractive index of 38, electro-optic medium may be 1.2 or greater; thus the refractive index of 80, antireflection coating, is larger than the refractive index of 38, electrochromic medium), wherein a thickness of the conductive layer is between 50 A and 230 A (Table 1 depicts the thickness of a single layer transreflective coating made of Cr to be 4.7 nm which converts to 47 angstroms; [0035] teaches 80, antireflection coating, may be provided on 22B, second surface; [0047-0048] teach 80, antireflection coating, may be a single layer of a metallic material with a typical thickness between 0.1 and 5 nm, which converts to 1 and 50 angstroms, respectively; thus the combined thickness includes values in the claimed range).
Saenger Nayver fails to teach a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the display panel comprises a display area, a non-display area surrounding the display area, and a bonding area electrically connected to an external chip, wherein the conductive pattern is located in the bonding area. Saenger Nayver and Shin are related because both teach an electronic device.
Shin teaches an electronic device (Figure 5) comprising: a conductive pattern (470, side electrode) electrically connecting the conductive layer (430, pad electrode) and the display panel (200, sub-pixel structure; [0064]), wherein the display panel comprises a display area (10, display region), a non-display area surrounding the display area (20, peripheral region), and a bonding area electrically connected to an external chip ([0068] teaches a FPCB connected to 100, OLED display device), wherein the conductive pattern is located in the bonding area ([0068]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Saenger Nayver to have incorporated the teachings of Shin and provide a conductive pattern electrically connecting the conductive layer and the display panel, wherein the display panel comprises a display area, a non-display area surrounding the display area, and a bonding area electrically connected to an external chip, wherein the conductive pattern is located in the bonding area. Doing so would allow for an increase in the maximum display area and a decrease in the minimum non-display area.
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 BALRAM T PARBADIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0602. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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.
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights