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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2026-07-16 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “barrier… forming an opening penetrating a portion of the front skin” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In every figure which shows either barrier groove BG or barrier slit BS, the identified elements are shown as surface features which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand to be recessed section(s) (i.e. they do not expose layer 131 below skin 132). Furthermore there is no “opening” whatsoever, whether in the front skin or otherwise, described in any of the specification or description of the drawings and no opening as claimed is readily apparent from the drawings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There is neither disclosure in the specification nor any figure showing a barrier forming an opening portion penetrating a portion of the front skin. The present barriers disclosed in the present application are either barrier groove BG or barrier slit BS. Nowhere in the present application is either BG or BS disclosed as an “opening” nor shown penetrating a portion of the front skin, nor is such a feature described in the specification. The only description in the specification does state: "The barrier slit BS may be formed by being penetrated by the front skin 132, the core 131, and the rear skin 133 of the flat part 130P", this however does not support the recited opening recited in the newly presented amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-12 (as best understood in light of the 112 rejection) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kenney (US 2011/0290685).
Regarding claim 1 Kenney discloses:
A display device comprising:
a display panel (e.g. 12 FIG.1A); and
a material complexed plate (e.g. 30 FIG.5B) at a rear of the display panel, wherein the material complexed plate comprises:
a front skin (e.g. 42 FIG.5B) forming a front surface;
a rear skin (e.g. 32 FIG.5B) forming a rear surface and facing the front skin;
a core (e.g. 36 FIG.5B) disposed between the front skin and the rear skin, and comprising fibers (e.g. aramid paragraph [0033]);
an accommodating part (e.g. section pointed to by C FIG.5B) formed at the front skin and having a stepped shape toward the rear skin (e.g. shown FIG.5B); and
a barrier (e.g. walls formed around C FIG.5B) located adjacent to the accommodating part and forming an opening (e.g. negative section shown FIG.5B) penetrating a portion of the front skin (e.g. shown FIG.5B). (note FIG.5B contains both "C" and "c" capitalization signifies the relevant element of the prior art)
Regarding claim 2 Kenney discloses:
the accommodating part includes a step extending downward from the front skin to a lower region of the accommodating part (e.g. shown FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 3 Kenney discloses:
the material complexed plate comprises:
a flat part (e.g. surface along c (between 34 and 26 FIG.5B)); and
the accommodating part formed in a portion of the flat part (e.g. shown FIG.5B), wherein the front skin of the accommodating part includes a step extending downward from the front skin to the flat part (e.g. shown FIG.5B), and wherein the barrier is formed in the step between the flat part and a remaining portion of the accommodating part (e.g. shown FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 4 Kenney discloses:
the barrier is one of a plurality of barriers (e.g. two shown FIG.5B), and wherein each of the plurality of barriers comprises:
a first slit (e.g. left diagonal section about C FIG.5B) formed along a boundary between the flat part and the remaining portion of the accommodating part; and
a second slit (e.g. right diagonal section about C FIG.5B) formed along the boundary between the flat part and the remaining portion of the accommodating part, wherein the second slit is spaced apart from the first slit (e.g. shown FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 5 Kenney discloses:
the first slit forms a first distance from a distal edge of the accommodating part to a first end of the first slit less than a second distance from the distal edge of the accommodating part to a second end of the first slit (e.g. shown FIG.4B), and wherein the second slit forms a third distance from the distal edge of the accommodating part to a first end of the second slit is less than a fourth distance from the distal edge of the accommodating part to a second end of the second slit (e.g. shown FIG.4B).
Regarding claim 6 Kenney discloses:
the first slit is symmetrical to the second slit (e.g. about C FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 7 Kenney discloses:
each of the plurality of barriers comprises:
a third slit (e.g. not shown side into/out of the page shown FIG.5B to accommodate 40 as described paragraph [0042]-[0044]) spaced apart from the first slit and the second slit, the third slit being formed in the flat part (e.g. in the same manner as shown FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 8 Kenney discloses:
the third slit is elongated (e.g. between the inner edges of slanted walls shown FIG.5B), and wherein a length of the third slit is less than a distance between both distal ends of the first slit and the second slit (e.g. the length of the bottom of the accommodating part).
Regarding claim 10 Kenney discloses:
each of the plurality of barriers comprises:
a third slit (e.g. not shown third side to accommodate 40 as described paragraph [0042]-[0044]) spaced apart from the first slit and the second slit, the third slit being formed in the flat part (e.g. in the same manner as shown FIG.5B), a fifth distance between the third slit and the first slit or between the third slit and the second slit is less than the second distance or the fourth distance (e.g. distance between third and second/first slit approaches zero at the vertex of the slits).
Regarding claim 11 Kenney discloses:
the rear skin includes a protrusion
extending away from the core and the front skin (e.g. edges of 32 extending away shown FIG.5B), wherein a location of the protrusion generally corresponds with a location at the front skin of the accommodating part (e.g. above, as shown FIG.5B).
Regarding claim 12 Kenney discloses:
A display device comprising:
a display panel (e.g. 12 FIG.1A); and
a material complexed panel (e.g. 30 FIG.5B) located at a rear of the display panel,
wherein the material complexed panel comprises:
a front skin (e.g. 42 FIG.5B) forming a front surface;
a rear skin (e.g. 32 FIG.5B) forming a rear surface and facing the front skin; and
a core (e.g. 36 FIG.5B) located between the front skin and the rear skin, wherein the material complexed panel is shaped to define an accommodating part (e.g. section pointed to by C FIG.5B) where a portion of the front skin has been pressed toward the rear skin (e.g. shown FIG.5B), wherein the material complexed panel is further shaped to define a barrier (e.g. walls formed around C FIG.5B) located relative to the accommodating part, and wherein the barrier includes an opening penetrating a portion of the front skin (e.g. downward opening shown FIG.5B).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenney (US 2011/0290685) in view of LEE at al. (US2019/0014670).
Regarding claim 9 Kenney discloses:
a width of the first slit or a width of the second slit (e.g. widths shown FIG.5B)
Kenney does not explicitly disclose:
a width of the third slit is less than a width of a slit
LEE teaches:
a width of the third slit (e.g. ledge above f8 FIG.31) is less than a width of another slit (e.g. ledge below f8 FIG.31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teachings of Lee as pointed out above, in Kenney, as one having ordinary skill in the art would have would have recognized the teaching, suggestion, and motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings (as pointed out above) to arrive at the claimed invention, and would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because such a combination and/or modification would have allowed for: accommodation of attachment devices on angled surfaces with greater support (FIG.31, paragraph [0112]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2026-07-16 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The rejection above points out where the prior art of record discloses the argued limitations insofar as they are understood in light of the specification without importing limitations from the specification into the claims in consideration of the drawing and 112 rejection.
As noted in the drawing objection and the 112 rejection above the present application provides no figures showing either barrier groove BG or barrier slit BS penetrating or forming an opening in the front skin (e.g. removing 132 to expose 131), and in addition the present specification describes the opposite of applicants amendment, namely that: "The barrier slit BS may be formed by being penetrated by the front skin 132, the core 131, and the rear skin 133 of the flat part 130P" it is the front skin that penetrates the barrier slit, not the other way around. The claim is interpreted as requiring a change in the level of the front skin without a breaking of the front skin, which is disclosed by Kenney.
Any/all other arguments are either addressed by the responses above, or addressed in the rejection above, and so will not be repeated here.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THERON S MILLISER whose telephone number is (571)270-1800. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
Limited examiner interviews are available.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Imani N. Hayman can be reached at (571) 270-5528. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THERON S MILLISER/Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/ANTHONY M HAUGHTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights