DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species #1, claims 1-14 & 20 in the reply filed on December 19th, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would be no burden to the Examiner because a search for one species would identify art for a relevant species and Applicant and public would be conversely be burdened.
This is not found persuasive because the grooves would be classified in another area (B32B 3/30 not B32B 3/266 and are also uniquely classified in the USPC, 428/131+ vs. 428/156+) as previously recited, are not overlapping in scope regarding terminology (grooves comprising a directionality with the encapsulation region with respect a lengthwise direction, which is not required for any embodiments regarding the holes), are not related to the sub-regions as claimed (in contrast to the holes as claimed), and pertain to unique embodiments as set forth in the specification with seemingly no overlap in use with the holes as claimed. Therefore, there would be both a search and written burden for the Examiner.
Lastly, Applicant’s financial burden and the public’s search burden(?) are not relevant to a restriction requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on December 19th, 2026.
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 Applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-14 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.
Regarding claim 5, it is unclear how there is a “third hole” when there is neither a “first hole” or “second hole” as claimed. It is unclear how the third hole functions without the disclosure of the first and second holes.
Regarding claim 6, it is unclear if claim 6 is meant to be a relative claim similar to claim 7 (“less than”). In its current state is states that the area is an area.
Claims 6-14 are rejected for being dependent on indefinite claim 5 and failing to correct claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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 1-2, 5-6, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Nishino et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0161778 A1 (hereinafter “Nishino”), wherein claims 5-7 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nishino, as evidenced by or in view of Fan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0045995 A1) (hereinafter “Fan”) and optionally Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0092599 A1) (hereinafter “Lee 2012”).
Regarding claims 1-2, 5-6, and 20, Nishino teaches a display device comprising a display panel comprising a display region (All Figs. [500]) and a non-display region entirely surrounding the display region comprising a seal part (encapsulation region) having a sealing material (encapsulant) disposed therein, the display panel further comprises a TFT array substrate (All Figs. [100]) having an array layer (All Figs. [103]) disposed thereon, the array layer including scanning lines and picture scanning lines defining pixels (Fig. 1 [30/40/35]) [0030-0031], the array layer having a dielectric layer (All Figs. [104/105/106]) disposed thereon, the dielectric layer comprising an organic passivation film, an inorganic insulating film, and an alignment film, and a counter substrate (All Figs. [200]) formed opposite to the substrate with the sealing material disposed therebetween and bonding the substrate and counter substrate, wherein the seal part has a first width/X-direction extending parallel to a direction outward from the display region and a second circumferential/Y-direction extending around the display region, wherein the dielectric layer comprises an array defined by rows (along the width direction) and columns (along the second direction) of recesses/holes formed therein, wherein the array may be uniform or the array may be non-uniform [0061] such that an outer area of the seal part (closer to the peripheral edge) has an increased hole density relative to that of an inner area (nearer to the display region) wherein the increased hole density benefits the increased adhesion/reliability of the sealing material the outer area near the peripheral edge of the display that experiences increased stress/forces [0063-0064], wherein the hole density is based on the pitch (All Figs. [p1/p2]) and the hole size, which can comprise the major, and optionally minor, opening dimension(s) (All Figs. [d1] & optionally [d11]) [0064-0066], and optionally the recess depth [0050-0051], wherein an example provides a total sealing width (A1) (Fig. 11 [SW]) extending along the circumferential direction and comprises, along the width direction, a first subregion comprising approximately half the sealing width (A2) comprises no holes (Fig. 11 [SW/2]) has the smallest contact area/hole density relative to the other subregion(s) comprising at least seven columns of uniformly spaced holes/recesses, which includes third holes spaced apart around the circumferential direction and each having area.
Further regarding claims 5-7, although not explicitly depicted based on the equation for hole density demonstrated by Nishino, it would have also been obvious/motivated to form an increased number of subregions in a uniform hole pattern extending within the other region and/or form two or more subregions extending over the entirety of the sealing width, resulting in (third) holes of a different areal size and/or pitch (density) that is relatively smaller in subregion(s) nearer to the display region and relatively larger in subregion(s) closer to the peripheral edge of the display panel as evidenced by or as made obvious/motivated by Fan, wherein Fan teaches a display region having a surrounding non-display sealing region comprising padding/dielectric layer having a plurality of holes to ensure sufficient adhesive strength [0019, 0052, 0058], wherein the cross-sectional area of holes/recesses and/or the distribution density of the holes increases as distance from the display region increases to ensure sufficient adhesive strength at the edge of the display substrate [0052-0056], wherein holes of differing size and/or density are demonstrated (Fig. 3), wherein Lee 2012 further evidences/teaches a passivation/insulating layer dummy pattern to maintain the thickness of an orientation/alignment film, wherein the pattern may be comprise a uniform array of holes (Figs. 5D-5F) or a non-uniform array of a gradually increasing or decreasing size/area (Fig. 5G) comprising least four subregions comprising different hole areas/sizes [0037-0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide three or more subregions at least two subregions as having (third) holes of different areas/sizes and/or pitch/densities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to explicitly iterate on non-unform hole patterns that meet the desired criteria or further iterate on an already demonstrated hole pattern.
Claims 3-9 & 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishino, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Li et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0202514 A1) (hereinafter “Li”) and Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0183458 A1) (hereinafter “Lee 2014”), wherein claims 6-7 are optionally further in view of Fan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0045995 A1) (hereinafter “Fan”).
Regarding claims 3-9 and 12, Nishino does not teach the holes of one or more subregions to comprise one or more protrusions therein.
Li teaches a display panel comprising a metallic protection (dielectric) layer having therein a plurality of grooves/holes, wherein the grooves can increase in opening area/width and/or depth/volume as distance from the display region increases [0009-0010, 0039-0040], wherein each of the holes may have one or more protrusions/posts disposed therein [0012, 0042-0043, Fig. 2], wherein the presence of protrusions/posts in outer grooves but not inner grooves (F=0) [Fig. 3 & Fig. 6] or increased number of protrusions/posts in outer grooves relative to inner grooves increases (F=1) [Fig. 5] as distance from the display region increases, wherein when a groove comprises one protrusion/post, spacing of the protrusion/post from the side of the hole is inherently one half the difference between the width of the hole/groove and the width of the protrusion/post.
Further regarding claims 3-4 and 8-10, while Lee 2014 teaches these grooves are located between the sealing area and display area, Lee teaches a display panel comprising a peripheral sealing region surrounding a display region, wherein a interlayer insulating bonding layer comprising a plurality of holes in an array pattern which improves adhesion especially in instances of shock/impact [0079], wherein one or more of the holes may have partitions/protrusions disposed therein formed of the same insulating materials [0021-0023], wherein the presence of partitions/protrusions further increase the bonding force [0093], wherein increased numbers of partitions/protrusions further increase the contact area and thus bonding area of the holes [0097], wherein partitions comprise a width that is 5% to 20% the width of each of the holes [0014, claim 6].
Further regarding claims 6-7, while Li teaches these grooves are located between the sealing area and display area, Fan teaches a display region having a surrounding non-display sealing region comprising padding/dielectric layer having a plurality of holes to ensure sufficient adhesive strength [0019, 0052, 0058], wherein the cross-sectional area of holes/recesses and/or the distribution density of the holes increases as distance from the display region increases to ensure sufficient adhesive strength at the edge of the display substrate [0052-0056], wherein holes of differing size and/or density are demonstrated (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide two or more regions of increases contact area imparted by varying the area/opening dimension(s), the distribution density, and/or the presence of or number of protrusions disposed in the holes between regions, preferably increasing the hole area, hole distribution density, inclusion or number of protrusions disposed in holes as distance from the display region increases. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply Nishino/Li(/Fan) to increase adhesion via increased area/density or Nishino/Li/Lee 2014 to increase adhesion [Nishino/Li/Fan] at an outer area of the sealant width closer to the peripheral edge of the display panel that experiences increased stress/forces [Nishino].
Claims 10-11 & 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishino in view of Li and Lee 2014, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Han et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0319123 A1) (hereinafter “Han”), Lee (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0127548 A1) (hereinafter “Lee 2011”), and optionally Niu et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0294434 A1) (hereinafter “Niu”).
Regarding claims 10-11 and 13-14, a hole/recess pattern having subregions of differing contact area, wherein an increased contact area via including protrusions/posts disposed in holes or including them at greater numbers is taught and motivated by Li/Lee 2014, wherein the equation related to a hole comprising a single protrusion/post is disclosed as recited above. However, the arrangement of a first/odd-numbered type subregion alternating with a second/even-numbered type subregion, the first/odd-numbered type subregion having less protrusions is not taught.
Han teaches a peripheral sealant region having grooves with varying heights/depths such that shallower grooves alternate with grooves of increased depth, wherein such that the adhesion/contact area is increased to improve interface adhesion [0078-0079], wherein Lee 2011 teaches a similar differing groove sealing region to obtain a uniform thickness sealant with an easily controlled width, wherein the differences between grooves formed in the seal area may be in depth and/or width, such as the same depth and different widths or the same width and different depths [0047-0048, 0052-0053].
Furthermore, Niu teaches that an comprising grooves of increased depth in the middle of grooves having a shallower depth allow for an increased contact area with additional anchoring [0073-0074].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide at least one second-type/even subregion having an increased adhesion/contact area between one or more first-type/odd subregions having a lower adhesion/contact area, wherein the contact area would be increased by hole area/width, hole distribution density, and the presence or number of protrusions disposed within the groove. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide increased adhesion/contact area to improve interface adhesion with the sealant [Han] to obtain a uniform thickness sealant with an easily controlled sealant width [Lee 2011], while still meeting the increased hole density qualities set forth in Nishino/Lee 2014, and further providing subregions of increased contact area within/between subregions of lesser adhesion for additional anchoring [Niu], also while still meeting the increased hole density qualities set forth in Nishino/Lee 2014.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
An alternative line of rejection could have been made over Jang (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0077192 A1) who teaches holes through metal layer(s), which may transfer heat to a surrounding insulating layers or the sealing member during the use of the device and/or UV light or laser bonding of the sealing member, which is mitigated through the use of holes [0111-0112, 0127-0130], wherein the holes are also formed in the overlying protection/insulating layers which further improves a bonding strength of the sealing member [0125], wherein the holes through the insulating member may have been modified as recited above AND/OR would have been modified concurrently with the holes through the metal layer(s) such as set forth due to the Gaussian shaped light or laser bonding as set forth in Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2012/0319574 A1) or Gao et al. (CN 112652727 A) OR due to the heat transfer in laser or light bonding as set forth in Liu et al. (CN 109119449 A) and/or Bai et al. (CN 115857212 A) (hereinafter “Bai”), wherein Cho et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0102293 A1) evidences that projections/partitions could be formed in the holes through insulating and conductive layers (Figs. 5A-5B vs. Figs. 6A-6B) and/or Lee 2014 also teaches that the bonding/interlayer insulating layer further comprises a layer to absorb laser light to assist in hardening the sealing material [0078].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 February 19th, 2026