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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species IA, IIB, IIIA, and IVA in the reply filed on 4/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-10 and 13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/29/2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant' s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) to foreign application CN 202210751286 filed on 06/29/2022 The foreign application is not in English. The certified copy of the foreign priority application CN 202210751286 has been received. Filing Dates for the Claims — All Claims Not Entitled to Priority Date To be entitled to the filing date of the foreign priority application CN 202210751286 that is not in English, an English translation of the non-English language foreign application CN 202210751286 and a statement that the translation is accurate in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55 is required to perfect the claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The foreign application must adequately support the claimed subject matter, meaning satisfy the written description and enablement requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a). See MPEP §§ 215 and 216. 37 C.F.R. 1.55(g)(3)(ii)-(iii). To demonstrate compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(a), applicant should point to support for their claimed subject matter in their translations.
35 U.S.C. § 103 Rejections
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-6, 11 and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US Pub. 20180047314), hereinafter referred to as Chen.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a bonding structure, comprising a bonding region (Chen, 20, Fig. 2, para. 41), wherein the bonding region is provided with a plurality of pads (Chen, 21, Fig. 2, para. 33), the pads are arranged in at least one row, pads in a same row are arranged along a first reference line (Chen, X axis, Fig. 2), extension lines of at least two pads intersect with a second reference line perpendicular to the first reference line (Chen, 40, Fig. 2, para. 40), an intersection point is located on a same side of the first reference line (Chen, P2, P2’ para. 41),
Chen does not explicitly teach and the second reference line is parallel to and spaced apart from a symmetric axis, perpendicular to the first reference line, of the bonding region; and an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is greater than an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the second reference line, of the symmetric axis and having a largest distance to the second reference line.
However, Chen teaches that the lateral zones are not limited to being symmetrical (paras. 38-39). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Chen by adding pads to one side, thereby shifting the symmetric axis away from the second reference line and resulting in the claimed included angle geometry, in order to create a thinner, lighter, more shock resistant display (Chen, para. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
636
934
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Chen the bonding structure according to claim 1, wherein the at least two pads having extension lines intersecting with the second reference line are located on two sides of the second reference line (Chen, Fig. 2, shows P2 and P2’).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 2, wherein the bonding region is divided into a first region and a second region by the second reference line (Chen, Fig. 2), the symmetric axis passes through the second region (Chen para. 38-39, shows the two side zones do not have to be symmetrical, which would move the symmetric axis into the larger area as pads are added), and in a same row, a distance, to the second reference line, from a pad located in the first region and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is less than a distance, to the second reference line, from a pad, located in the second region and having a largest distance to the second reference line (as pads are added to the second region the furthest pad will be further from the second reference line while the last pad in the first region will remain the same).
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 3, wherein in a same row, a quantity of pads located in the first region is less than a quantity of pads located in the second region (Chen, para. 38-39, the two regions can be asymmetric).
Regarding claim 5, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 3, wherein along the first reference line, a distance, to an edge of the bonding structure that is located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line, from a pad located in the first region and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is greater than a distance, to an edge of the bonding structure that is located on a side, away from the second reference line, of the symmetric axis, from a pad located in the second region and having a largest distance to the second reference line (Chen, para. 34, shows reference line 40 centered in the bonding structure, according to paras. 38-39 the two lateral regions do not have to be symmetrical, therefore pads are added to the second region, then the pad in the second region furthest from the reference line will be closer to the edge of the bonding structure than the pad in region 1 closest to the edge of the bonding structure).
Regarding claim 6, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 2, wherein in a same row, pads, having extension lines intersecting with the second reference line, have a same intersection point with the second reference line (Chen, Fig. 2, shows P2 and P2’, para. 40-41 explains that that the bumps with the same distance from the reference line have their extension lines forming a same angle with respect to the reference line, and will therefore have the same intersection point).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 5, wherein extension lines of pads in a part of all pads intersect with the second reference line ((Chen, B1, Fig. 2, para. 40-41, shows P2 and P2’, para. 40-41 explains that that the bumps with the same distance from the reference line have their extension lines forming a same angle with respect to the reference line, and will therefore have the same intersection point),
and extension lines of pads in the other part are parallel to the second reference line (Chen, B1, Fig. 2, para. 40), a quantity of pads having extension lines parallel to the second reference line are at least two (Chen, Fig. 2 shows 3 pads in B1), and the pads having extension lines parallel to the second reference line are adjacent in turn and are distributed from the first region to the second region (Chen shows 1 pad on either side of reference line 40, and reference line 40 bisecting the third pad along its vertical axis).
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Zhang (US Pub. 20190139481), hereinafter referred to as Zhang).
Regarding claim 12, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 2, but does not teach, wherein in a same row, the greater a distance from adjacent pads to the second reference line, the smaller a gap between the adjacent pads, or, the greater a distance from a pad to the second reference line, the smaller a cross-sectional width of the pad at the first reference line.
However, Zhang teaches a driver circuit carrier and display panel wherein cross-sectional width of one of the first pins (Zhang, 11, Fig. 5) close to the second reference line (Zhang L2, Fig. 5) may be greater than that of another one of the first pins farther from the second reference line (Zhang, para. 63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention, to combine the bonding structure of Chen with the cross-sections of Zhang in order to tenable maximum compliance with the properties of the substrate and effective compensation for bonding errors from tensile deformation of the substrate (Zhang, para. 9).
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches the bonding structure according to claim 2, wherein a pad having an extension line intersecting with the second reference line comprises a first end and a second end that are opposite (Chen, Fig. 2, the first end is the one above the X axis and the second end is the end below the X axis), a distance from the first end to the second reference line is less than a distance from the second end to the second reference line (Chen, Fig. 2),
Chen does not teach wherein along a direction parallel to the first reference line, cross-sectional widths of the first end and the second end are equal, a plane on which a side surface, facing the second reference line, of a same pad is located, is parallel to an extension line of the same pad, and a plane on which a side surface, away from the second reference line, of the same pad is located, is parallel to an extension line of the same pad.
However, Zhang teaches driver circuit carrier and display panel wherein a pad (Zhang, 11, Fig. 1, para. 26) having an extension line intersecting with the second reference line comprises a first end (Zhang, 110, Fig. 1, para. 25) and a second end (Zhang, 111, Fig. 1, para. 25) that are opposite, a distance from the first end to the second reference line is less than a distance from the second end to the second reference line (Zhang, Fig. 1), and along a direction parallel to the first reference line, cross-sectional widths of the first end and the second end are equal (Zhang para, 26, describes them as parallelograms), a plane on which a side surface, facing the second reference line, of a same pad is located, is parallel to an extension line of the same pad (Zhang, Fig. 1), and a plane on which a side surface, away from the second reference line, of the same pad is located, is parallel to an extension line of the same pad (Zhang, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention, to combine the bonding structure of Chen with the pad arrangement of Zhang in order to tenable maximum compliance with the properties of the substrate and effective compensation for bonding errors from tensile deformation of the substrate (Zhang, para. 9).
Claim 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches a display panel (Chen Fig. A, 1b, comprising a display region (Chen, A, Fig. 1b, 33) and a bonding structure (Chen, Fig. 1b, para. 33),
wherein the bonding structure comprises a bonding region (Chen, 20, Fig. 1b),
the bonding region is provided with a plurality of pads (Chem 30, Fig. 1b, para. 33),
the pads are arranged in at least one row (Chen, Fig. 1b),
extension lines of at least two pads intersect with a second reference line perpendicular to the first reference line (Chen, Fig. 1b, not shown, para. 34),
an intersection point is located on a same side of the first reference line (Chen, para. 34),
and an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is greater than an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the second reference line, of the symmetric axis and having a largest distance to the second reference line, wherein the second reference line is parallel to a direction from the bonding region to the display region (Chen, para. 38-39 states that the lateral regions do not have to be symmetrical, therefore it is possible to add more pads to one side than the other, thereby moving the symmetrical axis to the side while leaving the reference line in the same location. Para. 37 describes the angle between the extension line and the second reference line increasing as the distance from the pad to the second intersection line increase, therefore the angle between the first reference line and the extension line must decrease since the angle between the two extension lines is 90 degrees and the sum of all angles in a triangle is 180 degrees in Euclidean geometry).
Figure. 1b of Chen does not explicitly show pads in a same row are arranged along a first reference line, and the second reference line is parallel to and spaced apart from a symmetric axis, perpendicular to the first reference line, of the bonding region.
However, Fig 2 of Chen does show pads in a same row are arranged along a first reference line (Chen, X, Fig. 2). Additionally while the arrays of pads in both Fig. 1b and Fig. 2 are symmetrical and the second reference line is also the symmetric axis, Chen, paras. 38-39 state that the lateral zones (Chen, B1, Fig.2 ) are not limited by this depiction.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine the features of these two embodiments and to add pads to one side of the second reference , which would have moved the symmetric axis to that side of the reference line, in order to allow proper alignment between the chip bumps and the flexible display panel bumps thereby improving the yield of chip bonding in the display device (Chen, para. 36)
PNG
media_image1.png
636
934
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches the display panel according to claim 15, wherein intersection points of extension lines of pads and the second reference line are located on a side, facing the display region, of the first reference line (Chen, Fig. 1b, para. 34).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 20210335762), hereinafter referred to as Liu.
Chen teaches the display panel according to claim 15, but does not teach wherein the display panel further comprises two first driving chips located between the display region and the bonding region, the two first driving chips are electrically connected to pads, and a center of a connecting line of the two first driving chips is located on the second reference line
However, Liu teaches a display panel and device wherein the display panel further comprises two first driving chips (Liu, 300, Fig. 2, para. 60-61) located between the display region (Liu, 101, Fig. 2, para. 47)and the bonding region (Liu, 103, Fig. 2, para. 47), and the two first driving chips are electrically connected to pads (Liu, para. 61).
Additionally, Liu shows the two drive chips on the sides of the device (Liu, 300, Fig. 2) while Chen shows the second reference line (Chen, 40, Fig. 2) line centered with respect to the display region.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the display panel arrangement of Chen with the driving chips of Liu in order to form a screen of the desired size and resolution (Liu, para. 36).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen and Wu et al. (US 20210382337).
Regarding claim 18, Chen teaches a flexible circuit board, comprising a bonding structure (Chen, 20, Fig. 2, para. 41), wherein the bonding structure comprises a bonding region (Chen, 20, Fig. 2), the bonding region is provided with a plurality of pads (Chen, 21, Fig. 2, para. 33), the pads are arranged in at least one row (Chen, Fig. 2), pads in a same row are arranged along a first reference line (Chem, X, Fig. 2), extension lines of at least two pads intersect with a second reference line perpendicular to the first reference line (Chen, 40, Fig. 2, para. 40), an intersection point is located on a same side of the first reference line (Chen, P2, P2’, para. 41), and the second reference line is parallel to and spaced apart from a symmetric axis, perpendicular to the first reference line, of the bonding region; (Chen, paras 38-39, describes the pads as symmetrical in the depicted embodiment, but not limited thereby, therefore you can add pads to one side which would move the symmetric axis into the enlarged region and away from the second reference line), and an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is greater than an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the second reference line, of the symmetric axis and having a largest distance to the second reference line (Chen, para. 37 describes the angle between the extension line and the second reference line increasing as the distance from the pad to the second intersection line increase, therefore the angle between the first reference line and the extension line must decrease since the angle between the two extension lines is 90 degrees and the sum of all angles in a triangle is 180 degrees in Euclidean geometry. Additionally because the pad in the second region is further from the second reference line than the pad in the first region, therefore the included angle of the pad in the first region would be larger than the included angle of the pad in the second region).
Chen does not teach a second driving chip, or that the driving chip is electrically connected to a pad.
However, Wu teaches a display panel with a driving chip (Wu, 400, Fig. 8, para.95) which is electrically connected to the bonding area (Wu,140, Fig. 8, para. 95)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the display panel of Chen with the driving chip of Wu in order to simplify the manufacturing process, and reduce the cost (Wu para.110).
PNG
media_image1.png
636
934
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, modified Chen teaches the flexible circuit board according to claim 18, further comprising a connector, wherein the connector is electrically connected to a pad (Wu shows an external circuit board (Wu, 500, Fig. 8 para. 95) attached to a separate portion of the bonding area (Wu, 140, Fig. 8), and is located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line.
Wu is silent on the exact placement of the connector between the bonding region and the external circuit board; however, it would have been necessary to place it in a location where it’s connections to the bonding region would not interfere with the connections of the second driving circuit, which would have necessitated the two features be place on opposite sides of the device. Given that there are two configurations for this (one where the connector is on the same side as the symmetric axis, and one where it is away) it would have been obvious to try from these two configurations during routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 20, modified Chen teaches a display apparatus, comprising a display panel, and a flexible circuit board according to claim 18, wherein the display panel (Wu, 100, Fig. 1, para. 58) and the flexible circuit board are connected by bonding structures (Wu, 140, Fig. 8, para. 95), wherein the display panel comprises a display region (Chen, A, Fig. 1b, para. 33) and a bonding structure (Chen, 20, Fig. 2, para. 41), wherein the bonding structure comprises a bonding region (Chen, 20, Fig. 2, para. 41), the bonding region is provided with a plurality of pads (Chen, 21, Fig. 2, para. 33), the pads are arranged in at least one row (Chen, X, Fig. 2), pads in a same row are arranged along a first reference line (Chen X Fig. 2), extension lines of at least two pads intersect with a second reference line perpendicular to the first reference line (Chen, 40, Fig. 2, para. 40), an intersection point is located on a same side of the first reference line (Chen, P2, P2’, Fig. 2, para. 41), and the second reference line is parallel to and spaced apart from a symmetric axis, perpendicular to the first reference line, of the bonding region (Chen, paras 38-39, describes the pads as symmetrical in the depicted embodiment, but not limited thereby, therefore you can add pads to one side which would move the symmetric axis into the enlarged region and away from the second reference line); and an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the symmetric axis, of the second reference line and having a largest distance to the second reference line, is greater than an included angle between the first reference line and an extension line of a pad located on a side, away from the second reference line, of the symmetric axis and having a largest distance to the second reference line (Chen, para. 37 describes the angle between the extension line and the second reference line increasing as the distance from the pad to the second intersection line increase, therefore the angle between the first reference line and the extension line must decrease since the angle between the two extension lines is 90 degrees and the sum of all angles in a triangle is 180 degrees in Euclidean geometry. Additionally because the pad in the second (enlarged) region is further from the second reference line than the pad in the first region, therefore the included angle of the pad in the first region would be larger than the included angle of the pad in the second region), wherein the second reference line is parallel to a direction from the bonding region to the display region (Chen Fig. 1B, paras.34-35).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen (US Pub 20210068254) teaches a display panel with pads whose extension lines meet on a second reference line and the pads who are equidistant from the second reference line have their extension lines meeting at the second reference line.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIERAN M CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-9654. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-4:3.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at 5712703042. 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.
/KIERAN M. CUNNINGHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights