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’ amendments of the drawing and the specification filed on 07/10/2026, is acknowledged. Applicants' amendment of the claims, filed on 07/10/2026, in response to the rejection of claims 1-10 and 12-20 from the non-final office action, mailed on 07/10/2026, by amending claims 1, 3, 10, 18; canceling claims 2, 4, 12, 15, 17, 20; and adding new claims 21-26, is acknowledged and will be addressed below.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 11 remain withdrawn from consideration as pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 the second elongated hole is disposed between two adjacent rows of evaporation holes and two adjacent columns of evaporation holes” of Claim 5 and the same feature across the claim list must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). See the details in the 112 rejection below. 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Due to the objection to the newly filed drawing, specifically Fig. 6, the newly added statements for Fig. 6 is objected.
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 5-6, 16 and 21-26 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) Due to the newly filed amendment of the drawing, Claim 5 is not clear, because the feature of claim 5 contradicts to the feature in the newly filed Fig. 6.
Claim 5 clearly recites “the elongated hole comprises a second elongated hole, wherein the second elongated hole is disposed between two adjacent rows of evaporation holes and two adjacent columns of evaporation holes”.
Therefore, the drawing should be like below:
PNG
media_image1.png
353
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
If the applicants intend to present the feature of the new Fig. 6, the claim 5 must be constructed so to be “the elongated hole comprises a plurality of second elongated holes, wherein the plurality of second elongated holes are disposed between two adjacent rows of evaporation holes and between two adjacent columns of evaporation holes”. This is clearly different from “between… or…” of Claim 13.
Further, even in case the examiner accepts the current Fig. 6, the Fig. 6 also does not match with the feature of the claim 6. The claim 6 is dependent from the claim 5, therefore, the Fig. 6 must have the feature of the claim 6.
Claim 6 clearly recites “widths of the plurality of first entity regions are equal, and widths of the plurality of second entity regions are equal”.
However, in the regions around the elongated holes 32b of Fig. 6, the widths of the first entity regions are not are equal and widths of the second entity regions are not equal.
Emphasized again, the claim is purely examined as recited, not based on the disclosures. At least either the claim 6 or the fig. 6 must be amended in a different way.
(2) All the same limitations of Claims 16 and 21 raise the same issue as the item (1) above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3, 7-10, 13-14 and 18-19 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 07/10/2026 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