DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/7/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim1 be found allowable, claim 19 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 17, 19, 21-24, and 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US 2022/0231080; herein “Li”).
Regarding claim 1, claims 17 and 19, Li discloses in Fig. 9E and related text a display device comprising:
a first assembly electrode (e.g. a lower layer of ET1, see [0108] and [0203]) disposed on a substrate (BSL);
a second assembly electrode (ALE, see [0236]) disposed on the first assembly electrode;
an insulating layer (e.g. a first layer of INS1, see [0175] and [0208]) disposed between the first assembly electrode and the second assembly electrode;
an assembly barrier wall (e.g. a second layer of INS1) including an assembly hole and disposed on the second assembly electrode; and
a semiconductor light emitting device (LD, see [0059]) disposed in the assembly hole and electrically connected to the second assembly electrode (ALE directly connected to end of LD, see Fig. 9E),
wherein the second assembly electrode comprises an electrode hole (holes in ALE, see Fig. 9E) in a region overlapping the semiconductor light emitting device, and the electrode hole exposes a portion of the insulating layer (see Fig. 9E), and
wherein the semiconductor light emitting device is entirely spaced apart from the first assembly electrode (LD is spaced apart from lower layer of ET1 by upper layer of ET1).
Regarding claim 2, Li further discloses wherein a size of the electrode hole is less than a size of the semiconductor light emitting device (e.g. width, see Fig. 9E).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, Li further discloses at least one portion of the first assembly electrode (ET1) is configured to overlap at least one portion of the second assembly electrode (ALE) in a vertical direction.
Regarding claims 22 and 24, Li further discloses a bottom surface of the second assembly electrode (ALE) is disposed higher than a top surface of the first assembly electrode (ET1).
Regarding claims 26 and 27, Li further discloses wherein a bottom surface of the semiconductor light emitting device (LD) is disposed on a top surface of the second assembly electrode (ALE) (see Fig. 9E).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/27/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above. In particular, it is noted that the claimed “first assembly electrode” is newly interpreted as a bottom layer of ET1 of Li.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lauren R Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-7199. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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.
/LAUREN R BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896 2/26/2026