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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The response filed 01/12/2026 is accepted, in which, claims 1 and 5 are amended. Claim 1 is independent with claims 1, 2, 5-10, 12, and 13 awaiting an action on the merits as follows.
The objection to the specification is withdrawn in view of the amended title.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1, 2, 5-10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shih (US 20140139985 A1), in view of Hsu (Deposition of Silicon-Based Stacked Layers for Flexible Encapsulation of Organic Light Emitting Diodes), in view of Kovacs (Water vapor transmission properties of acrylic organic coatings), and further in view of Watanabe (US 20090115942 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shih teaches a display device (100A, Fig 1B), comprising:
a first substrate (110);
a second substrate (120) disposed over (shown over) the first substrate (110);
a display layer (130; 130 can be AM-OLED, [0021]) disposed between (shown between, Fig 1A) the first substrate (110) and the second substrate (120), and the display layer (130) having a boundary (130B; boundary around 130 in direct contact with 170);
a bump (144) connected (shown connected to 120) to the first substrate (110) or the second substrate (120) and protruding (shown protruding) in a direction (down) toward (toward 110) the opposite second substrate (120) or first substrate (110), and
the bump (144) being disposed around (shown disposed around, Fig 1B) the boundary (130B); and
a sealing material (150, Fig 1A) filled between (shown filled between) the bump (144) and the display layer (130),
wherein the bump (144) is connected (shown connected) to the second substrate (120),
the sealing material (150) is located in (shown in) a space (S; area below lowest edge of 144 and top of 110) defined by (shown defined by) the first substrate (110), the bump (144), and the second substrate (120).
Shih teaches the composition of the bump 144 can be silicon oxide, [0024], and sealing material 150 can be acrylic resin, [0026], but fails to explicitly teach the water vapor transmission rates of the bump and the sealing material.
However, Hsu teaches the water vapor transmission rate of silicon oxide as 1.5 g/m2/day, [page 3, Fig 1].
Kovacs teaches the water vapor transmission rate of acrylic resin as 17 g/m2/day, [page 533, Table A2].
Therefore, in combination, Shih, Hsu, and Kovacs discloses wherein a water vapor transmission rate (1.5 g/m2/day, Hsu) of the bump is less than a water vapor transmission rate (17 g/m2/day, Kovacs) of the sealing material.
The combination fails to explicitly teach a maximum height of the bump, measured from the second substrate to which the bump is connected in a direction toward the first substrate, is greater than a minimum vertical distance between an inner surface of the first substrate and an inner surface of the second substrate.
However, Watanabe teaches a maximum height (H1: height of bump 26 extending from the bottom surface of the first substrate 14 to the top surface of the second substrate 17, Fig 9) of the bump, measured from (measured from the connection of the bump 26 to the second substrate 17 at the upper connection point 31 down to the lowest point of lower connection 31 between the bump 26 and the lower substrate 14) the second substrate to which the bump is connected (shown connected) in a direction (down) toward the first substrate, is greater (shown greater) than a minimum vertical distance (H2: spacing between upper surface of lower substrate 14 and lower surface of upper substrate 17) between an inner surface (14T: top of first substrate 14) of the first substrate and an inner surface (17B: bottom of second substrate 17) of the second substrate.
Watanabe teaches a base product of a bump extending between two substrates with a maximum height greater than the minimum vertical distance between the inner surfaces of said substrates which the claimed invention can be seen as an improvement in that the bump can prevent a sealing member from falling off a flexible plate and also prevent any reduction in display quality (Watanabe, [0012]), because if a through hole is formed in a portion of at least one of the mounting region and the extending region in contact with the adhesive and the through hole is filled with the adhesive, the adhesion is also enhanced (Watanabe, [0029]).
Shih teaches a known technique of extending the bump to form a complete and unbroken pattern around the device that is comparable to the base product.
Shih’s known technique, as cited above, would have been recognized by one skilled in the art as applicable to the base product of Watanabe and the results would have been predictable and resulted in a complete bump that encircles the device and extends vertically past the inner surfaces of the two substrates causing a continuous barrier around the device, to block moisture and oxygen in order to effectively extend the lifetime of the device (Shih, [0003]) and also prevent any reduction in display quality (Watanabe, [0012]), because if a through hole is formed in a portion of at least one of the mounting region and the extending region in contact with the adhesive and the through hole is filled with the adhesive, the adhesion is also enhanced (Watanabe, [0029]) which results in an improved product.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention.
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device (method, or product) that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Shih, Hsu, and Kovacs are considered analogous to the claimed invention because all are from the same field of endeavor of preventing water transmission. Shih and Watanabe are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are from the same field of endeavor of attaching two substrates while creating a seal around the perimeter. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the device of Shih with the features of Hsu and Kovacs to create a device with a sealing material filled between the bump and the display layer, wherein a water vapor transmission rate of the bump is less than a water vapor transmission rate of the sealing material and a maximum height of the bump, measured from the second substrate to which the bump is connected in a direction toward the first substrate, is greater than a minimum vertical distance between an inner surface of the first substrate and an inner surface of the second substrate to increase resistance to moisture and therefore extend the lifetime of the device, (Shih, [0002]) and prevent a sealing member from falling off a flexible plate and also prevent any reduction in display quality (Watanabe, [0012]), because if a through hole is formed in a portion of at least one of the mounting region and the extending region in contact with the adhesive and the through hole is filled with the adhesive, the adhesion is also enhanced (Watanabe, [0029]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the bump (144, Fig 1B) is formed with a complete and unbroken annular pattern (shown with unbroken annular pattern; 144 may have continuous and closed annular structure, [0027]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Watanabe teaches the maximum height (H1, Fig 9) and the minimum vertical distance (H2).
Shih goes on to teach a ratio (0.75; 144 is shown to extend through more than half of the spacing area without touching the first substrate 110 which appears to be approximately 75% of the space) of the maximum height of the bump (144, Fig 1A) to the minimum vertical distance is in a range of 0.5 to 1 (0.75).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the sealing material (150, Fig 1A) is filled (shown filled) between the bump (144) and the first substrate (110) or the second substrate (120).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the bump (144, Fig 1B) is in a closed annular shape (shown with unbroken annular pattern; 144 may have continuous and closed annular structure, [0027]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach an optical adhesive layer (150M; middle section of 150 over 130; 150 is acrylic resin, [0026]) disposed between (shown between) the display layer (130) and the second substrate (120).
The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the display layer comprises: a first electrode disposed on the first substrate; a second electrode disposed over the first electrode; a display medium layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode.
However, although not explicitly shown, display layer 130 of Shih can comprise an AM-OLED. [0021]. AM-OLEDs are well known in the art to be comprised of a second electrode over a first electrode on a substrate with a display medium layer between them. Therefore, in view of Shih, the combination discloses these elements of claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih teaches the bump, (144, Fig 1A) and the composition of the bump comprised of silicon oxide, [0024].
Hsu goes on to teach the water vapor transmission rate (1.5 g/m2/day) of the bump is 0.1 g/m2/day to 10 g/m2/day (1.5 g/m2/day).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the bump (144, Fig 1A) is integrally formed (144 may be formed of the same material as second substate 120, [0025], and could therefore be integrally formed) with the first substrate (110) or the second substrate (120).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the display layer (130, Fig 1A) has a boundary (130B; boundary around 130 in direct contact with 170), and
a distance (distance from left-most sidewall of 120 and right-most sidewall of 130) between a sidewall of the second substrate (120) and the boundary (130B) is greater (shown greater) than a distance (distance from left-most sidewall of 110 and left-most sidewall of 130) between a sidewall of the first substrate (110) and the boundary (130B).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Shih, Hsu, Kovacs, and Watanabe discloses the device of claim 1. Shih goes on to teach wherein the display layer (130, Fig 1A) has a boundary (130B; boundary around 130 in direct contact with 170),
the bump (144) has a first sidewall (SW1; sidewall farthest from 130) away (shown away) from the display layer (130), and
the sealing material (150) has a second sidewall (sidewall farthest from 130) away (shown away) from the display layer (130), and
a distance (distance from SW1 to right-most sidewall of 130) between the first sidewall (SW1) and the boundary (130B) is greater (shown greater) than a distance (distance from SW2 to left-most sidewall of 130) between the second sidewall (SW2) and the boundary (130B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeremy D Watts whose telephone number is (703)756-1055. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 8:00am-4:30pm, F 8:00-3pm EST.
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, Chad Dicke can be reached at (571) 270-7996. 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.
/JEREMY DANIEL WATTS/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897