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 without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 12/8/2025 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55, which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/12/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/12/2023. These drawings are considered acceptable by Examiner.
America Invents Act
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claim(s) 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0027667 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee et al., teaches a display device comprising: a display panel (DD, Fig. 2B) comprising a first portion (NFA1), a second portion (NFA2), and a bending portion (FA) disposed between the first portion (NFA1) and the second portion (NFA2); a first black matrix (BM of RPP, “the anti-reflection panel RPP may further include a black matrix disposed adjacent to the color filters,” ¶ [0091]) (Fig. 5A) disposed in the first portion (NFA1) and disposed adjacent to a boundary of the first portion (NFA1); an anti-reflective layer (RPP) disposed in the first portion (NFA1) to cover the first black matrix (BM of RPP) and extending to the bending portion (FA); a second black matrix (WPP, “light blocking pattern,” ¶ [0095]) disposed on the anti-reflective layer (RPP) (refer now to Fig. 4A), disposed adjacent to a boundary of the anti-reflective layer (RPP), and overlapping the first black matrix (BM of RPP) and the bending portion (FA) in a plan view; and a window (WPB) disposed on the anti-reflective layer (RPP) to cover the second black matrix (WPP).
Regarding Claim 2, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the window (WPB) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP) overlap the bending portion (FA) in the plan view.
Regarding Claim 3, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the window (WPB) is coated on an upper surface of the anti-reflective layer (RPP) and an upper surface of the second black matrix (WPP).
Regarding Claim 4, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 3, wherein the window (WPB) is directly in contact (as clearly depicted in Fig. 4A) with the upper surface of the anti-reflective layer (RPP) and the upper surface of the second black matrix (WPP).
Regarding Claim 5, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein a lower surface of the window (WPB [Wingdings font/0xE0] of PSA1, wherein PSA1 is an extension of WPB) and a lower surface of the second black matrix (WPP) are placed on a same plane.
Regarding Claim 6, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 1, further comprising a bending protective layer (PSA2) disposed between the bending portion (FA) of the display panel (DD) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP).
Regarding Claim 7, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 6, wherein the bending protective layer (PSA2), the anti-reflective layer (RPP), and the window (WPB) are further disposed in a portion of the second portion (NFA2), which is adjacent to the bending portion (FA) when the bending portion (FA) is not bent (Fig. 5A).
Regarding Claim 8, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 6, wherein the bending protective layer (PSA2) is further disposed in a portion of the second portion (NFA2), which is adjacent to the bending portion (FA), and boundaries of the anti-reflective layer (RPP) and the window (WPB) are spaced apart from a boundary of the bending protective layer (PSA2) disposed in the second portion (NFA2) in the plan view.
Regarding Claim 9, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 6, further comprising an adhesive layer (PSA1, “adhesive layer,” ¶ [0097]) disposed between the bending protective layer (PSA2) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP).
Regarding Claim 10, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 9, wherein the bending protective layer (PSA2) is separated from the anti-reflective layer (RPP) when the bending portion (FA) is bent such that the second portion (NFA2) is disposed under the first portion (NFA1).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein the window (WPB) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP) cover the bending portion (FA) that is bent in the plan view.
Regarding Claim 12, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 10, further comprising a coating layer (PSA1) coated on an upper surface of the bending protective layer (PSA2), wherein the coating layer has a hydrophobicity (adhesive material includes a degree of natural hydrophobicity).
Regarding Claim 13, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein the adhesive layer (PSA1) is spaced apart from the bending protective layer (PSA2) when the bending portion (FA) is bent such that the second portion (NFA2) is disposed under the first portion (NFA1).
Regarding Claim 14, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 6, further comprising an adhesive layer (PSA1) disposed between the display panel (DD) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP) in the first portion (NFA1), wherein an adhesive layer is not disposed between the bending protective layer (PSA2) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP).
Examiner notes that the phrase “an adhesive layer is not disposed between the bending protective layer and the anti-reflective layer” does not recite a positive limitation and instead attempts to claim the disclosed invention by excluding what the applicants did not disclose or invent, rather than distinctly and particularly pointing out what the applicants did disclose or invent. Essentially this claim language fails to provide any structural element or concrete component.
Regarding Claim 15, Lee et al., teaches a display device comprising: a display panel (DD) comprising a first portion (NFA1), a second portion (NFA2), and a bending portion (FA) disposed between the first portion (NFA1) and the second portion (NFA2); an anti-reflective layer (RPP) disposed in the first portion (NFA1) and extending to the bending portion (FA); a window (WPB) disposed on the anti-reflective layer (RPP); a bending protective layer (PSA2) disposed between the anti-reflective layer (RPP) and the bending portion (FA) of the display panel (DD); and an adhesive layer disposed between the bending protective layer (PSA2) and the anti-reflective layer (RPP), wherein the bending protective layer (PSA2) is separated from the anti-reflective layer (RPP) when the bending portion (FA) is bent such that the second portion (NFA2) is disposed under the first portion (NFA1).
Regarding Claim 16, Lee et al., teaches the display device of claim 15, further comprising a coating layer (PSA1, “first adhesive layer,” ¶ [0097]) disposed on an upper surface of the bending protective layer (PSA2), wherein the coating layer has a hydrophobicity (adhesive material includes a degree of natural hydrophobicity).
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
K-PION Dossier of KR 10-2018-0098445
Examiner's Note
The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Hana Featherly whose telephone number is (571)-272-8654. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Greece can be reached on 571-272-3711. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Hana Featherly/
USPTO Art Unit 2875
Patent Examiner Hana Featherly
/JAMES R GREECE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875