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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 7, 8, 14, 15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 7 recites “the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer.” However, this limitation is of improper form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 1, the claim from which claim 7 ultimately depends. Claim 1 already requires the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer with the recitations of: (1) “a second layer disposed on the first layer;” and (2) “a third layer disposed on the second layer.”
Claim 14 recites “the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer.” However, this limitation is of improper form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 11, the claim from which claim 14 ultimately depends. Claim 11 already requires the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer with the recitations of: (1) “a second layer disposed on the first layer;” and (2) “a third layer disposed on the second layer.”
Claim 19 recites “the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer.” However, this limitation is of improper form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 16, the claim from which claim 19 ultimately depends. Claim 16 already requires the second layer is disposed between the first layer and the third layer with the recitations of: (1) “a second layer disposed on the first layer;” and (2) “a third layer disposed on the second layer.”
Claims 8, 15 and 20 are included in this rejection based on their dependencies from either claim 7, 14 or 19.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0201874 (hereinafter “You”), and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2015/0009632 (hereinafter “Min”).Regarding claims 1 and 21 You teaches a foldable display device (display device) 1000 comprising a flexible display module (display panel) 100 having a folding axis Faxis extending in a direction parallel to a first direction (first direction) DR1, and a support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 disposed on a surface of the flexible display module (display panel) 100, where the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 includes: a first support part (first layer) 200, a second support part (second layer) 300 disposed on the first support part (first layer) 200, and a third support part (third layer) 400 disposed on the second support part (second layer) 300 (abstract; paragraphs [0054], [0092], [0106]; and Figures 1-3, 9-10, 12 and 14). You teaches each of the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 includes carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP), the CFRP comprising a plurality of fibers (fiber yarns) extending in one direction, and a binding polymer (base resin) configured to fix the carbon fibers (paragraphs [0086] and [0110]), which corresponds to: (1) the first layer including a first base resin and first fiber yarns, where the first fiber yarns are dispersed in the first base resin; (2) the second layer including a second base resin and second fiber yarns, where the second fiber yarns are dispersed in the second base resin; (3) the third layer including a third base resin and third fiber yarns, where the third fiber yarns are dispersed in the third base resin; (4) the panel supporter including a base resin and fiber yarns; and (5) the base resin includes: (i) a first portion in which the fiber yarns are dispersed; (ii) a second portion in which the second fiber yarns are dispersed; and (iii) a third portion in which the third fiber yarns are dispersed. You teaches the first fibers 210 from the first support part (first layer (of the first portion)) 200 extend in the first direction (first direction) DR1, the second fibers 310 from the second support part (second layer (of the second portion)) 200 extend in a second direction (second direction) DR2, and the third fibers 410 from the third support part (third layer (of the third portion)) 400 extend in a third direction DR3 (paragraphs [0082], [0083] and [0106]). You teaches the first direction DR1 is perpendicular to the second direction DR2, and the third direction DR3 is substantially identical to the first direction DR1 (paragraphs [0083], [0092] and [0107]), which corresponds to the second direction intersects the first direction, and the third fiber yarns extend in the first direction. You teaches the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 includes a plurality of grooves (slits) H in a foldable area (bending portion) FA in which the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 is configured to bend according to the folding axis of the display panel, where each of the plurality of grooves (slits) H penetrates through the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 in a thickness direction (third direction that intersects the first direction DR1 and the second direction DR2 (paragraphs [0111] – [0112]; and Figure 14). You does not explicitly teach a number of the second fiber yarns per unit volume of the second layer (or second portion) is greater than the number of the first fiber yarns per unit volume of the first layer (or first portion) and a number of the third fiber yarns per unit volume of the third layer (or third portion). Min teaches a display device 40 comprising a device module (display panel) 42, an adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 supporting said device module (display panel) 42, and a window 46 (Figure 7A and paragraph [0095]). Min teaches the adhesive layer may include resin in which a fiber is impregnated (layer including a base resin and fiber yarns) (paragraph [0054]). Min teaches the adhesive layer (panel supporter) includes an impregnation region of a multilayer structure that includes first and third layers, and a second layer disposed therebetween, where a density of the fiber (number of the fiber yarns per unit volume) in the first and third layers may be lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (paragraph [0097]), which corresponds to the number of the second fiber yarns per unit volume of the second layer is greater than the number of the first fiber yarns per unit volume of the first layer and the number of the third fiber yarns per unit volume of the third layer. Min teaches in such an embodiment, the first and third layers exhibit low elasticity and flexibility, and the second layer exhibits high elasticity and firmness, where the adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 may effectively protect the window and the display module dispose thereon and thereunder, and effectively alleviate a compression stress of the window when a display device is bent. Accordingly, an elasticity of the display device may be optimized, and a rolling stress may be alleviated when the display device is deformed, e.g., folded or bent (paragraph [0101]). You and Min are analogous inventions in the field of foldable displays. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify the fibers from each layer of the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 of You with the fiber density distribution in the first, second, and third layers of Min to: protect the display panel by effectively alleviate a compression stress when the display device is bent; and/or alleviate a rolling stress thereof when the display device is deformed. Regarding claims 2 and 22 In addition, Min teaches the density of the fiber impregnated in the adhesive layer may be adjusted by changing the thickness (diameter) of a yarn of the fiber (paragraph [0059]). Min does not explicitly teach that a smaller diameter of the fiber yarns results in a higher fiber density (diameter of each of the second fiber yarns is smaller than a diameter of each of the first fiber yarns and a diameter of each of the third fiber yarns). However, it would have been readily apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that a reduction of the diameter of a group of fiber yarns would result in a higher fiber density compared to the fiber density of another group having a larger diameter because the smaller diameter fibers would decrease the amount of interstitial spaces between fibers, thereby resulting in a higher density of fibers, which corresponds to a diameter of each of the second fiber yarns is smaller than a diameter of each of the first fiber yarns and a diameter of each of the third fiber yarns.Regarding claim 3 In addition, You refers to the layers of carbon fibers included in the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 using the same descriptive language; that is “the first support part 200 may include a plurality of first carbon fibers 210, the second support part 300 may include a plurality of second carbon fibers 310, and the third support part 400 may include a plurality of third carbon fibers 410 (paragraphs [0104] – [0109], etc.), which reasonably conveys to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the same plies or layers are being used in different layers of the stack, corresponding to the diameter of each of the first fiber yarns and the diameter of each of the third fiber yarns are the same as each other from the combination of You and Min.Regarding claims 4 and 23 In addition, Min teaches the adhesive layer (panel supporter) includes an impregnation region of a multilayer structure that includes first and third layers, and a second layer disposed therebetween, where a density of the fibers in the first and third layers may be lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (paragraph [0097]), analogous to fibers in the second layer being packed closer together to result in a larger mass per unit volume (density), which corresponds to a spaced distance between the second fiber yarns in the second layer is smaller than a spaced distance between the first fiber yarns in the first layer and a spaced distance between the third fiber yarns in the third layer.Regarding claim 5 In addition, Min teaches the density of the fiber impregnated in the adhesive layer may be adjusted by changing the thickness (diameter) of a yarn of the fiber (paragraph [0059]). Min teaches when the first and third layers have a density of the fiber lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (relatively lower density), they exhibit low elasticity and flexibility, and the second layer (having a relatively high density) exhibits high elasticity and firmness, which results in the adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 may effectively protect the window and the display module dispose thereon and thereunder, and effectively alleviate a compression stress of the window when a display device is bent. Accordingly, an elasticity of the display device may be optimized, and a rolling stress may be alleviated when the display device is deformed, e.g., folded or bent (paragraph [0101]). Min does not explicitly teach the diameter of each of the second fiber yarns is about 4.5 μm or more and about 5.5 μm or less, and the diameter of each of the first fiber yarns and the diameter of each of the third fiber yarns are about 6.5 μm or more and about 7.5 μm or less. Absent a showing of criticality with respect to the diameters of the first, second, and third layers (a result-effective variable), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine the thickness (diameter) of the yarn of the fiber for each of the first, second, and third layers through routine experimentation in order to achieve the desired optimized elasticity of the display device, including providing the benefits of: effectively protecting the components dispose thereon and thereunder; effectively alleviating a compression stress of the components when a display device is bent; and/or alleviating a rolling stress when the display device is deformed. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(B).Regarding claim 6 In addition, Min teaches a multilayer structure for the higher fiber density second layer, when compared to the single layer structure for each of the lower fiber density first and third layers (paragraphs [0097] – [0098], and Figures 7B-7C), which reasonably conveys that the thickness of the second layer is greater than a thickness of the first layer and a thickness of the third layer.Regarding claim 7 In addition, You teaches the second support part (second layer) 300 is disposed between the first support part (first layer) 200 and the third support part (third layer) 400 (Figure 12).Regarding claim 8 In addition, You refers to the layers of carbon fibers included in the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 using the same descriptive language; that is “the first support part 200 may include a plurality of first carbon fibers 210, the second support part 300 may include a plurality of second carbon fibers 310, and the third support part 400 may include a plurality of third carbon fibers 410 (paragraphs [0104] – [0109], etc.), which reasonably conveys to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the same plies or layers are being used in different layers of the stack, corresponding to the thickness of the first layer and the thickness of the third layer are the same as each other from the combination of You and Min.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You and Min as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2010/0178825 (hereinafter “Shah”).Regarding claim 9 The limitations for claim 1 have been set forth above. As previously mentioned, You teaches each of the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 includes carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP) (paragraphs [0086] and [0110]), which corresponds to the first fiber yarns, the second fiber yarns, and the third fiber yarns include carbon. The combination of You and Min does not explicitly teach a carbon content of each of the second fiber yarns is greater than a carbon content of each of the first fiber yarns and a carbon content of each of the third fiber yarns. Shah teaches a carbon fiber having a relatively low carbon content tends to have lower strength and stiffness, and a carbon fiber having a relatively high carbon content tends to have higher tensile strength (paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine a carbon content for each of the groups of carbon fibers 210, 310, 410 from the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400, respectfully, using nothing more than routine experimentation to achieve: the desired relatively lower strength and stiffness for the first and third layers (by having a relatively lower carbon content); and the relatively higher tensile strength for the second layer (by having a relatively higher carbon content). It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You and Min as applied to claim 1 above, as further evidenced by an article titled “ What is Carbon Fiber Modulus of Elasticity? The core of material properties explained” by Uchida-Japan.com (hereinafter “Uchida”) and an article titled “Modulus of Elasticity: Essential Insights on Glass Fiber Types” by glassfibertextile.com (hereinafter “GFT”).Regarding claim 10 The limitations from claim 1 have been set forth above. In addition, Min teaches an elastic modulus of the second layer is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first layer and the third layer (paragraph [0100]). Min also teaches the fiber used may include a glass fiber, a carbon fiber, an aramid-based fiber, a polyester fiber, asbestos, a cellulose-based fiber, or a combination thereof (paragraph [0057]). Min does not explicitly teach an elastic modulus of each of the second fiber yarns is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first fiber yarns and an elastic modulus of each of the third fiber yarns. The elastic modulus of carbon fibers and glass fibers are well-known, as evidenced by Uchida and GFT. Uchida teaches the modulus of elasticity of carbon fibers is 230 GPa or higher (bridging pages 2-3). GFT teaches the modulus of elasticity of glass fibers ranges from 70-140 GPa (pages 2 and 4). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use: (1) the relatively higher elastic modulus carbon fibers in the second layer of Min; and (2) the relatively lower elastic modulus glass fibers in the first and third layers of Min to form a second layer having a greater elastic modulus compared to the lower elastic modulus of the first and third layers, as desired by Min.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You and Min, as further evidenced by Uchida and GFT.Regarding claim 11 You teaches a foldable display device (display device) 1000 comprising a flexible display module (display panel) 100 having a folding axis Faxis extending in a direction parallel to a first direction (first direction) DR1, and a support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 disposed on a surface of the flexible display module (display panel) 100, where the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 includes: a first support part (first layer) 200, a second support part (second layer) 300 disposed on the first support part (first layer) 200, and a third support part (third layer) 400 disposed on the second support part (second layer) 300 (abstract; paragraphs [0054], [0092], [0106]; and Figures 1-3, 9-10, 12 and 14). You teaches each of the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 includes carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP), the CFRP comprising a plurality of fibers (fiber yarns) extending in one direction, and a binding polymer (base resin) configured to fix the carbon fibers (paragraphs [0086] and [0110]), which corresponds to: the first layer including a first base resin and first fiber yarns, where the first fiber yarns are dispersed in the first base resin; the second layer including a second base resin and second fiber yarns, where the second fiber yarns are dispersed in the second base resin; and the third layer including a third base resin and third fiber yarns, where the third fiber yarns are dispersed in the third base resin. You teaches the first fibers 210 from the first support part (first layer) 200 extend in the first direction (first direction) DR1, the second fibers 310 from the second support part (second layer) 200 extend in a second direction (second direction) DR2, and the third fibers 410 from the third support part (third layer) 400 extend in a third direction DR3 (paragraphs [0082], [0083] and [0106]). You teaches the first direction DR1 is perpendicular to the second direction DR2, and the third direction DR3 is substantially identical to the first direction DR1 (paragraphs [0083], [0092] and [0107]), which corresponds to the second direction intersects the first direction, and the third fiber yarns extend in the first direction. You does not explicitly teach an elastic modulus of each the second fiber yarns is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first fiber yarns and an elastic modulus of each of the third fiber yarns. Min teaches a display device 40 comprising a device module (display panel) 42, an adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 supporting said device module (display panel) 42, and a window 46 (Figure 7A and paragraph [0095]). Min teaches the adhesive layer may include resin in which a fiber is impregnated (layer including a base resin and fiber yarns) (paragraph [0054]). Min teaches the adhesive layer (panel supporter) includes an impregnation region of a multilayer structure that includes first and third layers, and a second layer disposed therebetween, where a density of the fiber (number of the fiber yarns per unit volume) in the first and third layers may be lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (paragraph [0097]). Min teaches in such an embodiment, the first and third layers exhibit low elasticity and flexibility, and the second layer exhibits high elasticity and firmness, where the adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 may effectively protect the window and the display module dispose thereon and thereunder, and effectively alleviate a compression stress of the window when a display device is bent. Accordingly, an elasticity of the display device may be optimized, and a rolling stress may be alleviated when the display device is deformed, e.g., folded or bent (paragraph [0101]). In addition, Min teaches an elastic modulus of the second layer is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first layer and the third layer (paragraph [0100]). Min also teaches the fiber used may include a glass fiber, a carbon fiber, an aramid-based fiber, a polyester fiber, asbestos, a cellulose-based fiber, or a combination thereof (paragraph [0057]). Min does not explicitly teach an elastic modulus of each of the second fiber yarns is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first fiber yarns and an elastic modulus of each of the third fiber yarns. The elastic modulus of carbon fibers and glass fibers are well-known, as evidenced by Uchida and GFT. Uchida teaches the modulus of elasticity of carbon fibers ranges from 230 GPa or higher (bridging pages 2-3). GFT teaches the modulus of elasticity of glass fibers ranges from 70-140 GPa (pages 2 and 4). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use: (1) the relatively higher elastic modulus carbon fibers in the second layer of Min; and (2) the relatively lower elastic modulus glass fibers in the first and third layers of Min to form a second layer having a greater elastic modulus relative to the elastic modulus of the first and third layers, as desired by Min. You and Min are analogous inventions in the field of foldable displays. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify the fibers from each layer of the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 of You with the fiber density distribution and content in the first, second, and third layers of Min to: protect the display panel by effectively alleviate a compression stress when the display device is bent; and/or alleviate a rolling stress thereof when the display device is deformed.Regarding claim 12 In addition, the modification of the first fiber yarns of the first layer and the third fiber yarns of the third layer of You with the relatively lower elastic modulus glass fibers of Min, as evidenced by GFT, corresponds to the elastic modulus of each of the first fiber yarns and the elastic modulus of each of the third fiber yarns are the same as each other from the combination of You and Min.Regarding claim 13 In addition, Min teaches a multilayer structure for the higher fiber density second layer, when compared to the single layer structure for each of the lower fiber density first and third layers (paragraphs [0097] – [0098], and Figures 7B-7C), which reasonably conveys that the thickness of the second layer is greater than a thickness of the first layer and a thickness of the third layer.Regarding claim 14 In addition, You teaches the second support part (second layer) 300 is disposed between the first support part (first layer) 200 and the third support part (third layer) 400 (Figure 12).Regarding claim 15 As previously mentioned, Uchida teaches the modulus of elasticity of carbon fibers (second fiber yarns present in the second layer, as modified above) ranges from 230 GPa or higher (bridging pages 2-3), which encompasses the claimed range. GFT teaches the modulus of elasticity of glass fibers (first and third fiber yarns present in the first and third layers, respectfully, as modified above) ranges from 70-140 GPa (pages 2 and 4), which falls within the claimed range.
Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You, Min, and Shah.Regarding claim 16 You teaches a foldable display device (display device) 1000 comprising a flexible display module (display panel) 100 having a folding axis Faxis extending in a direction parallel to a first direction (first direction) DR1, and a support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 disposed on a surface of the flexible display module (display panel) 100, where the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 includes: a first support part (first layer) 200, a second support part (second layer) 300 disposed on the first support part (first layer) 200, and a third support part (third layer) 400 disposed on the second support part (second layer) 300 (abstract; paragraphs [0054], [0092], [0106]; and Figures 1-3, 9-10, 12 and 14). You teaches each of the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 includes carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP), the CFRP comprising a plurality of fibers (fiber yarns) extending in one direction, and a binding polymer (base resin) configured to fix the carbon fibers (paragraphs [0086] and [0110]), which corresponds to: the first layer including a first base resin and first fiber yarns, where the first fiber yarns are dispersed in the first base resin; the second layer including a second base resin and second fiber yarns, where the second fiber yarns are dispersed in the second base resin; and the third layer including a third base resin and third fiber yarns, where the third fiber yarns are dispersed in the third base resin. You teaches the first fibers 210 from the first support part (first layer) 200 extend in the first direction (first direction) DR1, the second fibers 310 from the second support part (second layer) 200 extend in a second direction (second direction) DR2, and the third fibers 410 from the third support part (third layer) 400 extend in a third direction DR3 (paragraphs [0082], [0083] and [0106]). You teaches the first direction DR1 is perpendicular to the second direction DR2, and the third direction DR3 is substantially identical to the first direction DR1 (paragraphs [0083], [0092] and [0107]), which corresponds to the second direction intersects the first direction, and the third fiber yarns extend in the first direction. You does not explicitly teach a carbon content of each of the second fiber yarns is greater than a carbon content of each of the first fiber yarns and a carbon content of each of the third fiber yarns. Min teaches a display device 40 comprising a device module (display panel) 42, an adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 supporting said device module (display panel) 42, and a window 46 (Figure 7A and paragraph [0095]). Min teaches the adhesive layer may include resin in which a fiber is impregnated (layer including a base resin and fiber yarns) (paragraph [0054]). Min teaches the adhesive layer (panel supporter) includes an impregnation region of a multilayer structure that includes first and third layers, and a second layer disposed therebetween, where a density of the fiber in the first and third layers may be lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (paragraph [0097]). Min teaches in such an embodiment, the first and third layers exhibit low elasticity and flexibility, and the second layer exhibits high elasticity and firmness, where the adhesive layer (panel supporter) 44 may effectively protect the window and the display module dispose thereon and thereunder, and effectively alleviate a compression stress of the window when a display device is bent. Accordingly, an elasticity of the display device may be optimized, and a rolling stress may be alleviated when the display device is deformed, e.g., folded or bent (paragraph [0101]). You and Min are analogous inventions in the field of foldable displays. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention to modify the fibers from each layer of the support part (panel supporter) 200, 300, 400 of You with the fiber density distribution in the first, second, and third layers of Min to: protect the display panel by effectively alleviate a compression stress when the display device is bent; and/or alleviate a rolling stress thereof when the display device is deformed. The combination of You and Min does not explicitly teach a carbon content of each of the second fiber yarns is greater than a carbon content of each of the first fiber yarns and a carbon content of each of the third fiber yarns. Shah teaches a carbon fiber having a relatively low carbon content tends to have lower strength and stiffness, and a carbon fiber having a relatively high carbon content tends to have higher tensile strength (paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to determine a carbon content for each of the groups of carbon fibers 210, 310, 410 from the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400, respectfully, from the combination of You and Min using nothing more than routine experimentation to achieve: the desired relatively lower strength and stiffness for the first and third layers (by having a relatively lower carbon content); and the relatively higher tensile strength for the second layer (by having a relatively higher carbon content). It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art unless such a range is shown to be critical. Please see MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). In addition, Min teaches the density of the fiber impregnated in the adhesive layer may be adjusted by changing the thickness (diameter) of a yarn of the fiber (paragraph [0059]). Min does not explicitly teach that a smaller diameter of the fiber yarns results in a higher fiber density (second diameter of one among the second fiber yarns is smaller than: (1) a first diameter of one among the first fiber yarns; and (2) a second diameter of one among the third fiber yarns). However, it would have been readily apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that a reduction of the diameter of a group of fiber yarns would result in a higher fiber density compared to the fiber density of another group having a larger diameter because the smaller diameter fibers would decrease the amount of interstitial spaces between fibers, thereby resulting in a higher density of fibers, which corresponds to a first diameter of one among the first fiber yarns is greater than a second diameter of one among the second fiber yarns, and a third diameter of one among the third fiber yarns is greater than the second diameter. In addition, Min teaches the adhesive layer (panel supporter) includes an impregnation region of a multilayer structure that includes first and third layers, and a second layer disposed therebetween, where a density of the fibers in the first and third layers may be lower than a density of the fiber in the second layer (paragraph [0097]), analogous to fibers in the second layer being packed closer together to result in a larger mass per unit volume (density), which corresponds to a first gap at which the second fiber yarns are spaced apart from each other in the second layer is smaller than a second gap at which the first fiber yarns are spaced apart from each other in the first layer, and the first gap is smaller than a third gap at which the third fiber yarns are spaced apart from each other in the third layer.Regarding claim 17 In addition, You refers to the layers of carbon fibers included in the first support part (first layer) 200, the second support part (second layer) 300, and the third support part (third layer) 400 using the same descriptive language; that is “the first support part 200 may include a plurality of first carbon fibers 210, the second support part 300 may include a plurality of second carbon fibers 310, and the third support part 400 may include a plurality of third carbon fibers 410 (paragraphs [0104] – [0109], etc.), which reasonably conveys to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the same plies or layers are being used in different layers of the stack, corresponding to the carbon content of each of the first fiber yarns and the carbon content of each of the third fiber yarns are the same as each other.Regarding claim 18 In addition, Min teaches a multilayer structure for the higher fiber density second layer, when compared to the single layer structure for each of the lower fiber density first and third layers (paragraphs [0097] – [0098], and Figures 7B-7C), which reasonably conveys that the thickness of the second layer is greater than a thickness of the first layer and a thickness of the third layer.Regarding claim 19 In addition, You teaches the second support part (second layer) 300 is disposed between the first support part (first layer) 200 and the third support part (third layer) 400 (Figure 12).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You, Min, and Shah as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of a book titled “Handbook of Composite Reinforcements” by Stuart M. Lee (hereinafter “Lee”).Regarding claim 20 The limitations for claim 19 have been set forth above. In addition, Min teaches an elastic modulus of the second layer is greater than an elastic modulus of each of the first layer and the third layer (paragraph [0100]). Min also teaches the fiber used may include a carbon fiber (paragraph [0057]). Min does not explicitly teach a carbon content of each of the second fiber yarns is about 96% or more, and a carbon content of each of the first fiber yarns and the carbon content of each of the third fiber yarns are about 93% or less. Lee teaches different categories of carbon fibers, including: a “high strength” fiber type having a modulus of 228-241 GPa, and a carbon content of 92-96%; and a “high modulus” fiber type having a modulus of 276-380 GPa, and a carbon content of 99% (page 71, Table 1). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use: (1) the higher modulus “high modulus” fiber type in the second layer of Min; and (2) the lower modulus “high strength” fiber type in the first and third layers of Min to form a second layer having a greater elastic modulus compared to the elastic modulus of the first and third layers, as desired by Min. This modification results in the “high modulus” fiber type, having a carbon content of 99%, which falls within the claimed range, in the second layer, and the “high strength” fiber type, having a carbon content of 92-96%, which overlaps the claimed range.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 29 October 2025, with respect to the objections of claims 3, 8, 11, 12 and 17 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of claims 3, 8, 11, 12 and 17 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-18, filed 29 October 2025, with respect to the rejections of the claims relying on Mizoguchi (US 2021/0124397) under 35 USC §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of the additional consideration of You.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN HANDVILLE whose telephone number is (571)272-5074. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, from 9 am to 4 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, Veronica Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
/BRIAN HANDVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights