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 .
Specification
Examiner acknowledges the amendment to the title filed on December 30, 2025. The objection to specification in the previous Office Action filed on October 02, 2025 is hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17-18 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the capping layer" in the last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, “the capping layer” is interpreted as “a capping layer.” Claim 18 depends upon claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 8, 10-12, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US PG-Pub No.: 2012/0319123 A1, hereinafter, “Han”), prior art of record.
Regarding claim 1, Han discloses a display apparatus (see Han, FIGs. 1 and 5, with FIG. 5 being an alternate embodiment of FIG. 1) comprising:
a first substrate (10, FIG. 1) comprising a display area (30, FIG. 1) and a non-display area (40, FIG. 1) outside the display area (30);
a pixel electrode (116, FIG. 1) located on the display area (30) of the first substrate (10);
a second substrate (20, FIG. 1) located over the first substrate (10) with the pixel electrode (116) therebetween (FIG. 1);
a sealing member (160, FIG. 1) located between the first substrate (10) and the second substrate (20) to attach the first substrate (10) and the second substrate (20) to each other;
a metal pattern (152+153, FIG. 5) arranged on the first substrate (10) to be adjacent to the sealing member (160) at an inner side of the sealing member (160, FIG. 5); and
a connection wiring (150, FIG. 5) connected to the metal pattern (152+153) and extending to an edge of the first substrate (10) across the sealing member (160) in a plan view (FIGs. 1 and 5).
Regarding claim 2, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the metal pattern (152+153) contacts an inner surface of the sealing member (160, FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 3, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a gate wiring (111, FIG. 1) located on the non-display area (to meet the limitation, the display area is only 119 area) of the first substrate (10), wherein the gate wiring (111) is located at the inner side of the sealing member (160) in a plan view.
Regarding claim 8, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a dam portion (114, FIG. 1) located on the non-display area (to meet the limitation, the display area is 119 area) of the first substrate (10) to surround at least a part of the display area (119 area), wherein the metal pattern (152+153) is located between the sealing member (160) and the dam portion (114) in a plan view (FIGs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 10, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the metal pattern (152+153) and the pixel electrode (116) comprise a same material (¶ [0063]).
Regarding claim 11, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the metal pattern (152+153) is located at a corner of the first substrate (10, FIGs. 1-2 and 5).
Regarding claim 12, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 11, wherein the metal pattern is provided in plural so that a plurality of metal patterns are comprised, and the corner of the first substrate is provided in plural so that a plurality of corners are comprised, wherein the plurality of metal patterns are located at the corners of the first substrate, respectively (FIGs. 1-2 and 5).
Regarding claim 17, Han discloses a display apparatus (see Han, FIGs. 1 and 5, with FIG. 5 being an alternate embodiment of FIG. 1) comprising:
a first substrate (10, FIG. 1) comprising a display area (30, FIG. 1) and a non-display area (40, FIG. 1) outside the display area (30);
a pixel electrode (116, FIG. 1) located on the display area (30) of the first substrate (10);
a second substrate (20, FIG. 1) located over the first substrate (10) with the pixel electrode (116) therebetween (FIG. 1);
a sealing member (160, FIG. 1) located between the first substrate (10) and the second substrate (20) to attach the first substrate (10) and the second substrate (20) to each other;
a metal pattern (152+153, FIG. 5) arranged on the first substrate (10) to be adjacent to the sealing member (160) at an inner side of the sealing member (160, FIG. 5);
a connection wiring (150, FIG. 5) connected to the metal pattern (152+153) and extending to an edge of the first substrate (10, FIGs. 1 and 5); and
an attachment portion (140, FIG. 1) located between the capping layer (120, FIG. 1) and the sealing member (160, FIG. 1).
Note: for the purpose of examination, “the capping layer” is interpreted as “a capping layer.”
Regarding claim 18, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 17, wherein the attachment portion (140 in FIG. 5) has a closed loop shape overlapping the sealing member (160) in the plan view (FIGs. 1 and 5).
Regarding claim 19, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the connection wiring (150) is a part of a wiring, which connects the metal pattern (152+153) to a monitoring pad (to supply power) located outside the edge of the first substrate (10, ¶ [0053]).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US PG-Pub No.: 2012/0319123 A1, hereinafter, “Han”), prior art of record, as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1.
Han is silent regarding that the metal pattern comprises silver.
However, Han discloses that the metal pattern has the same material as pixel electrode (116) (¶ [0063]). And it is well-known that the pixel electrode can comprises silver, e.g., ITO/Ag/ITO.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form Han’s metal pattern comprising silver, since the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. See MPEP § 2144.07.
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US PG-Pub No.: 2012/0319123 A1, hereinafter, “Han”), prior art of record, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Hong et al. (US PG-Pub No.: 2016/0111677 A1, hereinafter, “Hong”), prior art of record.
Regarding claim 13, Han discloses the display apparatus of claim 1.
Han is silent regarding a first organic layer located at the inner side of the sealing member and covering a top surface of the metal pattern.
Hong, however, discloses a display apparatus (see Hong, FIG. 4), comprising a first organic layer (219, it is well-known that the pixel definition layer can be an organic layer; FIG. 4) located at an inner side of a sealing member (300a, FIG. 4) and covering a top surface of a metal pattern (240, FIG. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form a first organic layer located at Han’s inner side of the sealing member and covering a top surface of the metal pattern, as taught by Hong, in order to protect the signal wires
Regarding claim 14, Han in view of Hong discloses the display apparatus of claim 13, further comprising a pixel-defining film (Han’s 115, FIG. 1; Hong’s 219, FIG. 4) located on the pixel electrode (Han’s 116; Hong’s 221), and covering an edge of the pixel electrode (Han’s 116; Hong’s 221) and exposing a central portion of the pixel electrode (Han’s 116; Hong’s 221), wherein the first organic layer (part of 219) comprises a same material as a material of the pixel-defining film (219; Hong, FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 15, Han in view of Hong discloses the display apparatus of claim 13, further comprising a second organic layer (215; Hong, ¶ [0051]) located between the metal pattern (Hong’s 240) and the first substrate (Hong’s 10, FIG. 4).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US PG-Pub No.: 2012/0319123 A1, hereinafter, “Han”), prior art of record, in view of Murai (US PG-Pub No.: 2018/0040268 A1, hereinafter, “Murai”), prior art of record.
Regarding claim 20, Han discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus (see Han, FIGs. 1 and 5), the method comprising:
forming a first substrate (10, FIG. 1) comprising a display area (30, FIG. 1) and a non-display area (40, FIG. 1) surrounding the display area (30);
forming a metal pattern (152+153, FIG. 5) on the non-display area (40) of the first substrate (10), and forming a connection wiring (150, FIG. 1), which electrically connects the metal pattern (152+153) to a monitoring pad (not shown, but disclosed in ¶ [0053] as external source);
attaching a second substrate (20) to the first substrate (10) by using a sealing member (160, FIG. 1),
wherein the metal pattern (152+153) is located inside the sealing member (160, FIG. 5), and the monitoring pad (external source) is located outside the sealing member (160, ¶ [0053]).
Han is silent regarding measuring a change in electrical characteristics of the metal pattern by using the monitoring pad.
Murai, however, discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus, comprising measuring a change in electrical characteristics of a metal pattern (121/122, ¶ [0030]) by using a monitoring pad (120, ¶ [0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to measure a change in electrical characteristics of Han’s metal pattern by using the monitoring pad (e.g. apply current and measure temperature), as taught by Murai, in order to improve the quality of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious all the claimed subject of claim 4, in particular, the metal pattern overlaps the gate wiring in the plan view. Claims 5-7 depend upon claim 4.
The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious all the claimed subject of claim 16, in particular, a color filter layer located on a bottom surface of the second substrate facing the first substrate, and comprising at least two color filters, wherein the at least two color filters overlap each other on the non-display area in a plan view.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding claims 1 and 20 filed on December 30, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. First, Applicant alleged that Han fails to disclose the connecting wiring across the sealing member in a plan view (Remarks, page 10). Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in Han’s FIG. 5, the connection wiring 150 connected to the metal pattern 152+153 and extending to an edge of the first substrate 10 across the sealing member 160 in a plan view (although FIGs. 1 and 5 are cross-sectional view, it shows that the connecting wiring 150 across the sealing member 160 in a plan view). Second, Applicant alleged that Han in view of Murai fails to disclose the metal pattern is located inside the sealing member, and the monitoring pad is located outside the sealing member (Remarks, page 11). Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in FIGs. 1 and 5, Han discloses that the metal pattern 152+153 is located inside the sealing member 160, and the monitoring pad (although not shown, it is part of the external source such as current supply and temperature monitor, and 150 is the connecting wire between 152+153 and the external source) is located outside the sealing member 160.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 XIA L. CROSS whose telephone number is (571)270-3273. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5:30 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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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.
/XIA L CROSS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Prosecution Insights