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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ submission of replacement drawing, filed on 01/21/2026, is acknowledged. Applicants' amendment of the claims, filed on 01/21/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-18 from the non-final office action, mailed on 10/22/2026, by amending claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15, 17-18; canceling claims 3, 12; and adding new claims 19-22, is acknowledged and will be addressed below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wherein two ends of the arc are at positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame” of Claims 20 and 22, see the details in 112 2nd paragraph below, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
(1) The “wherein and edges of the body” of Claim 8 should be “wherein edges of the body”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
(1) The “wherein edges of the body at which the plurality of first support strips are disposed are first edges, two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips of the plurality of first support strips are joined in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest first edge of the body” of Claims 1 and 10 are not clear, because of the “two adjacent edges”.
The applicants firstly defined “edges of the body at which the plurality of first support strips are disposed are first edges”.
Does the “two adjacent edges” means a part of the plural first edges in one side of the body? If so, why different names are defined? Further, between two first ends, one first edge is existed.
If it is different edge, it is respectfully requested to clarify the difference between the first edges and the adjacent edges. For instance,
“wherein:
edges of the body at which the plurality of first support strips are disposed are first edges;
each first end comprises two edges;
two facing edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips are joined in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest first edge of the body.
For the purpose examination,
It will be examined inclusive of all the interpretations above.
(2) The claims 19 and 21 raises the same issue as the item (1) above.
(3) The “wherein two ends of the arc are at positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame” of Claims 20 and 22 is not clear.
First, it is not clear what the “two ends of the arc” means.
Claims 20 and 22 are dependent from Claims 1 and 10.
Claims 1 and 10 recites “a bottom end of the arc”.
In other words, claims 20 and 22 recites the broad recitation “end”, and the claims 1 and 10 also recites “bottom end” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
Second, it is not clear the “at positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame”.
Based on the applicants’ Fig. 19, the other end of the arc is located at a position lower than the intersecting position S, thus it is not clear, what the “position” means.
For the purpose examination,
It will be examined inclusive of “wherein a top end of the arc are around positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
(1) Continued from 112 2nd paragraph,
As discussed in the 112 2nd paragraph above, the “two ends of the arc” of Claims 20 and 22 is broader than the feature of claims 1 and 10, thus they fail to further limit the claims 1 and 10.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements
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.
Claims 1, 10 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) in view of Kim (KR 10-1659948, hereafter ‘948, filed in the IDS) and Guo et al. (US 20190144987, hereafter ‘987).
Regarding to Claim 1, AAPA teaches:
a full mask sheet commonly used in wearable products (Figs. 3-4, [0005]), and A current mask assembly generally includes a metal frame 10′, a fine metal mask 20′ (FMM) and a full mask sheet 30′ ([0004], the claimed “A mask assembly, comprising a frame, and a first mask and a second mask stacked on the frame, wherein the first mask is located at a side of the second mask away from the frame”);
The fine metal mask is used to evaporate a light-emitting layer material to form a pixel pattern on a backplate. The fine metal mask includes a plurality of fine metal mask strips 21′ ([0004], see also Fig. 4, the claimed “the first mask comprising a plurality of mask strips disposed along a first direction, wherein gaps are disposed respectively between any two adjacent mask strips of the plurality of mask strips, and a plurality of pixel openings are arranged in an array in each of the mask strips”);
See the full mask sheet 30’ of Fig. 3 (the claimed “the second mask comprising a body and support strips disposed along a periphery of the body, wherein first ends of the support strips are connected with the body; second ends disposed opposite to the first ends respectively are connected with the frame” and further “the support strips further comprise a plurality of first support strips extending along the first direction and a plurality of second support strips extending along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, the plurality of first support strips are spaced apart along the second direction, and the plurality of second support strips are spaced apart along the first direction”);
openings 311′ arranged on the full mask sheet 30′ ([0006], the claimed “a plurality of openings configured to define a shape of a display region are arranged in an array in the body”);
See the plurality of fine metal mask strips 21′ disposed on the full mask sheet 30’ of Fig. 4 (the claimed “a size of each of the plurality of openings in the first direction is less than a size of each of the plurality of the mask strips in the first direction” and further “and the plurality of first support strips are disposed corresponding to the gaps; wherein edges of the body at which the plurality of first support strips are disposed are first edges, two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips of the plurality of first support strips are joined in an shape”);
Fig. 3 of AAPA clearly shows widths of the outermost support strips arranged in two different directions (the claimed “wherein widths of first ends of outermost first and second support strips, along a direction from away from the body to close to the body”).
AAPA does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of:
Claim 1: (1A) wherein widths of first ends of outermost first and second support strips gradually increase along a direction from away from the body to close to the body.
(1B) two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips of the plurality of first support strips are joined in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest first edge of the body.
In regards to the limitation of (1A),
‘948 is analogous art in the field of mask (English title). Fig. 4 of ‘948 clearly shows the protruding strips 43, 45 has gradually increased widths of the end coupled to the sheet body 44, 45, specifically see a region around the area 43b.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have gradually increased the edge area, for the purpose of providing more durability, because a thicker area is stronger than a thinner area.
In regards to the limitation of (1B),
‘987 is analogous art in the field of mask (title). Fig. 6 of ‘987 clearly shows the two facing edges of the two adjacent protruding structures a2 are joined by a straight shaped strip structure a1, and further Figs. 7-8 clearly show the two facing edges of the two adjacent protruding structures a2 are joined by a arc shaped strip structure a1 and the bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest edge of the strip structure a1, which is the “dot” line. Consequently, the straight shape and the arc shape are mere simple change of shape.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the straight shape between the two facing edges of the two adjacent first ends of AAPA, so to be an arc shape, for the purpose of easily disbursing the stress accumulated on the straight joints, and/or since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component, and one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application and a change of shape is generally recognized as being within the ordinary level of skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding to Claim 10, AAPA teaches:
Evaporation device (title, the claimed “An evaporation device, comprising a mask assembly including”);
The rest of the claim 10 is the same as claim 1, thus it is omitted.
Regarding to Claims 19 and 21,
AAPA is silent about the “wherein edges of the body at which the plurality of second support strips are disposed are second edges, and two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent second support strips of the plurality of second support strips are in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest second edge of the body”.
However, the recited feature is mere the same feature of Claims 1 and 10, which is merely applied to one side of the body, thus the teaching of ‘987 can be applied to any side of the body of the full mask sheet 30’ of AAPA, by a mere duplication of the same feature.
Consequently, even if AAPA does not explicitly teach the feature,
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the straight shape between the two facing edges of the two adjacent first ends of the second support strip side of the AAPA, so to be an arc shape, for the purpose of easily disbursing the stress accumulated on the straight joints, and/or since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component, and one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application and a change of shape is generally recognized as being within the ordinary level of skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04.
Further MPEP clearly guide duplication of part is an obvious matter, see MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding to Claims 20 and 22,
As discussed in the claims 1 and 10 rejection above, when the arc is applied, the top end of the arc is around the positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame (the claimed “wherein two ends of the arc are at positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame”).
Claims 1-2, 4-11 and 13-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘948 in view of ‘987.
Regarding to Claim 1, ‘948 teaches:
a plurality of sets of FM mask sticks 136 are bonded onto an intermediate assembly to which a large, large support sheet 134 is bonded on a mask frame 132 (Figs. 1 and 13, page 20, last 3rd paragraph of the English translation, note the mask sticks 136 corresponds to the mask sticks 16 of Fig. 1, and the openings of the mask sticks 136 corresponds to the pattern portion 16b of Fig. 1), and both sides of each FM mask stick 1460 are supported by the horizontal rib 1442 of the support sheet 144 (page 21, 1st paragraph, note Fig. 14 clearly shows a gap between the two mask sticks 1460 and at the gap, the rib 1442 is disposed, further note the mask sticks 1460 are arranged in the Y direction of Fig. 5, which corresponds to the “first direction”, the claimed “A mask assembly, comprising a frame, and a first mask and a second mask stacked on the frame, wherein the first mask is located at a side of the second mask away from the frame; the first mask comprising a plurality of mask strips disposed along a first direction, wherein gaps are disposed respectively between any two adjacent mask strips of the plurality of mask strips, and a plurality of pixel openings are arranged in an array in each of the mask strips”);
See the support sheet 40 of Fig. 4 (the claimed “the second mask comprising a body and support strips disposed along a periphery of the body, wherein first ends of the support strips are connected with the body; second ends disposed opposite to the first ends respectively are connected with the frame” and further “the support strips further comprise a plurality of first support strips extending along the first direction and a plurality of second support strips extending along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, the plurality of first support strips are spaced apart along the second direction, and the plurality of second support strips are spaced apart along the first direction”);
See the openings 46 of Fig. 4 (the claimed “a plurality of openings configured to define a shape of a display region are arranged in an array in the body”);
See the FM mask sticks 136 bonded onto the support sheet 134 of Fig. 13 (the claimed “a size of each of the plurality of openings in the first direction is less than a size of each of the plurality of the mask strips in the first direction” and further “and the plurality of first support strips are disposed corresponding to the gaps; wherein edges of the body at which the plurality of first support strips are disposed are first edges, two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips of the plurality of first support strips are joined in an shape”);
Fig. 4 clearly shows the protruding strips 43, 45 has gradually increased widths at the end coupled to the sheet body 44, 45, specifically see a region around the area 43b (the claimed “wherein widths of first ends of outermost first and second support strips gradually increase along a direction from away from the body to close to the body”).
‘948 does not explicitly teach the other limitations (BOLD and ITALIC letter) of:
Claim 1: two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent first support strips of the plurality of first support strips are joined in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest first edge of the body.
‘987 is analogous art in the field of mask (title). Fig. 6 of ‘987 clearly shows the two facing edges of the two adjacent protruding structures a2 are joined by a straight shaped strip structure a1, and further Figs. 7-8 clearly show the two facing edges of the two adjacent protruding structures a2 are joined by a arc shaped strip structure a1 and the bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest edge of the strip structure a1, which is the “dot” line. Consequently, the straight shape and the arc shape are mere simple change of shape.
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the straight shape between the two facing edges of the two adjacent first ends of AAPA, so to be an arc shape, for the purpose of easily disbursing the stress accumulated on the straight joints, and/or since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component, and one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application and a change of shape is generally recognized as being within the ordinary level of skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding to Claim 10, ‘948 teaches:
The thin film process uses a mask assembly having a corresponding pattern, and may be formed by a process such as… vacuum evaporation (Background Art [0002] of page 1, the claimed “An evaporation device, comprising a mask assembly including”);
The rest of the claim 10 is the same as claim 1, thus it is omitted.
Regarding to Claims 2-5 and 11-14,
Fig. 4 clearly shows gradually increased area 43b for all the protruding strips 43, 45 has a increased corner shape, which can be interpreted to be either curved or straight (the claimed “wherein rounded corners are disposed respectively at portions of an outermost edge of the first ends of the outermost first support strips and two opposed edges of the first ends of the outermost second support strips joining the body” of Claims 2 and 11, “widths of first ends of at least part of other second support strips gradually increase along the direction from away from the body to close to the body” of Claims 4 and 13, and “rounded corners are disposed respectively at portions of two opposed edges of the first ends of at least part of the other second support strips joining the body” of Claims 5 and 14).
Regarding to Claims 6-7 and 15-16,
Fig. 4 of ‘948 clearly shows a width of the second ends of the strips 43 or 45, thus it can be interpreted as a minimum width, therefore, it teaches all the limitation of “wherein a width of the second ends of the first support strips is to a width of each of the gaps” of Claims 6-7 and “wherein a width of the second ends of the first support strips is a minimum width of the first support strips, and the minimum width of the first support strips is” of Claims 15-16, except the “less than or equal” of Claims 6-7 and “1.8mm to 2.0mm” of Claims 15-16.
However, it is clear that the width determines durability of the strip when it is coupled to the frame, because a thicker width is stronger than a thinner width, thus the width is a result effective parameter to control the durability.
Consequently, even if ‘948 does not explicitly teach the number ranges of the width, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have found it as recited, for the purpose of providing appropriate durability, depending on a desired application, and/or since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to Claims 9 and 18,
Fig. 4 of ‘948 clearly shows a distance between two adjacent strips 43 or 45 is greater than the size of the openings 46 (the claimed “wherein a distance between two adjacent second support strips is greater than the size of the openings in the first direction”).
Regarding to Claims 19 and 21,
‘948 is silent about the “wherein edges of the body at which the plurality of second support strips are disposed are second edges, and two adjacent edges between two first ends of any two adjacent second support strips of the plurality of second support strips are in an arc shape and a bottom end of the arc is tangent to a nearest second edge of the body”.
However, the recited feature is mere the same feature of Claims 1 and 10, which is merely applied to one side of the body, thus the teaching of ‘987 can be applied to any side of the body of ‘948, by a mere duplication of the same feature.
Consequently, even if ‘948 does not explicitly teach the feature,
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the straight shape between the two facing edges of the two adjacent first ends of the second support strip side of ‘948, so to be an arc shape, for the purpose of easily disbursing the stress accumulated on the straight joints, and/or since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component, and one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application and a change of shape is generally recognized as being within the ordinary level of skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04.
Further MPEP clearly guide duplication of part is an obvious matter, see MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding to Claims 20 and 22,
As discussed in the claims 1 and 10 rejection above, when the arc is applied, the top end of the arc is around the positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame (the claimed “wherein two ends of the arc are at positions where the two first support strips intersect with the frame”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Because of the arc shape of the amended claims 1 and 10,
Claims 8 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 01/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not convincing in light of the new ground of rejection above.
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 AIDEN Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1440. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9am-5pm PT.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AIDEN LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Prosecution Insights