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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an applications filed
in Korea, KR 10-2022-0065642 on May 27, 2022, and KR 10-2022-0090565 on July 21, 2022. Receipt is
acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
An amendment filed on 06/15/2026 in response to the Office Action mailed on 04/15/2026 is
being acknowledged and entered into the record. The present Non-Final rejection is made by taking into fully consideration all the amendments.
Response to Arguments
On page 11 of the remarks filed on 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that the flux in Chung merely performs a function of removing an oxide layer from a bump surface separately formed outside the adhesive layer and is not related to a change in the wetting property of conductive particles. This argument is fully considered but is not persuasive. According to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). As such, the display assembly of Chung et al. is substantially identical in structure and composition to that of the claimed invention, as outlined in the rejection below, and thus, would result in the above claimed property related to the change in the wetting property of conductive particles. Therefore, Chung is relied upon to teach some of the limitations of Claims 1, 11 and their dependents.
On page 12 of the remarks filed on 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that the purpose of the flux in Aoyama’s flux functions as an agent to remove an oxide layer on a surface of the conductive filler to promote sintering between particles but does not control the conductive particles to avoid non-electrode portions of the substrate and selectively adhere only to electrode portions and thus the combination of Chung and Aoyama fail to disclose or suggest the self- assembly of conductive particles through the differential wettability. These arguments are fully considered but are not persuasive for the same reasons indicated in the above paragraph. Therefore, Chung and Aoyama are relied upon to teach some of the limitations of Claims 1, 11 and their dependents.
On page 12 of the remarks filed on 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that the conductive particles C1 and C2 of Aoyama perform transitive liquid phase sintering in which they react with each other to form a new alloy but Aoyama is silent with regard to specific conductive particles C1 and C2 being made of the same material as the electrodes or the electrode pads. This argument is fully considered but is not persuasive. One cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As such, while Aoyama alone does not, the combination of Chung and Aoyama does teach the above limitations as outlined in the rejection below. Therefore, Chung and Aoyama are relied upon to teach some of the limitations of Claims 1, 11 and their dependents.
On pages 12-13 of the remarks filed on 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that Aoyama is silent with regard to a conductive particle C1 serving as a medium for increasing interfacial affinity between another conductive particle C2 and an electrode to achieve self-assembly based on selective wettability and wetting mediation through material matching, and thus, the combination of Chung and Aoyama, fail to disclose the newly added limitations of Claims 1 and 11. These arguments are fully considered but are not persuasive for the same reasons indicated in the first paragraph. Therefore, Chung and Aoyama are relied upon to teach some of the limitations of Claims 1, 11 and their dependents.
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.
Rejection note: Italicized claim limitations are limitations not explicitly disclosed in the primary
reference but disclosed either in a different embodiment of the primary reference or in the secondary reference.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 9-11, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 20210111324 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20190165230 A1), Kobayashi et al. (US 20140145147 A1) and Aoyama et al. (US 20170152410 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Chung et al. teaches a display assembly comprising:
a plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 50, paragraph 0078);
a plurality of electrodes 55 provided on the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 55, 50, paragraph 0098, 0101);
a substrate 10 (Fig. 3A: 10, paragraph 0078);
a plurality of electrode pads 22 provided on the substrate 10 (Fig. 3A: 22, 10, paragraph 0081),
the plurality of electrode pads 22 being connected to the plurality of electrodes 55 provided on the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 22, 50, 55, paragraph 0101);
a solder between each electrode of the plurality of electrodes and each electrode pad of the plurality of electrode pads;
and an adhesive layer 31 fixing the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 to the substrate 10 (Fig. 3B: 31, 50, 10, paragraph 0114),
wherein the adhesive layer 31 comprises:
a non-conductive polymer resin (paragraph 0115);
a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive polymer resin;
and a plurality of conductive particles 32 dispersed in the non-conductive polymer resin and configured to self-assemble toward and electrically connect the plurality of electrodes 55 of the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 during thermal compression bonding (Fig. 3A: 32, 55, 50, paragraph 0115, 0116, 0118),
wherein the flux agent is made of a material that improves wetting property of the plurality of conductive particles with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads so that the plurality of conductive particles exhibit a higher wetting property with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads than with respect to other portions of the substrate,
and wherein the plurality of conductive particles 32 comprise: a plurality of first conductive particles 32; and a plurality of second conductive particles having a higher wetting property than the plurality of first conductive particles, wherein the plurality of second conductive particles are made of a same material as or a similar material to a material of the plurality of electrodes or the plurality of electrode pads, such that the plurality of second conductive particles improve the wetting of the plurality of first conductive particles with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads.
Chung et al., in a different embodiment teaches wherein the adhesive layer 35 comprises a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive film (Fig. 3B: 35, paragraph 0088).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the different embodiments of Chung et al. in order to have the adhesive layer comprise a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive polymer resin. Doing so would prevent the formation of an oxide film during a thermocompression bonding of the electrodes to the electrode pads, as recognized by Chung et al. (paragraph 0088).
Further, the display assembly of Chung et al. is substantially identical in structure and composition to that of the claimed invention (see note below). According to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the flux agent will inherently have the claimed property:
wherein the flux agent is made of a material that improves wetting property of the plurality of conductive particles 32 with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 so that the plurality of conductive particles 32 exhibit a higher wetting property with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 than with respect to other portions of the substrate 10.”
Note:
Chung discloses the flux agent comprises pine resin (see paragraph 0122), which is an organic material, the same material class disclosed by the Applicant for the flux agent (see paragraph 0107 of originally filed disclosure).
Chung discloses the conductive particles 32 may be made of Au, Cu, Ni, etc. (paragraph 0116), which are the same materials disclosed by the Applicant for the conductive particles (see paragraphs 0009 and 0011 of originally filed disclosure).
Chung discloses the plurality of electrode pads 22 maybe made of Cu (paragraph 0084), which is the same material disclosed by the Applicant for plurality of electrode pads (see paragraph 0092 of originally filed disclosure)
While Chung fails to explicitly disclose the material of the plurality of electrodes, Kobayashi et al. teaches a display assembly comprising electrodes 24 made of Ti/Au alloy (Fig. 25: 24, paragraph 0185), which is the same material disclosed by the Applicant for the plurality of electrodes (see paragraph 0092 of originally filed disclosure). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have combined teachings of Chung and Kobayashi et al. in order to have the display assembly of Chung comprise electrodes made of the Ti/Au alloy. Doing so would provide strong adhesion, low electrical resistance and corrosion resistance.
Further, Kim et al. teaches a display assembly comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Chung:
a solder 75, 76 between each electrode 15, 16 of the plurality of electrodes 15, 16 and each electrode pad 65, 66 of the plurality of electrode pads 65, 66 (Fig. 4: 15, 16, 65, 66, 75, 76, paragraph 0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Chung et al. and Kim et al., in order to have a solder between each electrode of the plurality of electrodes and each electrode pad of the plurality of electrode pads. Doing so would provide reliable electrical connection between the electrodes and electrode pads rendered by the low-resistance conductive path formed by the solder.
Aoyama et al. teaches a display assembly including an adhesive layer comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Chung.:
and wherein the plurality of conductive particles C1, C2 comprise: a plurality of first conductive particles C2; and a plurality of second conductive particles C1 (paragraph 0021, 0022, 0130).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to have the plurality of conductive particles comprise a plurality of first conductive particles and a plurality of second conductive particles. Doing so would provide an adhesive layer with high conductivity.
The combination of Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. teaches the plurality of first conductive particles 32 includes Cu (as taught by Chung et al. in paragraph 0116) and the plurality of second conductive particles C1 includes Au, which are the same materials disclosed in the instant application (paragraph 0009 of originally filed disclosure), and therefore would result in the claimed property, i.e., the plurality of second conductive particles having higher wetting property than the plurality of first conductive particles. According to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Further, the combination of Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. teaches , wherein the plurality of second conductive particles C1 (i.e., Cu as taught by Aoyama et al. in paragraph 0021) are made of a same material as or a similar material to a material of the plurality of electrodes 55 or the plurality of electrode pads 22 (i.e., Cu as taught by Chung et al. in paragraph 0084), such that the plurality of second conductive particles (C1 of Ayoma, see paragraph 0021) improve the wetting of the plurality of first conductive particles (32 of Chung) with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22.
Note that according to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). As such, the display assembly of Chung et al./Ayoma is substantially identical in structure and composition to that of the claimed invention and thus would result in the above claimed properties.
Regarding Claim 4, Chung et al. teaches the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of first conductive particles 32 comprise at least one of tin (Sn), silver (Ag), copper (Cu), bismuth (Bi), and cobalt (Co) (paragraph 0116).
Regarding Claim 6, Aoyama et al. teaches the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the second conductive particles C1 are made of one of gold (Au), copper (Cu), and silver (Ag) (paragraph 0021).
Regarding Claim 7, Chung et al. fails to explicitly teach the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of conductive particles have size of 10 nm to 1 µm.
However, Aoyama et al. teaches a display assembly including an adhesive layer comprising a plurality of conductive particles C1, C2, wherein the plurality of conductive particles have size of 5 nm to 1 µm (see paragraph 0021, 0022, 0083, 0130). According to MPEP § 2144.05 (I), “In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to the plurality of conductive particles to have a size of 10 nm to 1 µm. Doing so would make the conductive particles more wettable by increasing its surface area, as well as improve the dispersion of the particles in the solvent with minimal aggregation, as recognized by Aoyama et al. (paragraph 0083).
Regarding Claim 9, Chung teaches the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer 31 is in a film shape (Fig. 3A: 31, paragraph 0088).
Regarding Claim 10, Chung et al. fails to teach the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer is in a paste shape.
However, Aoyama et al. teaches an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer is in a paste shape (paragraph 0122, 0130).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to have the adhesive layer in a paste shape. Doing so would ensure better wetting and contact as adhesive pastes can flow into gaps, irregular surfaces and microscopic voids.
Regarding Claim 11, Chung et al. teaches a display device comprising: a processor (paragraph 0196); and a display assembly comprising:
a plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 50, paragraph 0078);
a plurality of electrodes 55 provided on the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 55, 50, paragraph 0098, 0101);
a substrate 10 (Fig. 3A: 10, paragraph 0078);
a plurality of electrode pads 22 provided on the substrate 10 (Fig. 3A: 22, 10, paragraph 0081),
the plurality of electrode pads 22 being connected to the plurality of electrodes 55 provided on the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 (Fig. 3A: 22, 50, 55, paragraph 0101);
a solder between each electrode of the plurality of electrodes and each electrode pad of the plurality of electrode pads;
and an adhesive layer 31 fixing the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 to the substrate 10 (Fig. 3B: 31, 50, 10, paragraph 0114),
wherein the adhesive layer 31 comprises:
a non-conductive polymer resin (paragraph 0115);
a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive polymer resin;
and a plurality of conductive particles 32 dispersed in the non-conductive polymer resin and configured to self-assemble toward and electrically connect the plurality of electrodes 55 of the plurality of light emitting diodes 50 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 during thermal compression bonding (Fig. 3A: 32, 55, 50, paragraph 0115, 0116, 0118),
wherein the flux agent is made of a material that improves wetting property of the plurality of conductive particles with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads so that the plurality of conductive particles exhibit a higher wetting property with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads than with respect to other portions of the substrate,
and wherein the plurality of conductive particles 32 comprise: a plurality of first conductive particles 32; and a plurality of second conductive particles having a higher wetting property than the plurality of first conductive particles, wherein the plurality of second conductive particles are made of a same material as or a similar material to a material of the plurality of electrodes or the plurality of electrode pads, such that the plurality of second conductive particles improve the wetting of the plurality of first conductive particles with respect to the plurality of electrodes and the plurality of electrode pads.
Chung et al., in a different embodiment teaches wherein the adhesive layer 35 comprises a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive film (Fig. 3B: 35, paragraph 0088).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the different embodiments of Chung et al. in order to have the adhesive layer comprise a flux agent mixed with the non-conductive polymer resin. Doing so would prevent the formation of an oxide film during a thermocompression bonding of the electrodes to the electrode pads, as recognized by Chung et al. (paragraph 0088).
Further, the display device of Chung et al. is substantially identical in structure and composition to that of the claimed invention (see note below). According to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the flux agent will inherently have the claimed property:
wherein the flux agent is made of a material that improves wetting property of the plurality of conductive particles 32 with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 so that the plurality of conductive particles 32 exhibit a higher wetting property with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22 than with respect to other portions of the substrate 10.”
Note:
Chung discloses the flux agent comprises pine resin (see paragraph 0122), which is an organic material, the same material class disclosed by the Applicant for the flux agent (see paragraph 0107 of originally filed disclosure).
Chung discloses the conductive particles 32 may be made of Au, Cu, Ni, etc. (paragraph 0116), which are the same materials disclosed by the Applicant for the conductive particles (see paragraphs 0009 and 0011 of originally filed disclosure).
Chung discloses the plurality of electrode pads 22 maybe made of Cu (paragraph 0084), which is the same material disclosed by the Applicant for plurality of electrode pads (see paragraph 0092 of originally filed disclosure)
While Chung fails to explicitly disclose the material of the plurality of electrodes, Kobayashi et al. teaches a display assembly comprising electrodes 24 made of Ti/Au alloy (Fig. 25: 24, paragraph 0185), which is the same material disclosed by the Applicant for the plurality of electrodes (see paragraph 0092 of originally filed disclosure). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have combined teachings of Chung and Kobayashi et al. in order to have the display assembly of Chung comprise electrodes made of the Ti/Au alloy. Doing so would provide strong adhesion, low electrical resistance and corrosion resistance.
Further, Kim et al. teaches a display device comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Chung:
a solder 75, 76 between each electrode 15, 16 of the plurality of electrodes 15, 16 and each electrode pad 65, 66 of the plurality of electrode pads 65, 66 (Fig. 4: 15, 16, 65, 66, 75, 76, paragraph 0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Chung et al. and Kim et al., in order to have a solder between each electrode of the plurality of electrodes and each electrode pad of the plurality of electrode pads. Doing so would provide reliable electrical connection between the electrodes and electrode pads rendered by the low-resistance conductive path formed by the solder.
Aoyama et al. teaches a display device including an adhesive layer comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Chung.:
and wherein the plurality of conductive particles C1, C2 comprise: a plurality of first conductive particles C2; and a plurality of second conductive particles C1 (paragraph 0021, 0022, 0130).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to have the plurality of conductive particles comprise a plurality of first conductive particles and a plurality of second conductive particles. Doing so would provide an adhesive layer with high conductivity.
The combination of Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. teaches the plurality of first conductive particles 32 includes Cu (as taught by Chung et al. in paragraph 0116) and the plurality of second conductive particles C1 includes Au, which are the same materials disclosed in the instant application (paragraph 0009 of originally filed disclosure), and therefore would result in the claimed property, i.e., the plurality of second conductive particles having higher wetting property than the plurality of first conductive particles. According to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Further, the combination of Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. teaches , wherein the plurality of second conductive particles C1 (i.e., Cu as taught by Aoyama et al. in paragraph 0021) are made of a same material as or a similar material to a material of the plurality of electrodes 55 or the plurality of electrode pads 22 (i.e., Cu as taught by Chung et al. in paragraph 0084), such that the plurality of second conductive particles (C1 of Ayoma, see paragraph 0021) improve the wetting of the plurality of first conductive particles (32 of Chung) with respect to the plurality of electrodes 55 and the plurality of electrode pads 22.
Note that according to MPEP § 2112.01 (I), “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). As such, the display assembly of Chung et al./Ayoma is substantially identical in structure and composition to that of the claimed invention and thus would result in the above claimed properties.
Regarding Claim 14, Chung et al. teaches the display device of claim 13, wherein the plurality of first conductive particles 32 comprise at least one of tin (Sn), silver (Ag), copper (Cu), bismuth (Bi), and cobalt (Co) (paragraph 0116).
Regarding Claim 16, Aoyama et al. teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein the second conductive particles C1 are made of one of gold (Au), copper (Cu), and silver (Ag) (paragraph 0021).
Regarding Claim 17, Chung et al. fails to explicitly teach the display device of claim 11, wherein the plurality of conductive particles have size of 10 nm to 1 µm.
However, Aoyama et al. teaches a display device including an adhesive layer comprising a plurality of conductive particles C1, C2, wherein the plurality of conductive particles have size of 5 nm to 1 µm (see paragraph 0021, 0022, 0083). According to MPEP § 2144.05 (I), “In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to the plurality of conductive particles to have a size of 10 nm to 1 µm. Doing so would make the conductive particles more wettable by increasing its surface area, as well as improve the dispersion of the particles in the solvent with minimal aggregation, as recognized by Aoyama et al. (paragraph 0083).
Regarding Claim 19, Chung teaches the display device of claim 11, wherein the adhesive layer 31 is in a film shape (Fig. 3A: 31, paragraph 0088).
Regarding Claim 20, Chung et al. fails to teach the display device of claim 11, wherein the adhesive layer is in a paste shape.
However, Aoyama et al. teaches a display device including an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer is in a paste shape (paragraph 0122, 0130).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Aoyama et al. in order to have the adhesive layer in a paste shape. Doing so would ensure better wetting and contact as adhesive pastes can flow into gaps, irregular surfaces and microscopic voids.
Claim 8 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 20210111324 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20190165230 A1), Kobayashi et al. (US 20140145147 A1) and Aoyama et al. (US 20170152410 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Iguchi et al. (JP 2008156547 A).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Chung et al., Kim et al. and Aoyama fails to teach the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color.
However, Iguchi et al. teaches a display assembly comprising an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color (page 1, lines 22-27 in English Translation of Iguchi et al.).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Iguchi et al. in order to have the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color. Doing so would ensure the display assembly exhibit excellent light-shielding properties, as recognized by Iguchi et al. (page 1, line 20-12).
Claim 18 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 20210111324 A1), in view of Kim et al. (US 20190165230 A1), Kobayashi et al. (US 20140145147 A1) and Aoyama et al. (US 20170152410 A1), as applied to Claim 11 above, further in view of Iguchi et al. (JP 2008156547 A).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Chung et al., Kim et al. and Aoyama fails to teach the display device of claim 11, wherein the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color.
However, Iguchi et al. teaches a display device comprising an adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color (page 1, lines 22-27 in English Translation of Iguchi et al.).
Therefore, a person or ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have combined the teachings of both Chung et al. and Iguchi et al. in order to have the adhesive layer further comprises a pigment or dye having a black-based color. Doing so would ensure the display device exhibit excellent light-shielding properties, as recognized by Iguchi et al. (page 1, line 20-12).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMNA F IQBAL whose telephone number is 571-272-1587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30 am - 5.30 pm 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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at 571-272-5055. 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.
/HAMNA FATHIMA IQBAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 07/21/2026
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights