DETAILED ACTION
1. The Amendment filed 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8 & 10-20 in the application remain pending. Claims 1 & 5-8 were amended. Claim 9 was cancelled. Claims 12-20 remain withdrawn from consideration.
2. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/08/2026 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections
5. The claim rejections under AIA 35 U.S.C. 112(b), of claims 5-8 are withdrawn per amendments of claims 5-8.
6. The claim rejections under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Kim (US 2017/0263867 A1) of claims 1-3 & 5-6 are withdrawn per amendments of claim 1.
7. The claim rejections under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kim (US 2017/0263867 A1) of claims 4 & 7-11 are withdrawn per cancellation of claim 9 and amendments of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. Claims 1-8 & 10-11 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2017/0263867 A1) hereinafter Kim in view of Kang (CN 111254386 A – partial translation provided by Applicant in 05/08/2026 IDS & partial translation provided by examiner herein) (the terminology of the claims in the application is used, but the references of Kim and Kang are included between parentheses).
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “supplying a deposition material so that the deposition material passes through the at least one deposition area of the mask assembly and is deposited on the display substrate”, this recitation is a statement of process expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and intended use which does not patentably distinguish over Kim since Kim meets all the structural elements of the claim and is capable of supplying a deposition material so that the deposition material passes through the at least one deposition area of the mask assembly and is deposited on the display substrate, if so desired, and does not add structure to the claim. Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and intended use of a known apparatus does not give it patentable weight. See In re Thuau, 57 USPQ 324, CCPA 979 135 F2d 344, 1943. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus shows all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). It is additionally noted that it is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). Furthermore, “expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666,667 (Bd. App. 1969). Thus, the “inclusion of material or article worked upon does not impart patentability to the claims.” In re Young, 75 F.2d 966, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 (USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). Therefore, Examiner is disregarding any structural limitations to the apparatus based on process expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and the process intended to be used with the apparatus. See MPEP 2114 & 2115.
As regards to claim 1, Kim discloses an apparatus for manufacturing a display apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), comprising:
a chamber (161) ([0097]; [0100]; fig 9);
a mask assembly (100) located in the chamber (161) to face a display substrate (11 of fig 9), and comprising at least one deposition area ([0095]-[0098]; [0101]-[0102]; fig 9); and
a deposition source (200) located in the chamber (161) to face the mask assembly (100), and supplying a deposition material (see fig 9, broken lines coming from 200) so that the deposition material (see fig 9, broken lines coming from 200) passes through the at least one deposition area (see fig 9, open area of 110 & 120 through which deposition material passes) of the mask assembly (100) and is deposited on the display substrate (11 of fig 9) ([0097]-[0103]; fig 9),
wherein the mask assembly (100) comprises:
a mask frame (110) comprising an opening area (see fig 8, area containing 130) ([0088]-[0095]; fig 8-9);
at least one shield stick (130) intersecting the opening area (see fig 8, area containing 130) ([0088]-[0095]; fig 8-9); and
at least one mask sheet (120) covering at least part of the opening area (see fig 8, area containing 130) and at least partially overlapping (see fig 8) the at least one shield stick (130) ([0088]-[0095]; fig 8-9), and each of the at least one mask sheet (120) comprises:
a first body (body of 121, 221, 321 minus body of 121c, 221c, 321c) comprising a hole area (area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) comprising pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) and covering the at least one deposition area (see fig 9, open area of 110 & 120 through which deposition material passes) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 3A-4, 7-9); and
a second body (body of 121c, 221c, 321c) connected to the first body (body of 121, 221, 321 minus body of 121c, 221c, 321c) and fixed to the mask frame (110), and a maximum width (see fig 3A-4 & 7) of the first body (body of 121, 221, 321 minus body of 121c, 221c, 321c) is greater than a maximum width (see fig 3A-4 & 7) of the second body (body of 121c, 221c, 321c) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 3A-4, 7-9),
wherein a thickness of the hole area (area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) is the same as a thickness of an area where the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) are not provided (see fig 8) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however Kim does not disclose is less than.
Kang discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-4), wherein a thickness of the hole area (grids 111) is less than a thickness of an area where the pattern holes are not provided (body 112) (abs; [0030]; fig 1). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include wherein a thickness of the hole area is less than a thickness of an area where the pattern holes are not provided in the apparatus of Kim, because Kang teaches the use of wherein a thickness of the hole area (grids 111) is less than a thickness of an area where the pattern holes are not provided (body 112) so that the mechanical strength of the mask can be effectively improved (abs; [0030]).
As regards to claim 2, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein the at least one mask sheet (120) comprises an overlapping area (see fig 3A-4, 7-8, hole area - area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) overlapping (see fig 8) the at least one shield stick (130) in a plan view, and the overlapping area (see fig 3A-4, 7-8, hole area - area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) has a convex shape (see fig 3A-4, 7-8) in a plan view ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 3A-4, 7-9).
As regards to claim 3, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein the hole area (area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) comprises: a first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130) overlapping the at least one shield stick (130) in a plan view; and a second hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h not overlapping 130) not overlapping the at least one shield stick (130) in a plan view ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8).
As regards to claim 4, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein the first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130) has a rectangular shape (see fig 8) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however the combination of Kim & Kang does not disclose convex shape.
Although the combination of Kim & Kang does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape & configuration of the hole area, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of the combination of Kim & Kang to have the shape & configuration recited in the claim is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as the shape & configuration is considered engineering aspects of a device, not problems or sources of problems to be solved. In addition, it is the position of the examiner that the disclosure provides no evidence of criticality with regard to the shape & configuration of the hole area. Where the configuration of the claimed subject matter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed subject matter was significant is not patent eligible subject matter. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
As regards to claim 5, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein a number of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) per unit area in the first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130) and a number of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) per unit area in the second hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h not overlapping 130) are substantially equal to each other ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8).
As regards to claim 6, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein, in a plan view, sizes of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) provided in the first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130) and sizes of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) provided in the second hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h not overlapping 130) are substantially equal to each other ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8).
As regards to claim 7, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein a number of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) per unit area provided in the first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130) remains constant (see fig 8) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however the combination of Kim & Kang does not disclose gradually decreases outward.
Although the combination of Kim & Kang does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape & configuration of the number of the pattern holes, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of the combination of Kim & Kang to have the shape & configuration recited in the claim is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as the shape & configuration is considered engineering aspects of a device, not problems or sources of problems to be solved. In addition, it is the position of the examiner that the disclosure provides no evidence of criticality with regard to the shape & configuration of the number of the pattern holes. Where the configuration of the claimed subject matter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed subject matter was significant is not patent eligible subject matter. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
As regards to claim 8, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein, in a plan view, sizes of the pattern holes (121h, 221h, 321h) provided in the first hole area (see fig 8, area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h overlapping 130), remains constant (see fig 8) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however the combination of Kim & Kang does not disclose gradually decrease outward.
Although the combination of Kim & Kang does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape & configuration of the sizes of pattern holes, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of the combination of Kim & Kang to have the shape & configuration recited in the claim is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as the shape & configuration is considered engineering aspects of a device, not problems or sources of problems to be solved. In addition, it is the position of the examiner that the disclosure provides no evidence of criticality with regard to the shape & configuration of the sizes of pattern holes. Where the configuration of the claimed subject matter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed subject matter was significant is not patent eligible subject matter. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
As regards to claim 10, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein the first body (body of 121, 221, 321 minus body of 121c, 221c, 321c) further comprises an outer area (see fig 3A-4, 7-8, nonshaded white area along edges) located outside the hole area (area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) and overlapping the at least one shield stick (130) in a plan view, and a thickness of the hole area (area comprising 121h, 221h, 321h) and a thickness of the outer area (see fig 3A-4, 7-8, nonshaded white area along edges) are the same as a thickness of a remaining area (122) of the first body (body of 121, 221, 321 minus body of 121c, 221c, 321c) ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however the combination of Kim & Kang does not disclose is less than.
Although the combination of Kim & Kang does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape & configuration of the thicknesses of the areas, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of the combination of Kim & Kang to have the shape & configuration recited in the claim is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as the shape & configuration is considered engineering aspects of a device, not problems or sources of problems to be solved. In addition, it is the position of the examiner that the disclosure provides no evidence of criticality with regard to the shape & configuration of the thicknesses of the areas. Where the configuration of the claimed subject matter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed subject matter was significant is not patent eligible subject matter. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
As regards to claim 11, Kim discloses an apparatus (abs; fig 1-9), wherein, in a plan view, the outer area (see fig 3A-4, 7-8, nonshaded white area along edges) has a rectangular portion ([0064]-[0078]; [0085]-[0087]; fig 8), however the combination of Kim & Kang does not disclose a convex portion.
Although the combination of Kim & Kang does not explicitly disclose the claimed shape & configuration of the outer area, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of the combination of Kim & Kang to have the shape & configuration recited in the claim is not expected to alter the operation of the device in a patentably distinct way as the shape & configuration is considered engineering aspects of a device, not problems or sources of problems to be solved. In addition, it is the position of the examiner that the disclosure provides no evidence of criticality with regard to the shape & configuration of the outer area. Where the configuration of the claimed subject matter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed subject matter was significant is not patent eligible subject matter. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but are rendered moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 05/08/2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jethro M Pence whose telephone number is (571)270-7423. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00 A.M. - 6:30 P.M..
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, Dah-Wei D. Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/Jethro M. Pence/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights