DETAILED ACTION
General Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with line numbers and page numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist the examiner in locating appropriate paragraphs.
Per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification.
For Examiner’s Interview fill out the online Automated Interview Request (AIR) form (http://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html).
Status of claim(s) to be treated in this office action:
Independent: 1.
Pending: 1-20.
Withdrawn: 9-20
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s IDS(s) submitted on 10/11/2022 and 9/5/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has/have considered by the examiner and made of record.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species IV claim 1-8 (fig. 8) in the reply filed on 2/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: DISPLAY DEVICE WITH STAGGERED FLEXIBLE PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD ARRANGEMENT.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 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 of this title, 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al., US PG pub. 20140022148 A1; in view of Cho US PG pub. 20160066410 A1.
Re: Independent Claim 1, Kim discloses a display panel (fig. 1) comprising a display area (310, fig. 1) including a plurality of pixels (PX, fig. 1)
and a non-display area (320, fig. 1) disposed around the display area (310, fig. 1); and
a plurality of flexible printed circuit boards (520, fig. 1) disposed in the non-display area (320, fig. 1) along a first edge of the display panel (fig. 1).
Kim is silent regarding: wherein distances of a first end portion of each of the flexible printed circuit boards (520, fig. 1) from the first edge are different from each other.
Cho teaches the first end portion of each the flexible printed circuit board (31a/31b, fig. 1) from the first edge are different from each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a different edge distance each of the flexible PCB since this can reduce stress applied to each flexible wiring board and improve reliability.
Re: Claim 2, Kim and Cho discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first edge is parallel to a first direction (long side direction of the display area 310, fig. 1), and
the display panel (fig. 1) is curved around an axis in a second direction (short side direction of the display area 310, fig. 1) which is perpendicular to the first direction (long side direction of the display area 310, fig. 1).
Re: Claim 3, Kim and Cho discloses all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the display panel (fig. 1) includes a second edge and a third edge, which are connected to the first edge and opposite to each other in the first direction (long side direction of the display area 310, fig. 1), the flexible printed circuit boards (520, fig. 1) include a first flexible printed circuit board (center of display panel 520, fig. 1) disposed at a center of the display panel (fig. 1) and a second flexible printed circuit board (520 circle with S, fig. 1) disposed adjacent to the second edge of the display panel (fig. 1).
Kim is silent regarding: a first distance between the first end portion of the first flexible printed circuit board (center of display panel 520, fig. 1) and the first edge is greater than a second distance between the first end portion of the second flexible printed circuit board (520 circle with S, fig. 1) and the first edge.
Cho teaches the first end portion of each the flexible printed circuit board (31a/31b, fig. 1) from the first edge are different from each other.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a different edge distance each of the flexible PCB since this can reduce stress applied to each flexible wiring board and improve reliability.
Re: Claim 4, Kim and Cho discloses all the limitations of claim 3 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the flexible printed circuit boards (520, fig. 1) further include a third flexible printed circuit board (520 next to the first flexible PCB, fig. 1) and a fourth flexible printed circuit board (520 on the right side second flexible PCB, fig. 1), which are disposed between the first flexible printed circuit board (center of display panel 520, fig. 1) and the second flexible printed circuit board (520 circle with S, fig. 1), the third flexible printed circuit board (520 next to the first flexible PCB, fig. 1) is disposed closer to the first flexible printed circuit board (center of display panel 520, fig. 1) than to the second flexible printed circuit board (520 circle with S, fig. 1), the fourth flexible printed circuit board (520 on the right side second flexible PCB, fig. 1) is disposed closer to the second flexible printed circuit board (520 circle with S, fig. 1) than to the first flexible printed circuit board (center of display panel 520, fig. 1).
Kim is silent regarding: a third distance between the first end portion of the third flexible printed circuit board (520 next to the first flexible PCB, fig. 1) and the first edge is smaller than a fourth distance between the first end portion of the fourth flexible printed circuit board (520 on the right side second flexible PCB, fig. 1) and the first edge.
Cho teaches the distance between the first end portion of the flexible printed circuit board (3114a, fig. 5) smaller than another distance between the first end portion of the another flexible printed circuit board (3114a, fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a different edge distance each of the flexible PCB since this can reduce stress applied to each flexible wiring board and improve reliability.
Re: Claim 6, Kim and Cho discloses all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: a plurality of first pad portions (first two CG12’ from left to right, fig. 7) disposed in the display panel (fig. 1); and
a plurality of second pad portions (two set of PG11, PG12, from left to right, fig. 7) disposed in each of the flexible printed circuit boards (520, fig. 1),
wherein the first pad portions (first two CG12’ from left to right, fig. 7) are in contact with the second pad portions (two set of PG11, PG12, from left to right, fig. 7).
Prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to current application disclosure.
* (“Kohno US PG pub. 20080088768 A1”) Discloses a mounting film for a liquid crystal display drive chip and a method for manufacturing the same. The mounting film is provided with a slit cut from a side edge thereof, or provided with a weakened line for forming the slit. When a distance between a liquid crystal display panel and a control circuit substrate of the liquid crystal display unit is un-uniform, the opening degree of the slit is variable accordingly to accommodate variations in the distance. Such a COF mounting film for a liquid crystal display drive chip may be generally used even though a distance between the liquid crystal display panel and the control circuit substrate varies slightly. Therefore, the manufacturing cost of the liquid crystal display unit may be reduced.
* (“Park et al., US PG pub. 20170127512 A1”) discloses display apparatus may include a display substrate having a display region and a pad region adjacent to the display region; a first pad row in the pad region, the first pad row including a first pads and a second pads which are aligned along a first direction, center points of the first pads being at a first position in a second direction crossing the first direction, center points of the second pads being at a second position spaced apart from the first position in the second direction, the first and second types of pads being alternately arranged; and a second pad row in the pad region, the second pad row being adjacent to the first pad row in the second direction, the second pad row including a plurality of pads aligned along the first direction.
* (“Oh et al., US PG pub. 20180069067 A1”) discloses a display device according includes a display panel configured to display an image, a first flexible printed circuit film, and a second flexible printed circuit film. The display panel has a first pad area and a second pad area, the first flexible printed circuit film has a third pad area and a fourth pad area, and the second flexible printed circuit film has a fifth pad area and a sixth pad area. The third pad area is bonded to the first pad area, the sixth pad area is bonded to the second pad area, and the fifth pad area is bonded to the fourth pad area. An integrated circuit chip is mounted on the first flexible printed circuit film.
* (“Park et al., US PG pub. 20200015356 A1”) discloses a display apparatus includes a display panel bendable in a bending direction about a bending axis, pad units disposed on one side of the display panel and arranged in the bendable direction, printed circuit boards disposed below the display panel, and flexible printed circuit boards configured to connect the display panel to the printed circuit boards. The printed circuit boards are bendable in the bending direction about the bending axis, are arranged in the bendable direction, and extend in the bendable direction. Each of the flexible printed circuit boards has a first end connected to the display panel and a second end connected to one of the printed circuit boards. A second distance between the second ends of two of the flexible printed circuit boards respectively connected to two adjacent printed circuit boards is greater than a first distance between the first ends of the two flexible printed circuit boards.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 5, 7 and 8 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.
Re: Claim 5, the prior art of record do not disclose or suggest, in combination with all other limitations in the claim: wherein the first distance is greater than the third distance, and the second distance is smaller than the fourth distance.
Re: Claim 7 (and its dependent claim(s) 8), the prior art of record do not disclose or suggest, in combination with all other limitations in the claim: wherein the display panel includes a second edge and a third edge, which are connected to the first edge and opposite to each other in the first direction, and distances of each of the second pad portions from the first end portion are different from each other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSZ CHIU whose telephone number is 571-272-8656. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9:00AM to 5:00PM (EST).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Leonard Chang can be reached on 571-270-3691. 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.
/TSZ K CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 Tsz.Chiu@uspto.gov
/Leonard Chang/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights