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 Amendments
Acknowledgment is made of the amendment filed 05/08/2026 (“A...”), in which: claims 1, 2, 10, 17, 19, and 20 are amended; claim 4 is cancelled; new claim 21 is added; and the rejection of the claims are traversed. Claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 21 are currently pending an Office action on the merits as follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/08/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments assert that the prior art of record is deficient when it comes to “wettability” (pg. 8 of instant remarks), particularly pertaining to locations within the same layer having different wettabilities (pg. 9 of instant remarks). Examiner is not persuaded because Kim2 (US 20210363392 A1) teaches this feature (see current rejection); wherein Kim2 achieves different wettabilities in different locations of a film by changing surface energy of the adhesive material.
Rejections
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.
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 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1) and Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Sim teaches a display apparatus, comprising:
a transistor part (pixel circuit PC taught in [0216], wherein the pixel circuit PC at least includes transistors T1 to T7) over a substrate (Fig. 25; second support member SB2);
a light emitting part ([0216] teaches light emitting device OLED connected to the pixel circuit PC within the display module DM. Also see Fig. 26. [0215] – [0216] discloses Fig. 26 to be a circuit diagram of the pixel PX) over the transistor part (Fig. 26);
one or more cover members (Fig. 25; cover window CW) over the light emitting part (Fig. 25 shows the cover window CW over the display module DM);
one or more first adhesives (Fig. 25; an adhesive layer from 111 - 118) disposed between the one or more cover members ([0190]); and
one or more plates (Fig. 25; plate PT) including a display area (Figs. 24 – 25; plate PT at the folding area FA) and a hole area (Figs. 24 – 25; through hole TH of the plate PT at a periphery of the display area. [0213]) disposed on or at a periphery of the display area (Fig. 24; first area A1, taught in [0213] to correspond to the through hole TH),
wherein the display area includes a variable area (Fig. 24; folding area) and a non-variable area (Fig. 24; second-first area A2a or second-second area A2b) based on whether folding or bending can occur (Based on folding/bending), ...
However, Sim remains silent regarding the display apparatus features:
... wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area,
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area,
wherein a wettability of the first area of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the one or more first adhesives, and
wherein a transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is less than about 97%.
Examiner notes that Sim teaches in [0145] that the cover window CW, which includes the first adhesive 111 has a transmittance equal to about 90%.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a similar structure regarding the transmittance of the one or more first adhesive (e.g., Fig. 5) wherein the protective layer adhesive layer AP-P (similar to Sim’s adhesive layer 111) is explicitly disclosed to have a high transmittance of about 90% ([0173] and Table 1). Thus, examiner asserts that the transmittance taught by Sim for the cover window may also be understood as the transmittance of Sim’s first adhesive.
Therefore, a transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is less than about 97% would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, from at least [0173] and Table 1 of Kim because absent evidence or disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F. 2d454, 105 USQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1995).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s cover member to include a first adhesive wherein a transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is less than about 97%, as disclosed by Kim, because such a modification is taught, suggested, or motivated by the art. More specifically, the motivation to modify Sim’s cover member to include a first adhesive wherein a transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is less than about 97%, as disclosed by Kim, is expressly provided by Kim, wherein they disclose an analogous display apparatus structure with an explicit teaching of the transmittance of the first adhesive ([0173] and Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s cover member to include a first adhesive wherein a transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is less than about 97%, as disclosed by Kim, with the motivation of allowing light to transmit through the upper layers of the device. The person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefit of adhesives with high transparency.
Further, in the same field of endeavor, Kim (US 20210363392 A1; Kim2) teaches an adhesive layer including a first area (Fig. 1; low surface energy region 121 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]), a second area (Fig. 1; a first high surface energy region 122 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]) and a third area (Fig. 1; a second high surface energy region 122 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]), wherein the first area is between the third area and the second area (Fig. 1), wherein a wettability of the first area (see [0026] – [0032]) of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area (see [0026] – [0032]) and the third area (see [0026] – [0032]) of the one or more first adhesives (Kim2 teaches “the difference in selective adhesive force and wettability within the single adhesive layer to be achieved by the present disclosure” within their disclosure in at least [0103]).
Examiner asserts that Kim2 uses wettability’s dependence to surface energy to achieve the difference in wettability within the single adhesive layer as asserted in their disclosure (at least [0103]). Kim2’s adhesive layer would be obvious to include in a folding display device, such as Sim’s, in order to address the known issues that accompany folding semiconductor structures (e.g., cracking, air exposure, introduction to impurities, exposure to light, etc etc); wherein the known function of an adhesive layer is to hold device components in their specified position, so optimizing (as stated in a general sense by the applicant) how well that adhesive layer holds the specified positions of device components is a routine practice within the field of endeavor. Examiner asserts it would be obvious to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, with the teachings of Kim2 to yield the display apparatus further including:
... wherein the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area (yielded through the combination of adding Kim2 multi-region adhesive film),
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area (yielded through the combination of adding Kim2 multi-region adhesive film), ...
Therefore, Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, yield the display apparatus:
... wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area,
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area,
wherein a wettability of the first area of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the one or more first adhesives ...
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Kim2’s adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s adhesive layers because they are formed to hold semiconductor device components together. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area with the predictable result of wherein a wettability of the first area of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the one or more first adhesives in order to address the known problems within the field of foldable display devices.
Claims 2 – 3, 5, 8 – 11, 14, and 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), and Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, teach the display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:
one or more second adhesives (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 114 or 115. [0213] teaches the through hole TH penetrating through the second protecting member PL2 to the adhesive layer 114) disposed at the hole area,
wherein the one or more first adhesives are disposed between the one or more cover members in the display area (Fig. 25), and …
However, Sim remains silent regarding the display apparatus:
… wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nam teaches adhesive layer AP1 and AP2 (Fig. 4), which is similar to Sim’s second adhesive layer because they are both associated with space between the plate layer(s) and display panel/display module DM. Further, Nam teaches the adhesive layer AP1/AP2 having a transmittance of about 80% or less ([0116]). Incorporating Nam adhesive into Sim’s display device would yield the display apparatus wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the adhesive layers of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Nam’s teaching of their adhesive layers AP1/AP2 is comparable to Sim’s second adhesives because of the same relative placement of the adhesives between their disclosures. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adhesive layers of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives with the predictable result of improving the display apparatus’ transmittance.
Regarding dependent claim 3, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 2; however, Sim remains silent wherein
the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less.
However, further in view of Nam, it would be obvious to incorporate the materials of Nam’s adhesive layers AP1/AP2 into Sim’s first adhesive to yield the display apparatus wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the first adhesive layer of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Nam’s teaching of their adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s first adhesive because of their use within similar folding display devices. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first adhesive layer of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less with the predictable result of improving the display apparatus’ transmittance.
Regarding dependent claim 5, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein
at least one or more of a camera, a sensor (electronic sensor/electronic device SS. See [0147], [0177], and [0214]), and an optical part are disposed in the hole area.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 2, further comprising:
one or more third adhesives (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 116 or 117. [0196] or [0203]) between the one or more plates,
wherein the one or more plates are below the transistor part (Fig. 25 shows the plates below the display module DM).
Regarding dependent claim 9, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 8, wherein
at least one of the one or more plates further includes one or more opening patterns (Figs. 24 – 25; plurality of holes H positioned in the folding area FA).
Regarding dependent claim 10, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 9,
wherein the first area (Fig. 24; second-first area A2a or second-second area A2b) is adjacent to the one or more opening patterns (Figs. 24 – 25), and
wherein a wettability of a first area of the one or more third adhesives is different from a wettability of the one or more third adhesives corresponding to the one or more opening patterns.
It is the examiner understanding that, for at least adhesive layer 117, the wettability would be different in the folding area of the device because of cut out shape shown in at least Fig. 25; however, Sim remains silent regarding a wettability of a first area of the one or more third adhesives is different from a wettability of the one or more third adhesives corresponding to the one or more opening patterns.
However, examiner asserts that Kim2 uses wettability’s dependence to surface energy to achieve the difference in wettability within the single adhesive layer as asserted in their disclosure (at least [0103]). Kim2’s adhesive layer would be obvious to include in a folding display device, such as Sim’s, in order to address the known issues that accompany folding semiconductor structures (e.g., cracking, air exposure, introduction to impurities, exposure to light, etc etc); wherein the known function of an adhesive layer is to hold device components in their specified position, so optimizing (as stated in a general sense by the applicant) how well that adhesive layer holds the specified positions of device components is a routine practice within the field of endeavor. Examiner asserts it would be obvious to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, with the teachings of Kim2 to yield the display apparatus further including:
... wherein a wettability of a first area of the one or more third adhesives is different from a wettability of the one or more third adhesives corresponding to the one or more opening patterns.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein a wettability of a first area of the one or more third adhesives is different from a wettability of the one or more third adhesives corresponding to the one or more opening patterns, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Kim2’s adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s adhesive layers because they are formed to hold semiconductor device components together. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein a wettability of a first area of the one or more third adhesives is different from a wettability of the one or more third adhesives corresponding to the one or more opening patterns with the predictable result of addressing the known problems within the field of foldable display devices.
Regarding dependent claim 11, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 8, wherein
the hole area is disposed at a part of the one or more plates and a part of the one or more cover members (Fig. 24 shows the display device DSD with first area A1, i.e., the hole area; wherein Fig. 25 shows the hole area overlapping with the cover member).
Regarding dependent claim 14, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 1; however, Sim remains silent wherein
the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nam teaches adhesive layer AP1 and AP2 (Fig. 4), which is similar to Sim’s second adhesive layer because they are both associated with a foldable display apparatus, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would expect Nam’s adhesive layers to be configurable such that it may function in the same layer of the display apparatus wherein Sim’s first adhesive layer is disposed. Further, Nam teaches the adhesive layer AP1/AP2 having a transmittance of about 80% or less ([0116]). Incorporating Nam adhesive into Sim’s display device would yield the display apparatus the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the first adhesive layer of Sim, further in view of Kim, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Nam’s teaching of their adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s first adhesive because of their use within similar folding display devices. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first adhesive layer of Sim, further in view of Kim, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is about 70% or more to about 80% or less with the predictable result of improving the display apparatus’ transmittance.
Regarding dependent claim 16, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein
the one or more second adhesives include transparent adhesives (Nam teaches, e.g., [0016], that the adhesive layers AP1/AP2 have a transmittance of about 80%/optically clear (OCA), such that the examiner is considering adhesive layers AP1/AP2 to include transparent adhesives).
Regarding dependent claim 17, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 10, wherein
the one or more third adhesives include the first area and a second area adjacent to the first area, and
wherein the wettability of the first area is different from a wettability of the second area (Kim2: Fig. 1 and [0132]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), and Tanaka et al. (US 20140070203 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 6, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 2, further comprising:
an encapsulation part (Fig. 25; first protecting member PL1) over the light emitting part; and …
However, Sim remains silent regarding:
… a color filter part over the encapsulation part.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tanaka teaches a display apparatus with a resin adhesive layer 18, interpreted to be an encapsulation part (wherein it is understood that resin makes an excellent encapsulation material. See [0187] wherein Sim teaches their first protecting member PL1 to be formed from a resin), is formed over a light emitting part (Fig. 8). Further, a color filter 19B is formed directly onto the encapsulation part. Examiner asserts that a color filter, such as that shown by Tanaka may be added to the display apparatus of Sim.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, to include Tanaka’s color filter part over the encapsulation part, because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim and Nam, as modified by Tanaka’s color filter part over the encapsulation part can yield a predictable result of providing better color clarity/purity for the user since the color filter may be configured to selectively transmit wavelengths within a predefined range. Since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable before the effective filing date of the instant invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), Tanaka et al. (US 20140070203 A1), and Lee et al. (US 20200119113 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 7, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, Nam, and Tanaka, teach the display apparatus of claim 6; however, Sim remains silent regarding the display apparatus further comprising:
a touch part between the encapsulation part and the color filter part.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches an encapsulation layer 450; a touch layer 501, 511, and IE2; and a color filter layer CF_R/G/B (Fig. 6). Therefore, examiner asserts it would have been obvious to form the display apparatus wherein a touch part between the encapsulation part and the color filter part through Sim, further in view of Lee.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2,Nam, and Tanaka, to include Lee’s touch part between the encapsulation part and the color filter part, because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the display apparatus of the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2,Nam, and Tanaka, as modified by Lee’s touch part between the encapsulation part and the color filter part can yield a predictable result of providing a touch function to the display apparatus since the touch part may be configured to transmit a signal generated from a user’s touch. Since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable before the effective filing date of the instant invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), and Park et al. (US 20210375166 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 12, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 8; however, Sim remains silent wherein
the hole area extends from a part of the one or more plates to a part of the one or more cover members.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches a support member PM, interpreted to be a plate, and window WM, i.e., a cover member; wherein a hole area extends from the plate to the cover member (Fig. 6). Examiner asserts it would have been obvious to combine Sim and Park to yield the display apparatus wherein the hole area extends from a part of the one or more plates to a part of the one or more cover members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s display apparatus to include Park’s teaching wherein the hole area extends from a part of the one or more plates to a part of the one or more cover members, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Park’s hole is comparable to Sim’s hole because they may house sensor components. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sim’s display apparatus to include Park’s teaching wherein the hole area extends from a part of the one or more plates to a part of the one or more cover members with the predictable result of the hole reaching the cover member in order to provide appropriate connectivity for the sensor provided therein.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), and Hao et al. (US 20200152715 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 13, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 8; however, Sim remains silent wherein
at least one of the one or more first adhesives and the one or more third adhesives include a color material and an ultraviolet ray blocker.
However, in the field of adhesives, Hao teaches a polymeric adhesive that may include materials for color shifting, i.e., a color material ([0071] discusses colored tackifiers) and UV blocking features ([0060]). Examiner asserts it would have been obvious to combine Sim and Hao to yield the display apparatus wherein at least one of the one or more first adhesives and the one or more third adhesives include a color material and an ultraviolet ray blocker.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the adhesives of Sim, Kim, Kim2, Nam, to include Hao’s adhesive features of colored material and UV blocking material, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, the adhesives disclosed by Hao are comparable to the adhesives of Sim, Kim, Kim2, and Nam, because Hao discloses the use of their adhesives in display devices (e.g., [0007] – [0008]). Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adhesives of Sim, Kim, Kim2, and Nam, to include Hao’s adhesive features of colored material and UV blocking material, with the predictable result of providing protection to the sensitive device components on/in/below the display panel.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), Tanaka et al. (US 20140070203 A1), and Wu et al. (US 20240278533 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 15, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, Nam, and Tanaka, teach the display apparatus of claim 6, wherein
the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in going away from the color filter part to the one or more cover members.
However, in the same layer field of endeavor, Wu teaches making a multilayered adhesive layer wherein the transmittance may vary in the vertical direction (Fig. 8, [0114]). Therefore, it would be obvious from Sim, further in view of Wu, to form a display apparatus wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in going away from the color filter part to the one or more cover members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, to include Wu’s teaching wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in the vertical direction, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Wu’s adhesive layers discussed are comparable to the adhesive layers of Sim, Kim, and Nam because of the explicit teaching for use in foldable displays (abstract/[0005] – [0007] of Wu). Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, to include Wu’s teaching wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in the vertical direction with the predictable result of optimizing the desired optical properties ([0123]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20230383152 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1), and Wu et al. (US 20240278533 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 18, Sim, further in view of Kim, Kim2, and Nam, teach the display apparatus of claim 17; however, Sim remains silent wherein
a transmittance of the one or more third adhesives is differently configured in going away from the one or more plates including the one or more opening patterns.
However, in the same layer field of endeavor, Wu teaches making a multilayered adhesive layer wherein the transmittance may vary in the vertical direction (Fig. 8, [0114]). Therefore, it would be obvious from Sim, further in view of Wu, to form a display apparatus wherein a transmittance of the one or more third adhesives is differently configured in going away from the one or more plates including the one or more opening patterns.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim, further in view of Kim and Nam, to include Wu’s teaching wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in the vertical direction, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Wu’s adhesive layers discussed are comparable to the adhesive layers of Sim, Kim, and Nam because of the explicit teaching for use in foldable displays (abstract/[0005] – [0007] of Wu). Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim, further in view of Kim and Nam, to include Wu’s teaching wherein the transmittance of the one or more first adhesives is differently configured in the vertical direction with the predictable result of optimizing the desired optical properties (Wu: [0123]).
Claims 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Wu et al. (US 20240278533 A1) and Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1).
Regarding independent claim 19, Sim teaches a display apparatus, comprising:
one or more plates (Fig. 25; plate PT) including a display area (Figs. 24 – 25; plate PT at the folding area FA) and a non-display area (Figs. 24 – 25; plate PT outside of the boundaries of the display module DM);
a transistor part (pixel circuit PC taught in [0216], wherein the pixel circuit PC at least includes transistors T1 to T7) over the one or more plates (Figs. 25);
a light emitting part ([0216] teaches light emitting device OLED connected to the pixel circuit PC within the display module DM. Also see Fig. 26. [0215] – [0216] discloses Fig. 26 to be a circuit diagram of the pixel PX) over the transistor part (Fig. 26) over the transistor part (Fig. 26);
one or more cover members (Fig. 25; cover window CW) over the light emitting part (Fig. 25 shows the cover window CW over the display module DM); and
a plurality of first adhesives (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 116 or 117 and 111 or 112 110) divided into a first group (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 116 or 117 of 110 (below the illustration)) and a second group (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 111 or 112 of 110 (below the illustration)),
wherein the display area includes a variable area (Fig. 24; folding area) and a non-variable area (Fig. 24; second-first area A2a or second-second area A2b) based on whether folding or bending can occur (Based on folding/bending),
...
wherein the first group of the plurality of first adhesives … is disposed between the one or more plates (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 116 or 117), and
wherein the second group of the plurality of first adhesives … is disposed between the one or more cover members (Fig. 25; first adhesive layer 111 or 112).
However, Sim remains silent regarding the display apparatus:
... wherein the plurality of first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area,
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area,
wherein a wettability of the first area of the plurality of first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the plurality of first adhesives, ...
wherein the first group of the plurality of first adhesives … has a first transmittance and …
the second group of the plurality of first adhesives … has a second transmittance different from the first transmittance, and …
Regarding the features of transmittance, in the same field of endeavor, Wu teaches adhesive layers that have transmittance values that may vary in the vertical direction (Fig. 8, [0114]). Therefore, it would be obvious from Sim, further in view of Wu, to form a display apparatus wherein the first group of the plurality of first adhesives has a first transmittance and the second group of the plurality of first adhesives has a second transmittance different from the first transmittance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim to include Wu’s teaching wherein the first group of the plurality of first adhesives has a first transmittance and the second group of the plurality of first adhesives has a second transmittance different from the first transmittance, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Wu’s adhesive layers discussed are comparable to the adhesive layers of Sim because of the explicit teaching for use in foldable displays (abstract/[0005] – [0007] of Wu). Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim to include Wu’s teaching wherein the first group of the plurality of first adhesives has a first transmittance and the second group of the plurality of first adhesives has a second transmittance different from the first transmittance with the predictable result of optimizing the desired optical properties (Wu: [0123]).
Further, in the same field of endeavor, Kim (US 20210363392 A1; Kim2) teaches an adhesive layer including a first area (Fig. 1; low surface energy region 121 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]), a second area (Fig. 1; a first high surface energy region 122 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]) and a third area (Fig. 1; a second high surface energy region 122 of the second adhesive layer 120. See [0150]), wherein the first area is between the third area and the second area (Fig. 1), wherein a wettability of the first area (see [0026] – [0032]) of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area (see [0026] – [0032]) and the third area (see [0026] – [0032]) of the plurality of first adhesives (Kim2 teaches “the difference in selective adhesive force and wettability within the single adhesive layer to be achieved by the present disclosure” within their disclosure in at least [0103]).
Examiner asserts that Kim2 uses wettability’s dependence to surface energy to achieve the difference in wettability within the single adhesive layer as asserted in their disclosure (at least [0103]). Kim2’s adhesive layer would be obvious to include in a folding display device, such as Sim’s, in order to address the known issues that accompany folding semiconductor structures (e.g., cracking, air exposure, introduction to impurities, exposure to light, etc etc); wherein the known function of an adhesive layer is to hold device components in their specified position, so optimizing (as stated in a general sense by the applicant) how well that adhesive layer holds the specified positions of device components is a routine practice within the field of endeavor. Examiner asserts it would be obvious to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, with the teachings of Kim2 to yield the display apparatus further including:
... wherein the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area (yielded through the combination of adding Kim2 multi-region adhesive film),
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area (yielded through the combination of adding Kim2 multi-region adhesive film), ...
Therefore, Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, yield the display apparatus:
... wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, the first area and the second area being in the non-variable area and the third area being in the variable area,
wherein the first area is adjacent to the variable area and is between the third area and the second area,
wherein a wettability of the first area of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the plurality of first adhesives ...
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Kim2’s adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s adhesive layers because they are formed to hold semiconductor device components together. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein the one or more first adhesives include a first area, a second area and a third area with the predictable result of wherein a wettability of the first area of the one or more first adhesives is different from a wettability of the second area and the third area of the plurality of first adhesives in order to address the known problems within the field of foldable display devices.
Regarding dependent claim 20, Sim, further in view of Wu and Kim2, teach the display apparatus of claim 19, further comprising
a plurality of second adhesives (Fig. 25; adhesive layer 114) disposed at a hole area disposed on or at a periphery of the display area (Fig. 25 shows adhesive layer 114 disposed at a periphery of the display area), …
However, Sim remains silent regarding:
… the plurality of second adhesives having a third transmittance,
wherein the third transmittance of the plurality of second adhesives is different from that of the one or more first adhesives.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Wu teaches adhesive layers that have transmittance values that may vary in the vertical direction (Fig. 8, [0114]). Further, Kim2 teaches forming their different surface energy regions of varying materials. Therefore, it would be obvious from Sim, further in view of Wu and Kim2, to form a display apparatus includes the one or more second adhesives having a third transmittance, wherein the third transmittance of the one or more second adhesives is different from that of the one or more first adhesives.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim to include Wu’s teaching wherein their display device includes the one or more second adhesives having a third transmittance, wherein the third transmittance of the one or more second adhesives is different from that of the one or more first adhesives, further in view of Kim2, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Wu’s and Kim2’s adhesive layers discussed are comparable to the adhesive layers of Sim because of the explicit teaching for use in foldable displays (abstract/[0005] – [0007] of Wu). Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the transmittance, in the vertical direction, of the adhesives of Sim to include Wu’s teaching wherein their display device includes the one or more second adhesives having a third transmittance, wherein the third transmittance of the one or more second adhesives is different from that of the one or more first adhesives, further in view of Kim2, with the predictable result of optimizing the desired optical properties (Wu: [0123]).
Claims 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim et al. (US 20230071578 A1), and further in view of Wu et al. (US 20240278533 A1), Kim2 et al (US 20210363392 A1), and Nam et al. (US 20220174828 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 21, Sim, further in view of Wu and Kim2, teach the display apparatus of claim 10; however, Sim remains silent wherein
the transmittances increase from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives, and
the wettabilities of the first areas decrease from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nam teaches adhesive layer AP1 and AP2 (Fig. 4), which is similar to Sim’s second adhesive layer because they are both associated with space between the plate layer(s) and display panel/display module DM. Further, Nam teaches the adhesive layer AP1/AP2 having a transmittance of about 80% or less ([0116]). Incorporating Nam adhesive into Sim’s display device would yield the display apparatus the transmittances increase from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the adhesive layers of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives, because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Nam’s teaching of their adhesive layers AP1/AP2 is comparable to Sim’s second adhesives because of the same relative placement of the adhesives between their disclosures. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adhesive layers of Sim, further in view of Kim and Kim2, to include the relationship disclosed by Nam wherein the one or more second adhesives have different transmittance from those of the one or more first adhesives with the predictable result of improving the display apparatus’ transmittance.
Further, examiner asserts that Kim2 uses wettability’s dependence to surface energy to achieve the difference in wettability within the single adhesive layer as asserted in their disclosure (at least [0103]). Kim2’s adhesive layer would be obvious to include in a folding display device, such as Sim’s, in order to address the known issues that accompany folding semiconductor structures such as how the stress of folding a semiconductor device effects ascending/descending layers; wherein the known function of an adhesive layer is to hold device components in their specified position, so optimizing (as stated in a general sense by the applicant) how well that adhesive layer holds the specified positions of device components is a routine practice within the field of endeavor. Examiner asserts it would be obvious to modify the display apparatus of Sim, further in view of Kim, with the teachings of Kim2 to yield the display apparatus further including:
the wettabilities of the first areas decrease from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the adhesive layers of Sim, further in view of Kim2’s, to include the adhesive layer feature the wettabilities of the first areas decrease from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives, as the layers’ distance change from the folding substrate (Kim2), because such a modification is based on the use of known techniques to improve similar devices in the same way. More specifically, Kim2’s adhesive layers are comparable to Sim’s adhesive layers because they are formed to hold semiconductor device components together. Therefore, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sim’s adhesive layers to include Kim2’s adhesive layer feature wherein the wettabilities of the first areas decrease from the one or more first adhesives to the one or more third adhesives with the predictable result of addressing known problems within the field of foldable display devices., such as a layer’s elasticity.
Conclusion
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure:
Song K, Lee J, Choi SO, Kim J. Interaction of Surface Energy Components between Solid and Liquid on Wettability, and Its Application to Textile Anti-Wetting Finish. Polymers (Basel). 2019 Mar 14;11(3):498. doi: 10.3390/polym11030498. PMID: 30960482; PMCID: PMC6473839 – teaches that wettability primary depends on surface energy.
US 20250059409 A1 – previously relied on.
US 20100181090 A1 – previously relied on.
US 20230329070 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
US 20200051881 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
US 20230251690 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
US 20220011815 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
US 20200319672 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
US 20230292573 A1 – teaches an encapsulation layer, touch layer, and color filter.
US 20230354686 A1 – teaches a similar foldable display.
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 MARIO A AUTORE whose telephone number is (571)270-0059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am - 5 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, Chad Dicke can be reached on (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.
MARIO A. AUTORE JR.
Examiner
Art Unit 2897
/MARIO ANDRES AUTORE JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2897 /CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights