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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20200295113) in view of Kudo (US 20160163761).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses that a display apparatus, comprising:
a silicon substrate 101 & 102 (para. 0060, note: silicon nitride, oxide or oxynitride) including a first surface and a second surface opposite thereto and including an opaque material 101 (Fig. 2, para. 0059, note: “glass - - quartz etc.”);
a display panel 111-107 disposed on the first surface of the silicon substrate 101 & 102;
a base film 300 including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite thereto, the fourth surface having a portion facing the first surface of the silicon substrate 101 & 102;
a display driving chip 390 mounted on the base film 300;
a connector disposed on a portion of the third surface of the base film; and
a driving printed circuit board (PCB) 310 electrically connected with the base film through the connector LP5_6 (Fig. 19C), wherein:
the silicon substrate 101 & 102 corresponds to the base film in a one-to-one relationship (Fig. 3), a length of an edge of the base film 310 overlapping the silicon substrate 100 is a smaller length of an edge of the silicon substrate 100 parallel to the edge of the base film (Fig. 3-4).
PNG
media_image1.png
630
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee fails to specify that an opaque semiconductor material is an opaque silicon substrate and a length of an edge of the base film is about 90% & a length of an edge of the silicon substrate parallel to the edge of the base film.
Kudo suggests that an opaque semiconductor material is an opaque silicon substrate (para. 0075, note: “the substrate main body 1 is made of - - a transparent glass, opaque silicone or the like.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Lee with an opaque semiconductor material is an opaque silicon substrate as taught by Kudo in order to enhance material variations and also, the claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one know element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Lee & Kudo fail to teach that a length of an edge of the base film is about 90% & a length of an edge of the silicon substrate parallel to the edge of the base film
However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization.
Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain overlapping ratio of length between a substrate & a base film, because it would have been to obtain a certain overlapping ratio of length between a substrate & a base film to achieve proper electrical connection by optimizing numbers of contacts and size of contacts.
Reclaim 2, Lee & Kudo disclose that a substrate 101 including a transparent material, the substrate being disposed on the display panel, wherein the silicon substrate 102 is disposed under the display panel 111-170 (Lee, para. 0059).
Reclaim 3, Lee & Kudo disclose that a direction parallel to one end of the silicon substrate contacting the base film is a first direction, the base film includes a plurality of pads, the plurality of pads are connected with a signal channel of the display driving chip, and the plurality of pads are arranged in one row in the first direction (Fig. 2-4).
Reclaim 4, Lee & Kudo disclose that the base film includes a plurality of pads PAD arranged in a plurality of rows, a direction parallel to one end of the silicon substrate contacting the base film is a first direction, the plurality of pads are arranged apart from one another in the first direction in a same row, the plurality of rows are apart from one another in a second direction vertical to the first direction, and the plurality of pads do not overlap a plurality of pads, arranged in an adjacent row, in the second direction (Fig. 2-4).
Reclaim 6, Lee & Kudo disclose that one end of the base film 300 is disposed on the opaque silicon substrate 101, and opposite end thereof is disposed on the driving PCB 500, the base film is bent and fixed to the second surface of the opaque silicon substrate, and the driving PCB is apart from the second surface of the opaque silicon substrate with the base film therebetween (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 8, Lee & Kudo disclose that a hole (between the pads) formed in one end of the driving PCB and attachable or detachable onto or from the connector, wherein the connector is attached on the hole and configured to connect the driving PCB with the base film (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 9, Lee & Kudo disclose that the first surface of the opaque silicon substrate is divided into an emission region and a non-emission region, the emission region is a region where the display panel overlaps the opaque silicon substrate, the non-emission region is a region up to an end portion of the opaque silicon substrate from an end portion of the display panel (Fig. 2).
Lee & Kudo fail to specify that an area occupied by the non-emission region is about 5 % to about 10% of an area occupied by the emission region.
However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization.
Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain [thickness temperature range], because it would have been to obtain a certain areal occupancy between non-emission region and emission region to achieve higher resolutions of display device by optimizing area ratio between a non-emission region (more non-emission is darker) and emission region (more emission means higher resolution of the display device).
Reclaim 10, Lee & Kudo disclose that at least a portion of the fourth surface of the base film contacts a first end portion of the opaque silicon substrate, and a minimum separation distance between the display panel and the first end portion of the opaque silicon substrate is (Fig. 2).
Lee & Kudo fail to specify that a minimum separation distance between the display panel and the first end portion of the silicon substrate is about 0.5 mm to about 1.5 mm.
However, notwithstanding, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the recited dimensions through routine experimentation and optimization.
Before effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a certain minimum separation distance between the display panel and the first end portion of the silicon substrate, because it would have been to obtain a certain minimum separation distance between the display panel and the first end portion of the silicon substrate to achieve reduction of cost.
Regarding claim 11, Lee & Kudo disclose that a display apparatus comprising:
an opaque silicon substrate (para. 0075, Kudo) 101 & 102 including a first surface and a second surface opposite thereto and including an opaque semiconductor material (Kudo, par. 007, (101 Lee, Fig. 2);
a display panel 111-107 disposed on the first surface of the opaque silicon substrate 101 & 102 (Lee in view of Kudo);
a base film 300 including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite thereto, the fourth surface having a portion facing the first surface of the opaque silicon substrate (Kudo, para. 0075);
a plurality of semiconductor chips 390 mounted on the base film 300 (Lee, Fig. 2);
a connector LE & Pad disposed on a portion of the third surface of the base film (Fig. 2 & 3); and
a driving printed circuit board (PCB) 500 electrically connected with the base film 300, wherein the silicon substrate corresponds to the base film in a one-to-one relationship (Fig. 2 & 3-4).
Reclaim 12, & Kudo disclose that a first group of the plurality of semiconductor chips 390 are mounted on the third surface of the base film, and the a second group of the plurality of semiconductor chips are mounted on the fourth surface of the base film (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 13, Lee & Kudo disclose that the plurality of semiconductor chips include a display driving chip and a power management integrated chip (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 14, Lee & Kudo disclose that a separation distance between the display driving chip and the display panel is less than a separation distance between the power management integrated chip and the display panel (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 15, Lee & Kudo fail to teach that a passive device mounted on the base film, wherein the passive device and the power management integrated chip are disposed between the display driving chip and the connector.
However, It is obvious to implement a control chip with other necessarily circuit elements including passive device (i.e. resistor or capacitor) to enhance current/voltage controls.
Reclaim 16, Lee & Kudo disclose that a first metal tape LE attached on the plurality of semiconductor chips and configured to perform a heat dissipation function and a shielding function (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 17, Lee & Kudo disclose that comprising a second metal LE tape attached on a surface that is opposite to a surface of the base film having the plurality of semiconductor chips mounted thereon and configured to perform a heat dissipation function and a shielding function, wherein the second metal tape is apart from the first metal tape with the base film and the plurality of semiconductor chips therebetween (Fig. 2).
Reclaim 18, Lee & Kudo disclose that a second metal tape LE attached on a surface of the base film that is opposite to a surface with the plurality of semiconductor chips mounted thereon, and configured to perform a heat dissipation function and a shielding function (note: a metal is capable of dissipating heat & shielding function).
Reclaim 19, Lee & Kudo disclose that a supporter disposed at a portion where the base film contacts the silicon substrate (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 20, Lee & Kudo disclose that a display apparatus comprising:
an opaque silicon substrate 101 & 102 (Lee in view of Kudo’s para. 0075) including a first surface and a second surface opposite thereto and including an opaque semiconductor material 101 (Lee, para. 0059 in view of Kudo’s para. 0075, note: an opaque silicon substrate);
a display panel 111-170 disposed on the first surface of the silicon substrate 101 & 102;
a base film 300 including a third surface and a fourth surface opposite thereto, the fourth surface having a portion facing the first surface of the opaque silicon substrate;
a plurality of semiconductor chips 390 mounted on the base film;
a first metal tape LE attached to the plurality of semiconductor chips 390;
a second metal tape LE attached onto a surface that is opposite to a surface of the base film having the plurality of semiconductor chips mounted thereon;
a connector LE disposed on a portion of the third surface of the base film; and
a driving printed circuit board (PCB) 500 electrically connected to the base film,
wherein: the opaque silicon substrate corresponds to the base film in a one-to-one relationship (Fig. 3-4), a length of an edge of the base film overlapping the silicon substrate is about 90% of a length of an edge of the opaque silicon substrate parallel to the edge of the base film (See rejection for claim 1), the plurality of semiconductor chips includes a display driving chip and a power management integrated chip (See rejection on claim 15), a separation distance between the display driving chip 390 and the display panel 111-170 is less than a separation distance between the power management integrated chip 390 (par. 0054, note: it is an integrated circuit with more than one chips) and the display panel 111-170, and the power management integrated chip 390 is disposed between the display driving chip and the connector (Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20200295113) in view of Kudo (US 20160163761) and further in view of Go et al. (US 20190067844).
Reclaim 21, Lee & Kudo disclose that the base film is attached to the first surface of the opaque silicon substrate through an conductive layer.
Lee & Kudo fails to specify that the conductive layer is an anisotropic conductive layer.
However, GO suggests that a conductive layer is an anisotropic conductive layer ACF (Fig. 3a-3b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Lee & Kudo with a conductive layer is an anisotropic conductive layer ACF as taught by Go in order to enhance variation of connectivity (para. 0081-0082) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20200295113) in view of Kudo (US 20160163761) and further in view of KATSUTA (US 20170357353).
Reclaim 22, Lee & Kudo discloses that the opaque silicon substrate (Kudo, para. 0075) and Lee & Kudo fail teach that the substrate includes a register, and the display driving chip is connected to the register through the plurality of pads.
However, KATSUTA suggests that a substrate DSP1 includes a register SR and the display driving chip DCP1 is connected through the plurality of pads SWG (Fig. 3 & 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Lee & Kudo with the substrate includes a register, and the display driving chip is connected to the register through the plurality of pads as taught by KATSUTA in order to improving a performance of a display device (para. 0009) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights