DETAILED ACTION
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)(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.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10-15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cao (2021/0226128).
Cao teaches a mask assembly (see Figs. 3-5) comprising:
- a mask frame comprising an open area, see Fig. 4 with frame 10,
- a plurality of mask sheets covering the area, see 40, side-side in one direction,
- a support stick arranged between the frame and mask sheets, extending in the first direction, see supporting bars 20,
- wherein the widths of ends of the support stick are greater than a width of the support stick, see ends 23.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, the width end of the stick are tapered as claimed.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 13 and 14, the mask assembly support stick includes:
- a support portion, see 21,
- a clamping portion, welding portion and a correction welding portion – see any portions of the ends of the supporting bars per Fig. 5. The instant claims and specification do not require any particular structure difference between the three portions, see particularly instant Fig. 3, therefore the clamping portion is the outermost portion and the welding and correction welding portions are inward from that and are wider than the support portion as depicted.
For clarity, the regions are indicated: where the correction welding portion is closes to the bar, then the welding portion and the clamping portion is the outermost.
PNG
media_image1.png
155
212
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 15, as depicted, and wherein the three noted portions are not distinguished, as noted, by any structural difference, the portions have substantially equal taper angles.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, in an alternative viewpoint to claims 3 and 4, the clamping portion is the outer portion beyond the taper and the welding and correction welding sections are divide among the tapered portions.
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the teachings include a plurality of spacer plates 30 that shield gaps between the mask sheets.
Regarding claim 11, the teachings include an apparatus for manufacturing a display, see wherein the mask is included in a system to manufacture a display [0011]. In regard to the source and specifically display substrate, such aspects are well understood per the teachings and art. As per MPEP 2144.01, it is proper to take into account both implicit and explicit teachings of a reference. In this case, the vapor deposition apparatus is taught but not described and understood that the claimed mask is counter a display substrate along with a source facing the mask.
The claimed mask assembly is the same as claim 1 above.
Claims 1-6, 10-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deng (20210367151).
Deng teaches a mask assembly (see Figs. 2, 3, and 5-7) comprising:
- a mask frame comprising an open area, see Fig. 3 with frame 300,
- a plurality of mask sheets covering the area, see 360, side-side in one direction,
- a support stick arranged between the frame and mask sheets, extending in the first direction, see supporting bars 340,
- wherein the widths of ends of the support stick are greater than a width of the support stick, see ends which have a tapered portion as depicted.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, as depicted, the ends are tapered.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 13 and 14, the support stick is divided up in the same manner as per Cao above but the details not repeated.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, as depicted, and wherein the three noted portions are not distinguished, as noted, by any structural difference, the portions have substantially equal taper angles.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the noted portions are symmetrical as claimed and are concavely tapered as depicted.
Regarding claim 11, Deng teaches a system for forming displays as per [0003-04], the arguments made above over Cao are applied and not repeated, with the details of the mask assembly addressed per claim 1.
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.
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 6, 7, 9, 16, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao.
Regarding claims 6, 7, 16 and 17, the teachings of Cao include that the portions are symmetrical as claimed, but do not include that the tapers are concave or convex, per the two claims. However, as per MPEP 2144.04 IV. B. a change of shape is obvious without a showing of criticality. In this case, the instant specification includes multiple variations of the shape and does not support any criticality of the selection of the shape, therefore it would have been obvious to form the portions with a concave or convex taper as such modification of shape is obvious.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the teachings do not include the width of the welding portion, but as per MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. a selection of size is obvious without a showing of criticality. To select the size of the welding portion to be as claimed would have been obvious – the instant specification does not support criticality of the claimed dimensions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim (2017/0365822) teaches a similar mask system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A MILLER, JR whose number is (571)270-5825 and fax is (571)270-6825. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Michael Cleveland, can be reached on 571-272-1418. The fax 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).
/JOSEPH A MILLER, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights