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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment filed on February 11, 2026. Claims 1, 5, 8-10, and 22 have been amended. No new claims have been added. Claim 6 has been canceled. Claims 11-13 and 21 were withdrawn. Currently, claims 1-5, 7-10, 14-20, and 22-26 are pending.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 successfully overcomes the 112(b) rejection of claim 7 set forth in the previous Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 11, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicants argue, on page 8:
Regarding the revised limitations of claim 6, Bok concerns a display panel having support pillars. As acknowledged from the Office Action, according to FIGS. 4A-4B, 12-13 of Bok, Bok discloses a case that the fingerprint sensor FPS is disposed in the first area Al and the first area Al has the hole HL. Then, the transmission area TA may be disposed in the hole HL in the first area Al. It seems that the hole HL disclosed by Bok plays a similar role with the hollow area of present application. However, in the present application, each sub-touch electrode is provided with a hollow pattern (not hole) in the sensor setting area, and at least part of the first area is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern instead of being disposed in a simple hole. Apparently, the hole HL disclosed by Bok is different from the hollow area of the hollow pattern in the present application. Therefore, Bok fails to disclose above-mentioned limitations as claimed in the amended claim 1.
The Examiner responds:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, a simple hole can still be a hollow pattern. Also, the specification does not define a hollow pattern in a way that prevents the hollow pattern to be a hole (the term “hollow pattern” is recited in paragraphs [0066], [0069], [0071]-[0073], [0076]-[0077], [0082]). Thus, Huh in view of Wu and Bok renders obvious the limitations of amended claim 1. As a result, the rejection of amended claim 1 is maintained.
All other arguments have been fully addressed in prior Office Actions or in the rejections set forth below.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20200212140) in view of Wu et al. (US 20200103690), and further in view of Bok (US 20200364434).
Regarding claim 1, Huh teaches, in Figs. 1-3, a display panel, comprising:
a sensor setting area (Fig. 1, area around TH; Fig. 2, THB/TH) and a first display area (Fig. 2, AA including P' region) around the sensor setting area;
wherein the sensor setting area comprises an auxiliary display area (THB) and at least one first area (TH) ([0079]), the at least one first area is used for allowing light to pass through ([0076]), the first display area comprises first light-emitting units (Figs. 1-2, P, [0079]), and the auxiliary display area (THB) comprises second light-emitting units (P', [0079]);
wherein the display panel comprises: a first base substrate (Fig. 3, SUB), and
wherein the display panel further comprises: a touch electrode layer (not shown in Fig. 3, [0028]-[0029], [0087], can be disposed on upper passivation film PAS until inner dam DMI).
Huh does not teach that the display panel comprises: support pillars disposed on one side of the first base substrate; wherein one part of the support pillars are disposed in an area of the sensor setting area except the first area, and that the touch electrode layer comprises a plurality of sub-touch electrodes, and each of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes is provided with a hollow pattern in the sensor setting area; and at least part of the first area is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern.
In a similar field of endeavor, Wu teaches, in Figs. 10 and 12, that the first base substrate (10) and support pillars (40) disposed on one side of the first base substrate;
wherein one part of the support pillars are disposed in an area of the sensor setting area (A2) except the first area (A1) ([0029]),
so that “the withstand pressure ability of the display panel is improved” ([0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display panel of Huh with the support pillars of Wu, so that the withstand pressure ability of the display panel is improved ([0026]).
Huh in view of Wu does not explicitly teach that the touch electrode layer comprises a plurality of sub-touch electrodes, and each of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes is provided with a hollow pattern in the sensor setting area; and at least part of the first area is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern.
In a similar field of endeavor, Bok teaches that the touch electrode layer (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13; also see S1 in Fig. 12) comprises a plurality of sub-touch electrodes (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13) ([0167]), and each of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes is provided with a hollow pattern (HL, Fig. 12) in the sensor setting area (A1 and peripheral region around A1, Fig. 12); and at least part of the first area (TA in Figs. 4A-4B, which is within each PX1 in A1) is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern (HL, Fig. 12), in order to make flexible display devices “capable of sensing a touch position and a touch pressure” ([0008]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display panel of Huh in view of Wu with the touch electrode structures of Bok, in order to make flexible display devices capable of sensing a touch position and a touch pressure ([0008]).
Regarding claim 2, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Wu further teaches, in Fig. 11, that each of the at least one first area (A1) has a same film layer parameter ([0056], material of the film is display material 30).
Regarding claim 3, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Huh further teaches that both the first light-emitting units (P) and the second light-emitting units (P’) are organic light-emitting units ([0067]); and that an arrangement density of the first light-emitting units (P) in the first display area (Fig. 2, AA including P' region) is greater than an arrangement density of the second light-emitting units (P’) in the sensor setting area (Fig. 2, THB/TH) (interpreting the arrangement density to be the number of light-emitting units per unit of area; because the sensor setting area includes both the auxiliary display area THB and empty first area TH, and the distance between each P and P’ is equal, leading to less density of P’ in the sensor setting area compared to density of P in the first display area).
Regarding claim 5, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Huh further teaches, in Fig. 7, a first base substrate (SUB) and transparent functional film layers ([0108], CE can be transparent) disposed on one side (top side) of the first base substrate; wherein at least part of the transparent functional film layers (CE) are provided with a hollow area (see gap of TH), and the first area (TH) is disposed within the hollow area (see Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 7, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 5. Huh further teaches, in Fig. 7, a second base substrate (PLN); wherein the touch electrode layer (not shown in Fig. 7, [0028]-[0029], [0087], can be disposed on upper passivation film PAS until inner dam DMI) is disposed on one side (top side) of the second base substrate (PLN).
Regarding claim 8, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Bok further teaches that at least part of the first area (TA, Figs. 4A-4B) is further disposed within an interval between adjacent sub-touch electrodes (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 9, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Bok further teaches that vertical projections of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13) on the first base substrate (SUB) are all located within the auxiliary display area (peripheral area around A1, and region of A1 not including TA, Figs. 3, 4A-4B, 12); and wherein a gap between adjacent sub-touch electrodes (SS1) is disposed in an area in which no second light-emitting unit (SP1-SP3, Fig. 4A, [0112]) is disposed in the auxiliary display area (see Figs. 4A and 13, there are gaps between subpixels).
Regarding claim 10, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Bok further teaches that the auxiliary display area (peripheral area around A1, and region of A1 not including TA, Figs. 3, 4A-4B, 12) is covered by vertical projections of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13) on the first base substrate (SUB); and a gap between adjacent sub-touch electrodes (SS1) is disposed in an area of the sensor setting area (A1) except the first area (TA, Figs. 3, 4A-4B) (Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 14, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Wu further teaches, in Fig. 12, that another part of the support pillars (40) are disposed in the first display area (A3, see Fig. 10); and wherein an arrangement density C1 of the one part of the support pillars (40) in the sensor setting area (A2) is the same as an arrangement density C2 of the another part of the support pillars in the first display area (A3) (see Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 15, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Bok further teaches that the first display area (A2, [0086]) comprises first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1, Fig. 13; labelled as S1 in Fig. 12; [0161], [0167]), and the sensor setting area (A1 and peripheral region around A1, Fig. 12) comprises second touch electrode structures (S2 and FPS, [0101], [0213]), wherein the first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1, Fig. 13; labelled as S1 in Fig. 12) and the second touch electrode structures (S2 and FPS) are disposed at different film layers (see Fig. 12), that the first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1) are configured to detect a touch position within the first display area (A2) ([0018]), and that the second touch electrode structures are configured to detect a touch position within the sensor setting area (A1 and peripheral region around A1) ([0224], FPS).
Regarding claim 16, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 15. Bok further teaches that the first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1) are mutual-capacitive touch electrode structures ([0222]), and the second touch electrode structures (S2 and FPS) comprise self-capacitive touch electrode blocks ([0213], S2), wherein the sensor setting area (A1 and peripheral region around A1, Fig. 12) is completely covered by the self-capacitive (second) touch electrode blocks (S2).
Regarding claim 17, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 16. Bok further teaches a first base substrate (SUB, Fig. 12), and a display layer (PP, Fig. 12, [0091]) and an encapsulation layer ([0134], Fig. 4B; [0110], PX1 is part of PP, so the encapsulation layer would be the topmost part of PP) stacked on one side (top side) of the first base substrate (SUB), wherein the display layer (PP) comprises at least one display electrode layer (EL2, Fig. 4B, [0119]), and the self-capacitive (second) touch electrode blocks (S2) and one of the at least one display electrode layer are disposed at a same layer (PNL, Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 18, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 17. Bok further teaches, in Fig. 12, that the mutual-capacitive (first) touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1) are disposed on one side (top side) of the encapsulation layer (topmost part of PP) facing away from the first base substrate (SUB).
Regarding claim 19, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 17. Bok further teaches, in Fig. 12, a second base substrate (BFM), wherein the second base substrate is disposed on one side (top side) of the encapsulation layer (topmost part of PP) facing away from the first base substrate (SUB), and the mutual-capacitive (first) touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1) are disposed between the second base substrate (BFM) and the encapsulation layer (topmost part of PP).
Regarding claim 20, Huh in view of Wu teaches the limitations of claim 1. Huh further teaches that the first area (TH) is a photosensitive element setting area ([0006], camera hole for receiving light).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20200212140) in view of Wu et al. (US 20200103690) and Bok (US 20200364434), and further in view of Bower et al. (US 20160064363).
Regarding claim 4, Huh in view of Wu and Bok teaches the limitations of claim 1. Huh further teaches that the first light-emitting units (P) are organic light-emitting units ([0067]), and that an arrangement density of the first light-emitting units (P) in the first display area (Fig. 2, AA including P' region) is equal to an arrangement density of the second light-emitting units (P’) in the sensor setting area (Fig. 2, THB/TH) ([0079]) (interpreting the arrangement density to mean distance between each P/P’).
Huh in view of Wu and Bok does not teach that the second light-emitting units are micro-LEDs.
In a similar field of endeavor, Bower teaches, in Fig. 2, that the second light-emitting units (202a and 202b) are micro-LEDs ([0169]-[0170]), because “the [micro-ILEDs] take up a small proportion of the display area, and because the ILED wiring can be fine and/or transparent, the display itself can be transparent” ([0013]-[0014]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display panel of Huh in view of Wu and Bok with the second light-emitting units of Bower, so that the micro-LEDs take up a small proportion of the sensor setting area and so that the auxiliary display area can be transparent.
Claims 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huh (US 20200212140) in view of Bok (US 20200364434).
Regarding claim 22, Huh teaches, in Figs. 1-3, a display panel, comprising:
a sensor setting area (Fig. 1, area around TH; Fig. 2, THB/TH) and a first display area (Fig. 2, AA including P' region) around the sensor setting area (Fig. 1);
wherein the sensor setting area comprises at least one first area (TH, [0079]), the at least one first area is used for allowing light to pass through ([0076]), and
wherein the display panel further comprises: a touch electrode layer (not shown in Fig. 3, [0028]-[0029], [0087], can be disposed on upper passivation film PAS until inner dam DMI).
Huh does not explicitly teach that the first display area comprises first touch electrode structures, and the sensor setting area comprises second touch electrode structures; wherein the first touch electrode structures and the second touch electrode structures are disposed at different film layers, and that the touch electrode layer comprises a plurality of sub-touch electrodes, and each of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes is provided with a hollow pattern in the sensor setting area; and at least part of the first area is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern.
In a similar field of endeavor, Bok teaches, in Fig. 12, that the first display area (A2, [0086]) comprises first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1, Fig. 13, [0161], [0167]; labelled as S1 in Fig. 12), and the sensor setting area (A1, [0086]) comprises second touch electrode structures (S2, [0213]);
wherein the first touch electrode structures (top 2 rows of SS1) and the second touch electrode structures (S2) are disposed at different film layers (see Fig. 12),
that the touch electrode layer (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13; also see S1 in Fig. 12) comprises a plurality of sub-touch electrodes (bottom row of SS1, Fig. 13) ([0167]), and each of the plurality of sub-touch electrodes is provided with a hollow pattern (HL, Fig. 12) in the sensor setting area (A1 and peripheral region around A1, Fig. 12); and
at least part of the first area (TA in Figs. 4A-4B, which is within each PX1 in A1) is disposed within a hollow area of the hollow pattern (HL, Fig. 12),
in order to make flexible display devices “capable of sensing a touch position and a touch pressure” ([0008]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display panel of Huh with the touch electrode structures of Bok, in order to make flexible display devices capable of sensing a touch position and a touch pressure ([0008]).
Regarding claim 23, Huh in view of Bok teaches the limitations of claim 22. Bok further teaches that the first touch electrode structures (top two rows of SS1) comprise mutual-capacitive touch electrode structures ([0222]), and the second touch electrode structures (S2) include self-capacitive touch electrode blocks ([0213]).
Regarding claim 24, Huh in view of Bok teaches the limitations of claim 23. Huh further teaches, in Fig. 12, that the mutual-capacitive (first) touch electrode structures (top two rows of SS1, labelled as S1 in Fig. 12) are configured on one side of an encapsulation layer ([0134], Fig. 4B; [0110], PX1 is part of PP, so the encapsulation layer would be the topmost part of PP) facing away from a first substrate (SUB).
Regarding claim 25, Huh in view of Bok teaches the limitations of claim 23. Bok further teaches, in Fig. 12, a second base substrate (BFM), wherein the second base substrate is disposed on one side (top side) of an encapsulation layer ([0134], Fig. 4B; [0110], PX1 is part of PP, so the encapsulation layer would be the topmost part of PP) facing away from the first base substrate (SUB), and the mutual-capacitive (first) touch electrode structures (top two rows of SS1 in Fig. 13, labelled as S1 in Fig. 12) are disposed between the second base substrate (BFM) and the encapsulation layer (topmost part of PP).
Regarding claim 26, Huh in view of Bok teaches the limitations of claim 22. Huh further teaches that the first area (TH) is a photosensitive element setting area ([0006], camera hole for receiving light).
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 ERIKA HEERA SON whose telephone number is (703)756-4644. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:30-8:30 PM ET.
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, Yara Green can be reached on 571-270-3035. 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.
/ERIKA H SON/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights