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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Election/Restrictions
Claim(s) 1-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected device claim(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse of Group II, claim(s) 12-21 in the reply filed on 2/20/2026.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sunaga et al. (US publication 2023/0140856 A1), hereinafter referred to as Sunaga856.
Regarding claim 12, Sunaga856 teaches a method of fabricating a display panel (fig. 3a-5f and related text), comprising: adsorbing, by a transport member (20, [0161]), a transfer member (10, [0161]) by a chuck (26, [0176-00178]); picking up, by the transport member, light-emitting elements from a donor substrate by the transfer member (fig. 3a-3c); bonding, by the transport member, the light-emitting elements onto a circuit substrate by the transfer member by placing the light-emitting elements on the circuit substrate and applying laser light ([0161-0268], fig. 5a-5f); separating, by the transport member, the transfer member from the circuit substrate; and detaching, by the transport member, the transfer member by releasing the chuck ([0161-0268]).
Regarding claim 14, Sunaga856 teaches wherein the transfer member includes: a stamp layer that has adhesiveness or stickiness; and a base layer that is disposed on a surface of the stamp layer, and is formed of a material that transmits laser light ([0161-0268]).
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 of this title, 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.
Claim 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebbecke (US publication 2024/0322070 A1), hereinafter referred to as Ebbecke, in view of Sunaga et al. (US publication 2023/0140856 A1), hereinafter referred to as Sunaga856.
Regarding claim 12, Ebbecke teaches a method of fabricating a display panel (fig. 1-4 and related text), comprising: adsorbing, by a transport member (10/20, [0047]), a transfer member (30, [0048]); picking up, by the transport member, light-emitting elements from a donor substrate by the transfer member (fig. 1-2); bonding, by the transport member, the light-emitting elements onto a circuit substrate by the transfer member by placing the light-emitting elements on the circuit substrate and applying laser light (fig. 1-2); separating, by the transport member, the transfer member from the circuit substrate; and detaching, by the transport member, the transfer member (fig. 2).
Ebbecke does not explicitly teach adsorbing, by a transport member, a transfer member by a chuck and detaching, by the transport member, the transfer member by releasing the chuck.
Sunaga856 teaches adsorbing, by a transport member (20, [0161]), a transfer member (10, [0161]) by a chuck (26, [0176-00178]) and detaching, by the transport member, the transfer member by releasing the chuck ([0161-0268]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ebbecke with that of Sunaga856 so that adsorbing, by a transport member, a transfer member by a chuck and detaching, by the transport member, the transfer member by releasing the chuck for efficiently transferring a transport object element such as an element using the stamp tool (Abstract).
Regarding claim 14, Ebbecke 6teaches wherein the transfer member includes: a stamp layer that has adhesiveness or stickiness (fig. 1-2); and a base layer that is disposed on a surface of the stamp layer, and is formed of a material that transmits laser light (fig. 1-2).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sunaga856, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US patent 6,150194), hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi.
Regarding claim 13, Sunaga856 discloses all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Sunaga856 does not explicitly teach further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete.
Sakaguchi teaches further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding onto the circuit substrate is complete (line 20-27 of col. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sunaga856 with that of Sakaguchi so that further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete because a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete would have yield predictable results. The claimed limitation would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebbecke in view of Sunaga856, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US patent 6,150194), hereinafter referred to as Sakaguchi.
Regarding claim 13, Ebbecke and Sunaga856 disclose all the limitations of claim 12 as discussed above on which this claim depends.
Ebbecke and Sunaga856 do not explicitly teach further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete.
Sakaguchi teaches further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding onto the circuit substrate is complete (line 20-27 of col. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sunaga856 with that of Ebbecke and Sakaguchi so that further comprising: rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete because a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that rinsing off a flux from the circuit substrate in case that the bonding of the light-emitting elements onto the circuit substrate is complete would have yield predictable results. The claimed limitation would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The claims contain limitations that none of the prior art of record discloses, teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combinations when taken in combination with all other limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammed R Alam whose telephone number is 469-295-9205 and can normally be reached between 8:00am-6:00pm (M-F) or by e-mail via Mohammed.Alam1@uspto.gov.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached on 469-295-9060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMMED R ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights