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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 10/07/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-24 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/07/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 3/21/2023, 8/1/2024, and 5/14/2025. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Song (2007/0046623).
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses, in figures 1 and 2, a display device (electronic paper display device) (figure 1 and paragraph 0007) comprising: an outer substrate (102, lower substrate; see annotated figure 1 below); an inner substrate (101, lower substrate; see annotated figure 1 below); a first electrode (106, upper transparent electrode) and a second electrode (105, upper transparent electrode) disposed between the inner substrate (101, lower substrate) and the outer substrate (102, lower substrate) a spaced apart relationship (paragraph 0007 and figure 1); and a plurality of microspheres (100, microcapsule) between the first and second electrodes (106, upper transport electrode and 105, upper transparent electrode) (paragraph 0007), each microsphere (100, micro capsule) comprising a spherical shell enclosing an electrophoretic media (103a and 103b, color ink particles and 107, binder) (paragraph 0007; Examiner notes that a microcapsule holds a core material and is enclosed by a shell); and wherein the electrophoretic media (103a and 103b, color ink particles and 107, binder) comprises a first chemical entity (103a, color ink particles) and a second chemical entity (103b, color ink particles) (paragraph 0007), wherein the first and second chemical entities (103a and 103b, color ink particles) are to be induced to reversibly interact to switch between a separated state and an optically active state in response to a change in an electromagnetic field applied to the electrophoretic media (103a and 103b, color ink particles and 107, binder) by the first and second electrodes (106, upper transparent electrode and 105, lower transparent electrode) to change an optical property of the electrophoretic media (103a and 103b, color ink particles and 107, binder) (paragraph 0005 discloses moving the particles due to the change of the polarities of an electromagnetic field; paragraphs 0006 and 0009 disclose an electric field is applied to the charged particles to move the particles to an electrode having opposite charge through the dispersion medium; Examiner notes that the active state is when the fields are active and the particles move to create an image and non-active state is when the display is in a standby state).
PNG
media_image1.png
386
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (2007/0046623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamazaki et al. (2011/0090186), hereinafter Yamazaki.
Regarding claim 2, Song discloses all the limitations in common with claim 1, and such is hereby incorporated.
Song discloses wherein each microsphere has a diameter (paragraph 0007). Song does not specifically disclose wherein each microsphere has a diameter of between about 100 nm to about 20 µm.
Song and Yamazaki are related as electronic display devices.
Yamazaki discloses wherein each microsphere has a diameter of between about 100 nm to about 20 µm (paragraph 0090 discloses the microcapsules are about 10 to 200 µm).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Song with the microcapsules of Yamazaki for the purpose of placing/fitting the micro capsules in the electrophoretic media of the display.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (2007/0046623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kataoka, Kazunori et al. (CN 105188905), hereinafter Kataoka.
Regarding claim 3, Song discloses all the limitations in common with claim 1, and such is hereby incorporated.
Song discloses wherein each microsphere has a diameter (paragraph 0007). Song does not specifically disclose wherein each microsphere has a diameter of between about 300 nm to about 1 µm.
Kataoka discloses wherein each microsphere has a diameter of between about 300 nm to about 1 µm (paragraph 35 discloses having a diameter of about 100 nm).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Song with the microcapsules of Kataoka for the purpose of having micro capsules of a particular size to hold the colored particles.
Regarding claim 4, Kataoka discloses wherein a dispersity index of the plurality of microspheres is between about 1 and 1.2 (paragraph 565 discloses 0087).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a dispersity index of between 1 and 1.2 since the claimed ranges and the prior art ranges are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties, Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Nabber, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) and further being motivated to ensure a uniform size of the microcapsules.
Regarding claim 5, Kataoka discloses wherein a thickness of the shell of each microsphere is between about 5 nm to about 80 nm (paragraph 397 discloses 5 nm or more).
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (2007/0046623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamoto Nozomi et al. (JP 2015018209), hereinafter Nozomi.
Regarding claim 6, Song discloses all the limitations in common with claim 1, and such is hereby incorporated.
does not specifically disclose further comprising a layer structure to contain the plurality of microspheres between the first and second electrodes, and wherein the plurality of microspheres are arranged in a lattice within the layer structure.
Nozomi discloses further comprising a layer structure to contain the plurality of microspheres between the first and second electrodes, and wherein the plurality of microspheres are arranged in a lattice within the layer structure (figure 1 below shows the microspheres in a lattice formation and Nozomi discloses a lattice pattern).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Song with the lattice pattern of Nozomi for the purpose of isolating the dispersion liquid from the plurality of cells.
PNG
media_image2.png
200
448
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Nozomi discloses wherein the lattice comprises one of: a face-centered cubic packing arrangement or a hexagonal close packing arrangement (figure 1 above shoes cubic and hexagonal arrangements).
Regarding claim 8, Nozomi discloses further comprising additional layer structures arranged substantially parallel to the layer structure to contain additional microspheres between the first and second electrodes (see figure 1 above, shows a lattice structure with a plurality of layers).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDI N THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2341. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 - 3:30.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/BRANDI N THOMAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872