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 § 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)(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, 4-5 & 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 20200312822).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses that a display device, comprising:
a wiring substrate 100 (Fig. 5);
wiring electrodes 111ab 112ab, at least a part of which is disposed on the wiring substrate 100 (Fig. 5);
light emitting devices connect electrically to related wiring electrodes, respectively, among the wiring electrodes (Fig. 8-11); and
adhesive patterns 130 having adhesive property for bonding the wiring electrodes 111ab 112ab and the light emitting devices 121b 122b and transfer property required to transfer the light emitting devices to the wiring electrode 111ab 112ab, wherein the adhesive patterns 130 are formed respectively for a plurality of bonding pair including a wiring electrodes and a light emitting device connected electrically among the wiring electrodes and the light emitting devices and are spaced apart (Fig. 8-11), and wherein the adhesive patterns include one or more first sub-patterns (left pattern) respectively related to a first number of bonding pairs 140 among the plurality of bonding pairs, and one or more second sub-patterns (a right pattern) respectively related to a second number of bonding pairs among the plurality of bonding pairs.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reclaim 4, Kim discloses that each of the adhesive patterns is formed to integrally surround bonding pairs included in the adhesive pattern (Fig. 8-11).
Reclaim 5, Kim discloses that each of the adhesive pattern is formed of a non-conductive paste (NCP) phase-changeable to a semi-solid state (Fig. 8-11).
Reclaim 11, Kim discloses that the wiring electrodes include first wiring electrodes and second wiring electrodes electrically connected to related device electrodes, respectively, among first device electrodes and second device electrodes of the light emitting devices: and wherein all of the first wiring electrodes and the second wiring electrodes are formed on one surface of the wiring substrate (Fig. 8-11).
Reclaim 12, Kim discloses that the wiring electrodes include first wiring electrodes and second wiring electrodes electrically connected to related device electrodes, respectively, among first device electrodes and second device electrodes of the light emitting devices, and wherein the first wiring electrodes are formed on one surface of the wiring substrate and the second wiring electrodes are formed facing the first wiring electrodes with the light emitting devices interposed between the first wiring electrodes and the second wiring electrodes (Fig. 8-11).
Reclaim 13, Kim discloses that each of the light emitting devices 121 & 122 includes a micro-light emitting device (LED).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20200312822) in view of Lin (US 20160118333).
Reclaim 6, Kim fails to specify that the NCP include an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage composition and a thermosetting composition.
However, Lin suggests that NCP include an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage composition and a thermosetting composition (para. 0056).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Kim with an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage composition and a thermosetting composition as taught by Lin in order to enhance material variations and also, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one know element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Reclaim 7, Kim & Lin fail to specify that content of the UV B-stage composition in the NCP is 20% to 50%.
However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization.
Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain percentage of mixture, because it would have been to obtain a certain percentage of mixture to achieve better adhesive property in the process of bonding.
Reclaim 8, Kim & Lin fail to specify that the NCP has a viscosity of 10,000 to 100,000 centipoise (cps).
However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization.
Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain percentage of mixture, because it would have been to obtain a certain percentage of mixture to achieve better adhesive property in the process of bonding.
Reclaim 9, Kim & Lin disclose that the NCP includes at least one of acrylate or epoxy acrylate (Lin, para. 0054).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20200312822) in view of Kim2 et al. (US 20180138372) .
Reclaim 10, Kim discloses that an adhesive pattern related to bonding pairs 140 among the adhesive pattern (a left & a right pattern) constituting one pixel among the plurality of bonding pair 140 has flat (Fig. 8-11).
Kim fails to teach that bonding pairs has a consistent curvature.
However, Kim2 suggests that bonding pairs 44/42 has a consistent curvature (Fig. 1B, at least side of solder ball).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Kim with bonding pairs has a consistent curvature as taught by Kim2 in order to enhance variation of shapes to adjust a height of LED devices and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Claim(s) 14-15, 17 & 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20200312822) in view of Chaji (US 20170215280).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses that a method of manufacturing a display device, the method comprising:
growing light emitting devices 121 & 122;
forming at least a part of wiring electrodes 111ab & 112ab on a wiring substrate;
patterning adhesive patterns 130 spaced apart from each other and having adhesive property for bonding the wiring electrodes and the light emitting devices 121 & 122 and transfer property required to transfer the light emitting devices to the wiring electrode; and
transferring the light emitting devices to the wiring electrodes so that bonding pairs each including a related wiring electrode and a related light emitting device among the wiring electrodes and the light emitting devices are bonded through the adhesive patterns (Fig. 8-11), wherein the patterning of the adhesive patterns includes:
patterning first sub-patterns among the adhesive patterns to be related respectively to a first number of bonding pairs among the plurality of bonding pairs 140, and patterning second sub- patterns among the adhesive patterns to be related respectively to a second number of bonding pairs 140 among the plurality of bonding pairs.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim fails to specify that growing light emitting devices on a growth substrate.
However, Chaji suggests that growing light emitting device on a growth substrate (para. 0159).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Kim with growing light emitting device on a growth substrate as taught by Chaji in order to enhance better LED devices and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Reclaim 15, Kim & Chaji disclose that the patterning the adhesive patterns includes performing patterning by dispensing, pattern-printing, or inkjet-printing an adhesive material on the wiring substrate (Fig. 8, Kim & Chaji, Fig. 1A).
Reclaim 17, Kim & Chaji disclose that phase-changing the adhesive pattens to a semi-solid state at the same time as the transferring the light emitting devices to the wiring electrodes or immediately after the transferring the light emitting devices to the wiring electrodes (Kim in view of Chaji).
Reclaim 19, Kim & Chaji disclose that performing laser lift-off (LLO) on the growth substrate after the phase-changing the adhesive patterns to the semi-solid state (Kim in view of Chaji).
Reclaim 20, , Kim & Chaji disclose that repeating the transferring the light emitting devices to the wiring electrodes to complete transfer for each pixel; and simultaneously thermally compressing and bonding light emitting devices of each pixel alter completing the transferring each pixel (Kim in view of Chaji).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20200312822) in view of Chaji (US 20170215280) and further in view of Lin (US 20160118333).
Reclaim 18, Kim & Chaji fails to specify that the phase-changing the adhesive patterns to the semi-solid state includes an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage.
However, Lin suggests that adhesive pattern can be an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage (para. 0056).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Kim & Chaji with an ultraviolet (UV) B-stage composition and a thermosetting composition as taught by Lin in order to enhance material variations and also, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one know element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to rejected claims under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), applicant argues that “Kim does not disclose the features of the adhesive patterns includes one or more first sub-pattern respectively - - one or more second sub-patterns - - a second number of bonding pairs among the plurality of bonding pairs, as recited in claim 1 ”
In response to applicant's contention, it is respectfully submitted that discloses all the claimed limitation including “the adhesive patterns includes one or more first sub-pattern respectively - - one or more second sub-patterns - - a second number of bonding pairs among the plurality of bonding pairs - -”below.
Kim appears to show, see Fig. 1 & 8, a first sub-pattern can be a left pattern and a second sub-pattern can be right pattern in claim 1 including a two of bonding pairs among a plurality of bonding part in the first sub-patterns and in the second sub-patterns.
Therefore, the rejection of claims 1, 4-5 & 11-13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) is deemed proper.
In addition, for the rejection of claims 6-10, 14-15, & 17-20 the prima facie case of obviousness has been met and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is deemed proper.
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 SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899