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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/2/2023; 2/25/2024; and 7/7/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Claims 1-15) in the reply filed on 12/26/2025 is acknowledged.
A. Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
The applicant has not presented a 37 CFR 1.121(c) compliant marked-up version of the claims relative to the restriction election of 12/26/2025. The claims are, therefore, being objected to.
Claim Status
Claims 1-15 are currently being examined. No claims have been amended, and no new claims have been added. Claims 16-20 are withdrawn per the 12/26/2025 restriction election (see above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by YI (US 2017/0369983 A1, hereafter Yi).
Re claim 1, Yi discloses in FIGS. 4-5 (with references to FIGS. 1-3) a mask-support assembly (300; [0056]) which is used in a process of forming organic light-emitting diode (OLED) pixels (P; [0053]) on a semiconductor wafer (e.g. Si of various materials for 101; [0051]), the mask-support assembly (300) comprising:
a support (310; [0057]) comprising an edge portion (left/right perimeters of 310 in FIG. 3) and a grid portion (360 in FIG. 3; [0068]); and
a mask (330; [0058]) connected onto (patterned on at 311; [0058]) the support (310) and comprising a plurality of cell portions (320; [0059]) in each of which a mask pattern (350; [0060]) is formed, wherein at least a partial region (above 340 in FIG. 4) of the support (310) is exposed on one surface (extreme left/right vertical planes) of the support (310) except for a region (between left/right slanted planes) where the cell portions (320) of the mask (330) are disposed.
Re claim 4, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1, wherein at least a region (above 340 in FIG. 4) that corresponds to (aligns with) the edge portion (left/right perimeters of 310) of the support (310) is exposed.
Re claim 11, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1, wherein the support (310) is formed from a silicon wafer (0057) and the mask (310) is formed on (patterned on) the silicon wafer by electroforming (plating; [0036]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of JANG et al (US 2021/0140030 A1, hereafter Jang).
Re claim 2, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose wherein an edge (full perimeter of 310 in FIG. 3) of the support (310) has a circular shape.
However,
Jang discloses in FIG. 2 a mask-support assembly (30; [0064]), the mask-support assembly (30) comprising: wherein an edge (circumference) of a support (31; [0064]) has a circular shape ([0064]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi by an edge of the support having a circular shape in order to minimize the overall footprint of the mask-support assembly and the amount of the materials used to construct it.
Re claim 5, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 2, wherein the grid portion (360) comprises a plurality of first grid portions (361; [0069]) extending in a first direction (X) and having both ends (extreme left/right edges) connected to (integral with) the edge portion (left/right perimeters of 310); and a plurality of second grid portions (362; [0069]) extending in a second direction (Y) connected to (integral with) the edge portion (left/right perimeters of 310).
Re claim 6, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 5, wherein the mask (330) comprises the plurality of cell portions (320); separation portions (portions of 330 around each 320) disposed between the plurality of cell portions (320); and an outer peripheral portion (outermost portions of 330 at each outermost 320 in FIG. 4) disposed on an outer edge (perimeter of 330 of each outermost 320 in FIG. 4) of the plurality of cell portions (320).
Re claim 7, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 6.
But, fails to disclose wherein a region of the support (310) that corresponds to a region outside the outer peripheral portion (outermost portions of 330 at each outermost 320) of the mask (330) is exposed.
However, Jang would render the limitations obvious as depicted in FIG. 2 wherein a region (35) of the support (30) that corresponds to a region (20b) outside the outer peripheral portion (20a) of the mask (20) is exposed, as would be part of the minimized mask-support assembly discussed for claim 2.
Re claim 8, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 6, wherein the cell portions (320) have a rectangular shape (FIG. 3) and the separation portions (portions of 330 around each 320) and the outer peripheral portion (outermost portions of 330 at each outermost 320) are formed along the first direction (X) and the second direction (Y) perpendicular to (crossing) the first direction (X).
Re claim 9, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 8.
But, fails to disclose wherein a width (lateral extension in FIG. 3) of the outer peripheral portion (outermost portions of 330 at each outermost 320) is wider (laterally broader) than that of the separation portions (portions of 330 around each 320).
However, Jang would render these limitations obvious by disclosing wherein a width (lateral extension to 20b in FIG. 2; [0054]) of the outer peripheral portion (outermost portions of 20a at each line-centered outermost DP) is wider (laterally broader) than that of the separation portions (portions of 20a between each DP), as would be part of the minimized mask-support assembly discussed for claim 2.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of Ko et al (US 2011/0067630 A1, hereafter Ko).
Re claim 3, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose wherein the support (310) and the mask (330) are connected through a connection portion interposed therebetween and the connection portion comprises at least one of Ni, Cu, Ti, Au, Ag, Al, Sn, In, Bi, Zn, Sb, Ge, or Cd.
However,
A. Yi discloses in the embodiment of FIG. 7 wherein the support (710; [0074])
and the mask (laminate 732/733; [0076]) are connected through a connection portion
(laminate 731; [0076]) interposed therebetween.
And,
B. Ko discloses in FIG. 1 wherein the support (230; [0049]) and the mask (220; [0049]) are connected through a connection portion (210; [0049]) interposed therebetween and the connection portion (210) comprises at least one of Ni (nickel-steel; [0050]), Cu, Ti, Au, Ag, Al, Sn, In, Bi, Zn, Sb, Ge, or Cd.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi first by using the embodiment of FIG. 7, wherein the support (310) and the mask (330) are connected through a connection portion interposed therebetween, for corrosion protection of the mask (Yi; [0077]), and using the connection portion (210) comprises at least one of Ni (nickel-steel; [0050]) of Ko for matching of thermal expansion coefficients of the support and the connection portion (Ko; [0050]) to prevent deformation of the mask-support assembly.
Re claim 10, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose wherein the mask (330) comprises a first mask layer and a second mask layer that is formed of a material different from that of the first mask layer, the first mask layer is made of a material including at least one of Ni, Cu, Au, Ag, Al, Co, Ti, Cr, W, or Mo, and the second mask layer is made of Invar or Super Invar.
However, Ko would render these limitations obvious by disclosing wherein the mask (laminate 210/220; [0049]) comprises a first mask layer (220) and a second mask layer (210) that is formed of a material (nickel-iron alloy; [0050]) different from that of the first mask layer (220), the first mask layer (220) is made of a material ([0050]) including at least one of Ni ([0050]), Cu, Au, Ag, Al, Co, Ti, Cr, W, or Mo, and the second mask (210) layer is made of Invar ([0050]) or Super Invar, for matching of thermal expansion coefficients of the support and the connection portion (Ko; [0050]) to prevent deformation of the mask-support assembly.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of Jang.
Re claim 12, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 11.
But, fails to disclose wherein the surface resistance of the support (310) is 5X10-4 to 1X10-2 ohm-cm.
However,
Jang discloses in FIG. 5 a silicon support (41; [0073]) highly doped entirely or only on the surface at a concentration equal to or higher than 10.sup.19 (consistent with the instant specification).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi by using the doping of Jang, through routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05), where the support has no surface defects, to yield a surface resistance of the support (310) is 5X10-4 to 1X10-2 ohm-cm, allowing for uniform electroforming (plating) of the mask of the mask-support assembly (Jang; [0074]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of Yotsuya et al (US 2005/0211981 A1, hereafter Yotsuya).
Re claim 13, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 11.
But, fails to disclose wherein a crystal orientation of a (100) plane or (111) plane of the silicon wafer (of 310) is not parallel to a formation direction of the grid portion.
However,
Yotsuya discloses in FIG. 7(D) a silicon wafer (20’; [0100]) of mask-support assembly (20) wherein a crystal orientation of a plane of the silicon wafer (20’) is (110; [0100]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi by using the (110) crystal orientation of Yotsuya for the silicon wafer of Yi, wherein a crystal orientation of a (100) plane or (111) plane of the silicon wafer (of 310) is not parallel to a formation direction of the grid portion, to provide openings with a highly accurate shape that can form a thin film pattern with high accuracy (Yotsuya; [0021]-[0022]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi and Jang as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Yotsuya).
Re claim 14, Yi and Jang disclose the mask-support assembly of claim 5, wherein
the mask (Yi: 330) comprises the plurality of cell portions (320); and an outer peripheral portion disposed on an outer edge of the plurality of cell portions (see claims 6-9).
But, fails to disclose and slit lines are formed between each cell portion (320) so that the cell portions (320) are spaced apart from each other.
However,
Yotsuya discloses in FIG. 3 wherein the mask (plurality 20; [0083]) comprises the plurality of cell portions (20a/20b; [0091]); and slit lines (pitch spacings d1 between 20a and 20b; [0091]) are formed between each cell portion (each 20a/20b) so that the cell portions (20a/20b) are spaced apart (by d1; [0091]) from each other.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi and Jang by using the slit lines of Yotsuya, the slit lines are formed between each cell portion so that the cell portions are spaced apart from each other, to control location and width of deposited materials of the OLED pixels of widescreen displays (Yotsuya; [0092] and [0094]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of JU et al (US 2020/0044010 A1, hereafter Ju) and Ghosh et al (US 2016/0141498 A1, hereafter Ghosh).
Re claim 15, Yi discloses the mask-support assembly of claim 1.
But, fails to disclose wherein a thickness of the grid portion (360) is thinner than that of the edge portion (left/right perimeters of 310), a thickness of the edge portion ranges from 500 µm to 1,000 µm, and a thickness of the grid portion ranges from 50 µm to 200 µm.
However,
A. Ju discloses in FIG. 33 a mask-support assembly comprising: a thickness of the edge portion (left/right ends) of a support portion (101; [0098]) ranges from 500 µm to 1,000 µm (500 to 725 micrometers; [0098]).
And,
B. Ghosh discloses in FIG. 3 a mask-support assembly comprising: wherein a thickness of the grid portion (Si Mask; [0047]) is at least 20 microns ([0047]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Yi by first using the thickness of Ju for the edge portion, to provide the advantages of no adhesion and plasticity, so that the support portion is less likely to be deformed during the manufacturing process of the mask-support assembly (Ju; [0099]); and second, using the at least 20 micrometers thickness of Ghosh for the grid portion of Yi, to create a high resolution, high precision collimating shadow mask to reduce feathering and image shift for very high brightness micro-displays (Ghosh; [0047] and [0051]), wherein, together with Ju, a thickness of the grid portion (360) is thinner than that of the edge portion, a thickness of the edge portion ranges from 500 µm to 1,000 µm, and a thickness of the grid portion ranges (through routine experimentation; MPEP § 2144.05) from 50 µm to 200 µm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC W JONES whose telephone number is (408)918-9765. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 6:00 PM PT.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/ERIC W JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892