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. Note to Applicant The originally filed specification and claims (accidentally) include a comment made on page 14. Please submit a clean copy with proper margins of the specification and claims with the response to the presently filed non-final rejection. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Objections Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: There are typographical errors present in claim 20: T he word “at” is repeated in line 8 of the claim, see phrase “ and one or more second dam disposed in close proximity to the first dam at at least one of the first and second substrates ”. It also appears the singular element “dam” in line 8 of the claim should read “dams are”, as it is referencing one or more of the same element. Additionally, it appears the phrase “and are disposed on” is missing from line 8 of the claim with respect to the placement of the one or more second dams. As best understood and interpreted by the examiner, lines 8-9 of the claim read as and will be interpreted as “ one or more second dam s are disposed in close proximity to the first dam and are disposed on at least one of the first and second substrates. ” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 20 -26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph , as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “ close proximity FILLIN "Enter the relative term that renders the claim indefinite." \* MERGEFORMAT ” in claim 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ close proximity ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The phrase will be interpreted and examined as “disposed adjacent to” under the broadest reasonable interpretation . Therefore, claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and subsequent dependent claims 21-26 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for at least the same reasons. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (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. Claims 1-3, 11-15, 17, 19-23, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)( 1 ) as being anticipated by KR 2017 / 0071282 A Soo et al ( herein “ Soo ” ) . Regarding Claim 1, Soo discloses : A display device ( see generally Figs. 1 and 5 ) comprising: first ( #100 ) and second ( #290 ) substrates each divided into a display area ( see annotated Fig. 5 below, herein “DA” ) and a non-display area ( see annotated Fig. 5 below, herein “NDA” ) ; a dam ( see annotated Fig. 5 below, includes elements #250, #260, #265, and the like, herein references using #250 ) disposed between the first ( #100 ) and second ( #290 ) substrates and surrounding the display area ( #DA ) ; a wiring part ( see annotated Fig. 5 below, herein “WP” ) positioned in the non-display area ( #NDA ) of the first substrate ( #100 ) and overlapping the dam ( #250 ) ; and a circuit part ( see annotated Fig. 5 below, herein “CP” ) provided inside the dam ( #250 ) , spaced apart from the wiring part ( #WP ) , and positioned in the non-display area ( #NDA ) of the first substrate ( #100 ) . Soo Fig. 5 – Annotated by Examiner Regarding Claim 2 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 1, wherein a cathode ( #230 ) extends to the non-display area ( #NDA, see above ) to cover the circuit part ( #CP, see above ) and is spaced apart from the wiring part ( #WP, see above ) . Regarding Claim 3 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 1, further comprising a bonding film ( specifically see bonding film #250 of dam structure in annotated Fig. 5 above, also see paragraph [ 0049 ] of espacenet machine translation of Soo et al : “ The above sealant (250) is placed between the first and second substrates (100, 290) to bond the first and second substrates (100, 290). At this time, the sealant (250) is arranged in the form of a frame surrounding the display area (AA). ” ) provided between the first substrate (#100) and the second substrate (#290) and disposed inside the dam (#250) . Regarding Claim 1 1 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 2, wherein an organic layer ( #220 ) is disposed on a planarization layer ( #180 ) that is disposed on the circuit part ( #CP ) , wherein the cathode ( #230 ) is disposed on the organic layer ( #220 ) , and wherein the organic layer ( #220 ) and the cathode ( #230 ) are spaced apart from an end ( left end of planarization layer in Fig. 5, see annotated Fig. 5 above ) of the planarization layer ( #180 ) . Regarding Claim 1 2 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 2, wherein the cathode (#230) is disposed inside the dam (#250) to cover only the circuit part (#CP , see Fig. 5 ) . Regarding Claim 1 3 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 11, further comprising a capping layer (#240) disposed on the cathode (#230) to cover the cathode (#230) , wherein the capping layer (#240) is spaced apart from an end ( left end of planarization layer in Fig. 5, see annotated Fig. 5 above ) of the planarization layer (#180) . Regarding Claim 1 4 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 13, further comprising: a lower outer dam (#D2, Fig. 5) provided on an upper portion of the first substrate (#100) and disposed outside the dam (#250) ; and a lower inner dam (#D1) disposed inside the dam (#250) . Regarding Claim 1 5 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 14, wherein the lower outer dam ( #D2 ) overlaps the wiring part ( #WP ) , and wherein the lower inner dam ( #D1 ) is spaced apart from the wiring part ( #WP, spaced apart vertically with respect to the page ) . Regarding Claim 1 7 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 14, further comprising an upper outer dam (#265) provided over the second substrate (#290) and disposed outside the dam (#250) , and an upper inner dam (#260) disposed inside the dam (#250) . Regarding Claim 1 9 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 1, further comprising a planarization layer (##180) disposed over the first substrate (#100) of the circuit part (#CP) and spaced apart from the dam (#250) . Regarding Claim 20 , Soo discloses : A display device comprising: first ( #100 ) and second ( #290 ) substrates where a display area ( #DA , see annotated Fig. 5 above ) and a non-display area ( #NDA , see annotated Fig. 5 above ) are defined; a first dam ( #250 ) disposed on the second substrate ( #290 ) ; a wiring part ( #WP , see annotated Fig. 5 above ) disposed in the non-display area ( #NDA ) of the first substrate ( #100 ) and overlapping the first dam ( #250 ) ; a circuit part ( #CP , see annotated Fig. 5 above ) spaced apart from the wiring part ( #WP ) , disposed in the non-display area ( #NDA ) of the first substrate ( #100 ) and disposed at a side of the first dam ( #250 ) closer to the display area ( #DA ) ; and one or more second dam s ( #D1, #D2, #260, #265 ) are disposed adjacent to the first dam ( #250 ) and are disposed on at least one of the first ( #100 ) and second ( #290 ) substrates . Note, see objection to claim 20 above. Regarding Claim 2 1, Soo discloses : The display device of claim 20, further comprising a cathode of a light-emitting element (cathode #230) extending to the non-display area (#NDA) and overlapping the circuit part (#CP) . Regarding Claim 22 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 21, wherein the cathode (#230) is disposed on the one or more second dam ( #D1, #D2, #260, #265 ) . Regarding Claim 2 3 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 20, further comprising an insulation layer (#240) disposed on the one or more second dam (#D1, #D2, #260, #265) . Regarding Claim 25 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 20, further comprising a connection line ( #135, Soo discloses gate electrode 130 and gate metal 135 ) electrically connecting the wiring part ( #WP ) and the circuit part ( #CP ) . Regarding Claim 26 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 20, further comprising a planarization layer (#180) disposed at the circuit part (#CP) and not disposed ( see Fig. 5 ) at the wiring part (#WP) . 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. 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. Claims 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2017 / 0071282 A Soo et al in view of US 2018 / 0033832 A1 Park et al ( herein “Park” ) . Regarding Claim 4 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 1, Soo does not explicitly disclose : wherein the wiring part is configured to transmit a signal or power and includes a plurality of clock lines, a plurality of signal lines, and a plurality of high- potential power voltage lines. However, in analogous art, Park teaches : See Fig. 4b, see also paragraphs [0087]-[0088]. wherein the wiring part is configured to transmit a signal or power and includes a plurality of clock lines, a plurality of signal lines, and a plurality of high- potential power voltage lines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider combining the teachings of Park to the display device disclosed by Soo and include a plurality of lines including signal lines, clock lines, low voltage lines , and high voltage lines . These elements are inherent to the display device in order for the device to function, however, Soo does not specifically include constructional details regarding these lines to perform the intended function of the display device, therefore motivating a person of ordinary skill to seek such teachings like those disclosed by Park to form a functional display device and to fully practice the display device of Soo. Regarding Claim 5, Soo in view of Park discloses : The display device of claim 4 , Park further teaches : See Fig. 4b, see also paragraphs [0087]-[0088 ]. further comprising a plurality of low-potential voltage lines disposed on the circuit part, wherein the wiring part and the plurality of low-potential voltage lines are disposed on a same layer ( specifically see [0088]: “Some of the gate lines GL, the data lines DL, the light emitting lines EL, the control signal line SL-D, the initialization voltage line SL- Vint , and the voltage line SL-VDD may be disposed on the same layer,” ) . Under the same motivation provided above, Soo does not explicitly disclose the voltage lines , however in order for the display device to function , a person of ordinary skill would seek out the teachings of Park to practice the display device , specifically the inclusion of voltage lines to power the device as mentioned above . Additionally, the placement of the voltage lines, specifically the low potential voltage lines , the high potential voltage lines… etc , and the wiring part on the same layer is a matter of design choice to meet the needs/constraints of the specific device. See MPEP 2144.04. Regarding Claim 6 , Soo in view of Park discloses : The display device of claim 5 , Soo further discloses : further comprising a buffer layer ( #110 ) disposed on the wiring part ( #WP ) and the plurality of low-potential voltage lines ( see above, taught by Park and substituted into device disclosed by Soo, herein “LPVL” ) , wherein the buffer layer ( #110 ) extends to the non-display area ( #NDA ) to cover the wiring part ( #WP ) and the plurality of low-potential voltage lines ( #LPVL ) . Regarding Claim 7 , Soo in view of Park discloses : The display device of claim 5 , Soo further discloses : further comprising a plurality of transistors (#T) disposed on the circuit part (#CP) , wherein the plurality of transistors (#T) is electrically connected to the wiring part (#WP) through a plurality of connection lines (# 135, Soo discloses gate electrode 130 and gate metal 135 ) . Regarding Claim 8 , Soo in view of Park discloses : The display device of claim 5 , Soo in view of Park does not explicitly disclose : wherein the plurality of connection lines comprises: a first connection line connecting the wiring part and one of the plurality of transistors; and a second connection line connecting the wiring part and another of the plurality of transistors. However , first and second connection parts, and first and second transistors, is a mere duplication of parts. See MPEP 2144.04 VI . Nothing on the record indicates that the duplication of the first and second connection parts, and first and second transistors produces a new or unexpected result, rather producing the expected result of multiple connections for multiple transistors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider duplicating connection lines and transistors to fit the needs/constraints of the display device in order for the device to perform its intended function. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 2017 / 0071282 A Soo et al in view of US 2018 / 0159077 A1 Lee et al ( herein “Lee” ) . Regarding Claim 1 6 , Soo discloses : The display device of claim 14 Soo does not explicitly disclose : further comprising an insulation layer disposed on the capping layer, wherein the insulation layer extends to the non-display area to cover the lower outer dam and the lower inner dam. However, in analogous art, Lee teaches : See Figs. 1, 2, and 8, details of specific layers cited shown in Fig. 8. further comprising an insulation layer ( #530 ) disposed on the capping layer ( #510 ) , wherein the insulation layer ( #530 ) extends to the non-display area ( II-II’ , see Fig. 1 ) to cover the lower outer dam ( #610 ) and the lower inner dam ( #620 ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider combining the teachings of Lee to the device disclosed by Soo and include the disclosed dielectric insulation layer in combination with the capping layer to cover the lower dam structures, in order to protect the dam structures and other elements of the display device from outside exposure. See [0072]: “ The first inorganic encapsulation layer 510 and the second inorganic encapsulation layer 530 may respectively contact outer sides of the organic encapsulation layer 520. That is, the organic encapsulation layer 520 may be protected from exposure to the outside due to the first inorganic encapsulation layer 510 and the second inorganic encapsulation layer 530. ” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9-10, 18, and 24 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. Claim 24 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph , set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding Claim 9 : The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record as considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure does not teach or suggest the claimed invention having the following limitation, in combination with the remaining claimed limitations. With respect to dependent claim 9 , the prior art fails to teach or suggest the claimed limitations, namely: “ further comprising a compensation pattern added to a side surface of the second connection line, wherein the second connection line has a longer length than the first connection line. ” Regarding Claim 1 0 : Claim 10 is dependent on objected to but allowable claim 9, and is objected to but allowable for at least the same reasons. Regarding Claim 18 : The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record as considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure does not teach or suggest the claimed invention having the following limitation, in combination with the remaining claimed limitations. With respect to dependent claim 18 , the prior art fails to teach or suggest the claimed limitations, namely: “ further comprising an undercut in a lower portion of the lower inner dam, wherein the insulation layer fills the undercut . ” Regarding Claim 24 : The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record as considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure does not teach or suggest the claimed invention having the following limitation, in combination with the remaining claimed limitations. With respect to dependent claim 24 , the prior art fails to teach or suggest the claimed limitations, namely: “ further comprising an undercut portion in the insulation layer under the one or more second dam .” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Andrew V. Prostor whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-2686 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:00a-4:30p . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Christine S Kim can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-8458 . 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. /ANDREW VICTOR PROSTOR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2812 /CHRISTINE S. KIM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812