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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-15, 18 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0346474 Jeong et al in view of US 2022/0011814 Ryou et al.
Regarding claim 1, Jeong teaches a display panel (paragraph 0003) comprising:
a layered arrangement comprising
a flat area A formed in a middle of the laminate and having a first side and a second side that is opposite the first side (figure 12), and
a plurality of curved areas B including a first curved area that extends from the first side of the flat area and a second curved area that extends from the second side of the flat area (figure 12); and
a backplate 210 comprising pattern forming areas 220 including
a first pattern forming area 21 that overlaps the first curved area of the laminate (figure 12),
a second pattern forming area 21 that overlaps the second curved area of the laminate (figure 12), and
a non-pattern area that overlaps the flat area of the laminate and is between the first pattern forming area and the second pattern forming area (figure 12),
wherein at least one of the first and second pattern forming areas overlaps a portion of the flat area of the laminate (figure 12 and paragraph 0110),
wherein the backplate comprises a plurality of groove patterns 20 (figure 12 and paragraph 0110) including
a first groove pattern 22 in the first pattern forming area and overlapping the first curved area of the laminate (figure 12) and
a second groove pattern 22 in the second pattern forming area and overlapping the second curved area of the laminate (figure 12),
each of the first pattern forming area and the second pattern forming area disposed in a first direction and extending in a second direction in the at least one of the pattern forming areas (figure 12 and 14, where figure 14 shows the plan view and figure 12 shows another embodiment, where the plan view for the embodiment of figure 12 would show two strips of pattern area extending in the second direction),
the plurality of groove patterns overlapping the portion of the flat area of the laminate (figure 12) and
at least another portion of the flat area of the laminate not overlapping with any of the plurality of groove patterns in a plan view of the display panel (figures 12 and 14),
wherein the groove patterns of the backplate are outermost parts of the display panel (paragraph 0072, where layer 300 is not required),
wherein at least one or more outermost parts of the groove patterns of the backplate in a direction away from the panel layer are flat (figure 9 showing trapezoidal grooves with larger, flat intervals and paragraph 0090 teaching the option of other polygons such as squares or rectangles).
Jeong does not teach a bezel area or the other layers of the laminate. Ryou teaches a display panel DD (paragraph 0002) comprising:
a cover window WM (paragraph 0069) comprising a flat area formed in a middle of the cover window (figure 3A, where in direction DR1, both edges including a folding area while the center of the product includes a nonfolding area),
and a bezel area disposed in an outer region (paragraph 0043) adjacent to the curved areas and the flat area (figure 1),
an adhesive layer disposed below the cover window (paragraph 0072, including adhesive under the cover glass within WM);
a polarizer disposed below the adhesive layer (anti-reflection layer, paragraph 0075-0076 and figure 4),
a panel layer DP disposed below the polarizer (paragraph 0067 and figure 4); and
a backplate PP disposed below the panel layer (figure 4) and comprising pattern forming areas OP (figure 4),
wherein the cover window, the adhesive layer, the polarizer, the panel layer and the backplate are curved along an axis extending in the second direction in the curved areas (figure 3a showing curvature and figure 4 showing continuous layers), and
wherein at least a portion of the bezel area is in direct contact with the flat area (figure 1).
Jeong teaches the display device, but does not explicitly teach the bezel or additional layers. Ryou teaches a display device with both a bezel area and additional layers.
The only difference between the claim and the prior art is the combination of the elements in a single reference. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention could have combined the elements using known methods and there is no evidence that the display device of Jeong with a bezel and other layers of the claim from Ryou performs differently with respect to bending when combined with the other elements than it does separably nor is there any evidence that the combination would produce any unexpected results (MPEP 2141, Part III. KSR A: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods To Yield Predictable Results).
Therefore, Jeong in view of Ryou teaches that the cover window, the adhesive layer, the polarizer, the panel layer, and the backplate (Ryou) are curved along an axis extending in the second direction in the curved areas first curved area and the second curved area (Jeong).
Regarding claims 2, 6, and 10, Jeong teaches that each of the plurality of groove patterns comprises a groove pattern in a triangular shape (figure 12), a semicircle (paragraph 0023) or a quadrangular shape (trapezoid, paragraph 0023).
Regarding claims 3, 7 and 11, Jeong teaches that the backplate 210 has a first height (thickness), and wherein the triangular, semicircular or quadrangular groove pattern 20 has a second height (depth).
Jeong does not explicitly teach that the second height is greater than half of the first height. However, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” (MPEP 2144.04 Section IV Part A). Therefore, without a showing of criticality, the claimed dimensions do not impart patentability to the claims.
Regarding claims 4, 8, 12 and 13, Jeong does not teach the specific spacing or pattern width. However, Jeong does teach that the spacing may be altered (paragraph 0085) such that the width would also be altered. Furthermore, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” (MPEP 2144.04 Section IV Part A). Therefore, without a showing of criticality, the claimed dimensions do not impart patentability to the claims.
Regarding claims 5, 9 and 14, Jeong teaches that each of the groove patterns in a triangular, semicircular or quadrangular shape (paragraph 0023) is formed in a shape of a dotted line (figure 8) in the second direction (figures 14 and 12).
Regarding claim 15, Jeong teaches that a width of the pattern forming areas is greater than a width of the first and second curved areas (figure 12, where the patterns extend into the beginning of the flat area).
Regarding claim 18, Jeong teaches that the pattern forming areas correspond to the first and second curved areas (figure 12).
Regarding claim 20, Jeong teaches that the curved areas are maintained in a curved state (paragraph 0083, bending during forming).
Regarding claim 21, Ryou further teaches that a plurality of wirings and a plurality of pads are disposed in the bezel area in direct contact with the flat area (paragraph 0045, where the wirings and pads are required for circuitry, and Ryou teaches sensing circuitry in the non-display area).
Regarding claim 22, Jeong teaches that the plurality of groove patterns are integrally formed over an entirety of the pattern forming area in the second direction (figure 14).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 7, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Jeong does not teach the grooves being the outermost part because of layer 300. However, Jeong teaches that the layer 300 is optional by using the “may” language. Therefore, in an embodiment where layer 300 is not present, Jeong teaches the limitation.
Applicant further argues that Jeong does not teach the patterns being flat. However, as discussed above, the patterns are flat both in the figure showing trapezoidal patterns, and in the discussion of other polygonal shapes, where square and rectangles would be potential polygonal shapes that would include the flat portion.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Megha M Gaitonde whose telephone number is (571)270-3598. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am to 5 pm.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached on 571-270-1547. 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.
/MEGHA M GAITONDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781