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, Modifications A1, B2, C1 in the reply filed on 10 June 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species all include the same inventive concept, and examination of all such species would not introduce serious burden during examination (Response to Election / Restriction, p.2). This is respectfully not found persuasive because the species/claims include unique features not shared among the various species (as outlined in detail in the restriction election requirement of 04/10/2026). These unique features require additional and/or different search strategies, requiring consideration of multitudes of additional search results tailored specifically for the unique features of the individual species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
The response states (page 2) that claims 1-8, 10-11, 13, and 15-20 read on the elected species. However, dependent claims 3 and 13 require the additional optical material on the side surface of the second substrate. These claims are drawn to non-elected species 2 outlines in the Requirement for Restriction/Election of 04/10/2026. Therefore claims 3, 9, and 12-14 are withdrawn from consideration while claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, and 15-20 are herein examined on the merits.
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.
(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 1-2, 8, 10-11, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seonghwan Shin et al. (US 20220199594 A1; hereinafter Shin).
Regarding Claim 1, Shin discloses an electronic device (Fig. 9), comprising:
a first substrate (40; ¶0068) having a first surface (41), a second surface (43) and a side surface (45+49), wherein the first surface is opposite to the second surface, and the side surface is disposed between the first surface and the second surface (as shown in Fig. 9);
a function layer (layer comprising at least 47, 50, and an upper surface wiring layer {not shown in the figures}; ¶0122-¶0123; hereinafter FL) disposed on the first surface (41);
a wire structure (46+43b; ¶0123, ¶0129) disposed on the first substrate (40) and electrically connected to the function layer (FL) (as described in ¶0122-¶0123), and including a side wire (46) disposed on the side surface (45+49) of the first substrate (40) and a first wire (43b) disposed on the second surface (43);
a second substrate (70; ¶0113) disposed opposite to the first substrate (40);
an adhesive layer (not shown in the figures and bonded to the mounting surface 41; ¶0114) disposed between the first substrate (40) and the second substrate (70) (as described in ¶0114); and
a shading layer (90/100; which absorbs light and is therefore a shading layer; ¶0207) disposed on a side surface of the adhesive layer (90/100 is disposed on a side surface of the adhesive layer, wherein the adhesive layer {not shown} is bonded to the surface 41) and covers the side wire (46) (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 2, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shading layer (90/100) is further disposed on the side surface (45+49) of the first substrate (40) (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 8, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a protection layer (comprising at least 43c/61; ¶0130, which covers/protects the wire 43b) disposed on the second surface (43) of the first substrate (40), wherein at least part of the protection layer (43c/61) covers the first wire (43b) (as shown on the right side in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 10, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 8, wherein the first wire (43b) further comprises a bonding area (area where 43d is disposed, shown in Fig. 8; ¶0134-¶0135; wherein Fig. 2 – Fig. 10 are various views of the device of Fig. 1; as described in ¶0032-¶0041; hereinafter BA), and the protection layer (43c/61) is provided with an opening exposing the bonding area (BA) (as shown in Fig. 8; wherein at least 61 is the size corresponding to that of element 60; ¶0163).
Regarding Claim 11, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shading layer (90/100) comprises a first sub-layer (90) and a second sub-layer (100), and the first sub-layer (90) is disposed between the wire structure (46+43b) and the second sub-layer (100) (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 15, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1 (in view of Fig. 3 and Fig. 10), wherein the function layer (FL) at least includes a circuit layer (TFT layer 44; ¶0081), and a first electronic unit (50; ¶0100; right side of Fig. 10), a second electronic unit (50; middle in Fig. 10) and a third electronic unit (50; left in Fig. 10) disposed on the circuit layer (44) and electrically connected to the circuit layer (as described in ¶0081).
Regarding Claim 16, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 15, wherein the function layer (FL) further includes a pixel define layer (48; ¶0106 which defines area for individual pixels 50) disposed on the circuit layer (44) and arranged between any two electronic units (between each of 50).
Regarding Claim 20, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 8, further comprising a reinforcing plate (60) disposed on a side of the protection layer (43c/61; ¶0146) away from the second surface (43) (as shown in Fig. 9).
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.
Claims 4, 5, 7, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin.
Regarding Claim 4, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, but is silent regarding wherein the optical density of the shading layer (90/100) is greater than or equal to 3.
Although the optical density is not explicitly disclosed, Shin discloses that the shading layer (of 90) includes a black color (¶0293) and is for the same purpose of absorbing light (¶0207). The optical density of the shading layer is a result effective variable of the light absorption property of the shading layer (of 90). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have an optical density of greater than or equal to 3 for the shading layer of Shin (of 90) in order to achieve its purpose of absorbing as much light as possible to reduce the appearance of the seam in the gap (G) between adjacent display tiles (Shin; ¶0296).
Regarding Claim 5, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, but is silent regarding explicitly disclosing wherein a thickness of the shading layer (90/100) is between 1 micrometer and 100 micrometers.
Although the thickness of the shading layer is not explicitly disclosed, Shin describes that the shading layer (90/100) is formed in the gap (G) between adjacent display modules (30A/30B; ¶0059), wherein the distance/thickness of the shading layer is a result effective variable of the distance/thickness of the gap. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the result effective variable of the thickness of the shading layer (of Shin) to be between 1 micrometer and 100 micrometers as the gap is reduced in thickness to achieve the desired result of reducing the appearance of a seam between adjacent display modules (Shin; ¶0228, ¶0288).
Regarding Claim 7, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, but is silent regarding explicitly disclosing wherein a water vapor transmission rate of the shading layer (90/100) is smaller than or equal to 50 g/m2/day.
However, Shin discloses in ¶0257 that 90 prevents moisture entering from the outside. Absent evidence of criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that since 90 prevents moisture from entering from the outside, that the material of 90 would have a water vapor transmission rate of 0 g/m2/day, thereby satisfying the limitation.
Regarding Claim 17, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 8, but is silent regarding explicitly disclosing wherein a thickness of the protection layer (43c/61) is between 1 micrometer and 100 micrometers.
However, Shin discloses (¶0186-¶0187) that the thickness of at least protection layer (61) is a predetermined thickness that is a result effective variable that can be changes in order to prevent external force from being transmitted to the substrate (40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the result effective variable (thickness of the protection layer) to be within the claimed range in order to provide the substrate (40) with proper protection from external force, thereby preventing damage to the substrate (Shin; ¶0186-¶0187).
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin in view of Nak Cho Choi et al. (US 20240266362 A1; hereinafter Choi).
Regarding Claim 6, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 1, but is silent regarding wherein a pencil hardness of the shading layer (90/100) is greater than or equal to 8 hardness.
In the same field of endeavor, Choi teaches a tiled display device (¶0002) comprising a side wiring (Fig. 9; SIL; ¶0074) covered by a protection/shading layer (Fig. 9; OC; ¶0166), wherein hardness of the material comprising the protection/shading layer (OC) is a result effective variable of the material chosen, and is desirably harder than conventional protection/shading layers (¶0179-¶0180).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the material for Shins shading layer (in the manner of Choi) in order to adjust the result effective variable of hardness to be within the claimed range in order to improve scratch resistance of the shading layer (Choi; ¶0178-¶0180).
Regarding Claim 18, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 8, but is silent regarding wherein a pencil hardness of the protection layer is greater than 8 hardness.
In the same field of endeavor, Choi teaches a tiled display device (¶0002) comprising a side wiring (Fig. 9; SIL; ¶0074) covered by a protection/shading layer (Fig. 9; OC; ¶0166) that protects a rear surface of the substrate, wherein hardness of the material comprising the protection/shading layer (OC) is a result effective variable of the material chosen, and is desirably harder than conventional protection/shading layers (¶0179-¶0180).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the material for Shins protection layer (in the manner of Choi) in order to adjust the result effective variable of hardness to be within the claimed range in order to improve scratch resistance of the protection layer (Choi; ¶0178-¶0180).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin in view of Yongchao Zhao et al. (US 20240063351 A1; hereinafter Zhao).
Regarding Claim 19, Shin discloses the electronic device as claimed in claim 8, but is silent regarding wherein a water vapor transmission rate of the protection layer (43c/61; disposed on the rear surface of the substrate) is smaller than 50 g/m2/day.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhao teaches a tiled display (Fig. 13; ¶0070), wherein a protection layer (Fig. 4; 41; ¶0049) is disposed on a rear surface of a substrate (10; ¶0050), wherein a water vapor transmission rate of the protection layer (41) is smaller than 50 g/m2/day (¶0049).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the properties of the protection layer (of Zhao) in the protection layer of Shin in order to prevent water and oxygen from entering the panel thereby improving the encapsulation effect of the display panel (Zhao; ¶0046).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN PRIDEMORE whose telephone number is (703)756-4640. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm EST.
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, JULIO MALDONADO can be reached at (571) 272-1864. 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.
NATHAN PRIDEMORE
Examiner
Art Unit 2898
/NATHAN PRIDEMORE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 /JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights