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/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 (figs. 1a -1b) in the reply filed on 06/25/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the variation in the embodiment would not impose serious search and /or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because as specified in the restriction from 05/07/2025, the position/size of the different openings around the chip make them mutually exclusive, which impose a serious search and examination burden.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20220317508 A1, “Wang”) in view of CHANG (US 20080018636 A1, “CHANG”).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses (Figs. 2, 11, 16) an electronic device, comprising: a substrate (1); a metal layer (4), provided on the substrate and having a first opening; a first dielectric layer (01), provided on the metal layer; a first conductive circuit (3, 8), provided on the first dielectric layer; and a driving chip, provided on the first dielectric layer and electrically connected to the first conductive circuit (See para [0062] and [0066]), wherein the first opening is adjacent to the driving chip, and the first conductive circuit overlaps the first opening (See Wang claim 1).
Wang does not expressly disclose the first conductive circuit (8) overlaps the first opening.
CHANG, however, teaches the first conductive circuit overlaps the first opening (CHANG abstract).
Wang and CHANG are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang to incorporate the teachings of CHANG and provide the first conductive circuit overlaps the first opening (CHANG abstract). Doing so would enable direct repair/patching access and reduce the risk of a short to the underlying metal layer ([0007] – [0009] and [0034] – [0036]).
Regarding claim 2, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein Wang further discloses the first conductive circuit comprises a scan line or a first power line (See claim 1).
Regarding claim 3, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein Wang further discloses the first dielectric layer (01) is provided in the first opening (See fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1, Wang further discloses further comprising: a second dielectric layer (03), provided on the first conductive circuit and having a third opening; a first conductive pad (07), provided on the second dielectric layer and in the third opening, wherein the driving chip is electrically connected to the first conductive circuit through the first conductive pad (See para [0062] and [0066]).
Claim(s) 4 – 5, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20220317508 A1, “Wang”) in view of CHANG (US 20080018636 A1, “CHANG”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jeong et al. (US 20220115491 A1, “Jeong”).
Regarding claim 4, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1,
Wang in view of CHANG is silent on wherein the metal layer further has a second opening, and the electronic device further comprises: a second dielectric layer, provided on the first conductive circuit; and a second conductive circuit, provided on the second dielectric layer and electrically connected to the driving chip, wherein the second opening is adjacent to the driving chip, and the second conductive circuit overlaps the second opening.
However, Jeong discloses (Fig. 2, 3) wherein the metal layer further has a second opening (170a), and the electronic device further comprises: a second dielectric layer (170), provided on the first conductive circuit; and a second conductive circuit (W2, W3, W4), provided on the second dielectric layer and electrically connected to the driving chip (Fig. 2, para [0082], [0090]), wherein the second opening (170a) is adjacent to the driving chip (180), and the second conductive circuit overlaps the second opening (para [0076]).
Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang in view of CHANG to incorporate the teachings of Jeong and provide wherein the metal layer further has a second opening (170a), and the electronic device further comprises: a second dielectric layer (170), provided on the first conductive circuit; and a second conductive circuit (W2, W3, W4), provided on the second dielectric layer and electrically connected to the driving chip (Fig. 2, para [0082], [0090]), wherein the second opening (170a) is adjacent to the driving chip (180), and the second conductive circuit overlaps the second opening (para [0076]) which will allow the same short-avoidance/repair-access benefit.
Regarding claim 5, Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong discloses the electronic device according to claim 4, wherein Jeong further discloses the second conductive circuit comprises a data line or a second power line (para [0014], [0059], [0065]).
Regarding claim 7, Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong discloses the electronic device according to claim 4, wherein Joeng further discloses the first opening, and the second opening do not overlap the driving chip (Fig. 9).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20220317508 A1, “Wang”) in view of CHANG (US 20080018636 A1, “CHANG”) and Jeong et al. (US 20220115491 A1, “Jeong”) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of RYU et al. (US 20220029278 A1, “RYU”)
Regarding claim 6, Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong discloses the electronic device according to claim 4,
Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong is silent on further comprising: a metal mesh, provided in the second opening.
However, RYU discloses a metal mesh, provided in the second opening (See claim 1).
Wang in view of CHANG, Jeong and RYU are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang in view of CHANG and Jeong to incorporate the teachings of RYU and provide a metal mesh, provided in the second opening (See claim 1) which can reduce visible light leakage/reflection at that open region.
Claim(s) 9 – 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20220317508 A1, “Wang”) in view of CHANG (US 20080018636 A1, “CHANG”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of RYU et al. (US 20220029278 A1, “RYU”)
Regarding claim 9, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1,
Wang in view of CHANG is silent on further comprising: a metal mesh, provided in the first opening.
However, RYU discloses a metal mesh, provided in the first opening (See claim 1).
Wang in view of CHANG and RYU are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang in view of CHANG to incorporate the teachings of RYU and provide a metal mesh, provided in the first opening (See claim 1) which can reduce visible light leakage/reflection at that open region.
Regarding claim 10, Wang in view of CHANG discloses the electronic device according to claim 1,
Wang in view of CHANG is silent on wherein the metal mesh is a part of the metal layer.
However, RYU discloses wherein the metal mesh is a part of the metal layer (See claim 10).
Wang in view of CHANG and RYU are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electronic device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang in view of CHANG to incorporate the teachings of RYU and provide wherein the metal mesh is a part of the metal layer (See claim 10).
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.
(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(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as being anticipated by Suwa(US 2003/0218871).
Regarding claim 1, Suwa et al. discloses a substrate(fig 2, 7); a metal layer(fig 2, 8), provided on the substrate and having a first opening(fig 2); a first dielectric layer(fig 2, layer 7 in the middle of the circuit board), provided on the metal layer(fig 2); a first conductive circuit(fig 2, 8), provided on the first dielectric layer(fig 2); and a driving chip, provided on the first dielectric layer and electrically connected to the first conductive circuit, wherein the first opening is adjacent to the driving chip, and the first conductive circuit overlaps the first opening(fig 8, 43; note para graph 0091 states the chip is directly bonded to the terminals of the circuit board so the chip would then cover the opening in the opening).
Regarding claim 2, Suwa et al. discloses wherein the first conductive circuit comprises a scan line or a first power line(para 0065 states the inner circuits are used for power supply).
Regarding claim 3, Suwa et al. discloses wherein the first dielectric layer is provided in the first opening(fig 2, the middle layer 7)..
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIDI MOHAMED MAIGA whose telephone number is (703)756-1870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am 5 pm.
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, Timothy Thompson can be reached on 571-272-2342. 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.
/SIDI M MAIGA/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights