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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 7-10, drawn to an electronic device and protective film, in the reply filed on 01/16/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 1-10 and 13-20 can be understood as a single invention relating to a protective film of a display, and Species I and II are similar in that both include a rollable electronic device and a foldable electronic device that deforms a part of a display based on relative movements of the plurality of housings and the need to reduce a repulsive force of a protective film in the part of the display that deformed. This is not found persuasive because claims 11-12 of Species II relate to a device which includes a deformation area formed by folding instead of sliding, the folding taken place along a folding axis provided by a hinge device. The folding operation does not appear to be possible without the presence of a folding device and subsequently the hinge device, and the hinge device does not appear to be present in the embodiment of claims 1-10 and 13-20. Therefore, claims 1-10 and 13-20 will proceed with substantive examination.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/03/2023, 08/18/2023, and 01/31/2024 are all in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0029, “an electronic device according to according to an embodiment” is unclear; and
In paragraph 0097, “deformation area” is assigned reference number 203C despite being labeled 230C in other parts of the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 14-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US 20200264660), hereinafter Song, in view of Ryu et al. (US 20180272657), hereinafter Ryu, and Akutagawa et al. (US 20220056228), hereinafter Akutagawa.
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses an electronic device comprising: a first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101); a second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) connected to the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101), a relative position of the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) being changeable with respect to the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101), and a display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) comprising a deformation area (Fig. 12, third region 151c) deformed as the relative position between the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101) and the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) is changed (paragraph 0010).
Song fails to disclose an electronic device comprising: a display comprising: a window layer, and a display panel disposed under the window layer, the display panel comprising a deformation area deformed as the relative position between the first housing and the second housing is changed; a substrate layer disposed above the window layer and comprising a pattern in which multiple protrusions repeat; and an adhesive layer disposed between the window layer and the substrate layer, at least a part of the adhesive layer being disposed between the multiple protrusions of the substrate layer and having a refractive index adjustment member mixed therein in order to reduce a refractive index difference with the substrate layer.
Ryu discloses a window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A), and a display panel (i.e., Fig. 1A, display of smart device 10) disposed under the window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A); a substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A, paragraph 0064) disposed above the window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A) and comprising a pattern in which multiple protrusions repeat (see paragraph 0067, adhesion enhancement pattern); and an adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A, paragraph 0065) disposed between the window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A) and the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A), at least a part of the adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A) being disposed between the multiple protrusions of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include a window layer and a substrate layer connected by an adhesion layer as taught by Ryu with the teachings of Song, since Ryu states in paragraph 0008 that such a modification would allow for a display part protector to be provided which may be easily adhered to a smart device in order to reduce the risk of damage or restore an already-damaged part.
Further, Song and Ryu fail to disclose at least a part of the adhesive layer having a refractive index adjustment member mixed therein in order to reduce a refractive index difference with the substrate layer.
However, Akutagawa discloses mixing in a refractive index adjustment member in order to reduce a refractive index difference between layers (paragraph 0459).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a refractive index adjustment member as taught by Akutagawa with the teachings of Song and Ryu, since Akutagawa states in paragraph 0459 that such a modification would allow for adjustment of the layer’s refractive index and may inhibit interference fringes while minimizing the refractive index difference between layers.
Regarding claim 2, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1, and Ryu further discloses an adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A) and a substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A).
Song and Ryu fail to disclose the electronic device of claim 1, wherein a refractive index of the adhesive layer and a refractive index of the substrate layer are substantially identical to each other.
However, Akutagawa discloses a refractive index of the adhesive layer and a refractive index of the substrate layer being substantially identical to each other (paragraph 0459).
Regarding claim 3, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1, and Akutagawa further discloses wherein the refractive index adjustment member comprises a solid filler (see paragraph 0459).
Regarding claim 4, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1.
Song and Akutagawa fail to disclose the electronic device of claim 1, wherein widths of the multiple protrusions have a nanometer size.
However, Ryu discloses a protective layer wherein widths of the multiple protrusions have a nanometer size (paragraph 0069).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include multiple protrusions having a nanometer size as taught by Ryu with the teachings of Song and Akutagawa, since Ryu states in paragraph 0069 that such a modification would prevent a difference in heights between the adhesion enhancement patterns from becoming too large which may prevent an adhesive from spreading uniformly and lower the adhering force.
Regarding claim 5, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 4, and Ryu further discloses each of the multiple protrusions having a width of 300 nanometers (nm) to 700 nm (paragraph 0069).
Regarding claim 7, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1, and Song further discloses an electronic device wherein the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101) is slidable with respect to the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102), wherein at least a part of the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) is inserted into an accommodation space of the electronic device or withdrawn from the accommodation space according to a sliding of the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102), and wherein the deformation area (Fig. 12, third region 151c) of the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) comprises an area deformed by a sliding of the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101) with respect to the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102).
Regarding claim 8, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 7, and Song discloses an electronic device further comprising: a support member (Fig. 12, support frame 1515) supporting the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151), at least a part of the support member (Fig. 12, support frame 1515) being disposed in the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) to slide with respect to the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101); and guide rails (Figs. 2, 10, linear guides 230) arranged on opposite ends of the support member (Fig. 12, support frame 1515) to guide a sliding of the support member (Fig. 12, support frame 1515), wherein the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) further comprises a first area (i.e., Fig. 3, edges of display unit 151) in which opposite ends of the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) are fixed to the guide rails (Figs. 2, 10, linear guides 230) and a second area (i.e., Fig. 3, face of display unit 151) other than the first area (i.e., Fig. 3, edges of display unit 151).
Song and Akutagawa fail to disclose a pattern of the substrate layer formed on one area of the substrate layer corresponding to the second area of the display.
However, Ryu discloses a pattern of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A) formed on one area of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A) corresponding to the second area of the display (paragraph 0067).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a pattern formed on one area of the substrate layer corresponding to the second area of the display as taught by Ryu with the teachings of Song and Akutagawa, since Ryu states in paragraph 0068 that such a modification would provide increased surface area of the substrate layer and subsequently improve adhesion.
Regarding claim 9, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 8, and Ryu further discloses a pattern of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A) extends in a direction parallel to a sliding direction of the electronic device on the second area of the display.
Regarding claim 10, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 9, and Ryu further discloses a pattern of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A) is positioned on the deformation area.
Regarding claim 14, Song discloses a display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) of an electronic device.
Song fails to disclose a protective film disposed on a display of an electronic device, the protective film comprising: a substrate layer disposed above a window layer of the display and comprising a pattern in which multiple protrusions repeat; and an adhesive layer disposed between the window layer and the substrate layer, at least a part of the adhesive layer being disposed between the multiple protrusions of the substrate layer and having a refractive index adjustment member mixed therein in order to reduce a refractive index difference with the substrate layer.
Ryu discloses a substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A) disposed above the window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A) and comprising a pattern in which multiple protrusions repeat (see paragraph 0067, adhesion enhancement pattern); and an adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A) disposed between the window layer (Fig. 2, protector layer 111A) and the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A), at least a part of the adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A) being disposed between the multiple protrusions of the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A).
Further, Song and Ryu fail to disclose at least a part of the adhesive layer having a refractive index adjustment member mixed therein in order to reduce a refractive index difference with the substrate layer.
However, Akutagawa discloses mixing in a refractive index adjustment member in order to reduce a refractive index difference between layers (paragraph 0459).
Regarding claim 15, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 14, and Ryu further discloses an adhesive layer (Fig. 2, bonding layer 113A) and a substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A).
Song and Ryu fail to disclose the protective film of claim 14, wherein a refractive index of the adhesive layer and a refractive index of the substrate layer are substantially identical to each other.
However, Akutagawa discloses a refractive index of the adhesive layer and a refractive index of the substrate layer being substantially identical to each other (paragraph 0459).
Regarding claim 16, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 14, and Akutagawa further discloses wherein the refractive index adjustment member comprises a solid filler (see paragraph 0459).
Regarding claim 17, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 14.
Song and Akutagawa fail to disclose the protective film of claim 14, wherein widths of the multiple protrusions have a nanometer size.
However, Ryu discloses a protective layer wherein widths of the multiple protrusions have a nanometer size (paragraph 0069).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include multiple protrusions having a nanometer size as taught by Ryu with the teachings of Song and Akutagawa, since Ryu states in paragraph 0069 that such a modification would prevent a difference in heights between the adhesion enhancement patterns from becoming too large which may prevent an adhesive from spreading uniformly and lower the adhering force.
Regarding claim 18, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 17, and Ryu further discloses each of the multiple protrusions having a width of 300 nanometers (nm) to 700 nm (paragraph 0069).
Regarding claim 20, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 14, wherein the display (Fig. 3, display unit 151) comprises a deformation area (Fig. 12, third region 151c) that is deformed as a relative position between a first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101) and a second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) changes, the first housing (Fig. 3, first frame 101) and the second housing (Fig. 3, second frame 102) being connected such that the relative position therebetween is changeable (paragraph 0010).
Song and Akutagawa fail to disclose the protective film of claim 14, wherein at least a part of the pattern of the substrate layer is positioned on the deformation area.
However, Ryu discloses a protective film (Fig. 2, protector layer 110A) including a pattern (paragraph 0067) on the substrate layer (Fig. 2, base material layer 112A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a protective film with a pattern on the substrate layer positioned on the deformation area as taught by Ryu with the teachings of Song and Akutagawa, since Ryu states in paragraph 0068 that such a modification would provide increased surface area of the substrate layer and subsequently improve adhesion.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Ryu, Akutagawa, and Yang (US 20170270835).
Regarding claim 6, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1.
Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa fail to disclose the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the multiple protrusions have cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer to the adhesive layer.
Yang discloses multiple protrusions (Fig. 2, first trapezoidal bosses 11) having cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer (Fig. 2, first flexible plate 10) to the adhesive layer (paragraph 0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include multiple protrusions having cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer to the adhesive layer as taught by Yang with the teachings of Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa, since Yang states in paragraph 0040 that such a modification would allow for bending of the flexible plate while also preventing excessive bending and improving deflection resistance.
Regarding claim 19, Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the protective film of claim 14.
Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa fail to disclose the protective film of claim 14, wherein the multiple protrusions have cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer to the adhesive layer.
Yang discloses multiple protrusions (Fig. 2, first trapezoidal bosses 11) having cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer (Fig. 2, first flexible plate 10) to the adhesive layer (paragraph 0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include multiple protrusions having cross-sectional areas decreasing along a direction from the substrate layer to the adhesive layer as taught by Yang with the teachings of Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa, since Yang states in paragraph 0040 that such a modification would allow for bending of the flexible plate while also preventing excessive bending and improving deflection resistance.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Ryu, Akutagawa, and Jang et al. (US 20200314515), hereinafter Jang.
Song as modified by Ryu and Akutagawa discloses the electronic device of claim 1.
Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa fail to disclose the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer is formed of at least one material among an acrylic-based material, a silicone-based material, a rubber-based material, or a urethane-based material.
Jang discloses an adhesive layer formed of at least one material among an acrylic-based material, a silicone-based material, a rubber-based material, or a urethane-based material (paragraph 0105).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include an adhesive layer formed of at least one material among an acrylic-based material, a silicone-based material, a rubber-based material, or a urethane-based material as taught by Jang with the teachings of Song, Ryu, and Akutagawa, since Jang states in paragraph 0105 that such a modification would allow the adhesive layer to additionally act as a vibration transfer layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (US 20190261519) discloses an electronic device featuring a resizable touchscreen and multiple antennae within its interior.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOGAN MCGOWAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1898. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-17:00 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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571-270-5528. 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.
/L.F.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2841 /IMANI N HAYMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights