Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 8 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bohn (US 20120307423 A1, hereinafter Bohn) in view of Visser (WO2009067010A2, hereinafter Visser, using US 20110043976 A1 as a translation).
Claim 1. Bohn teaches a display device comprising:
a flexible display (506, bottom of fig 5) comprising a first portion (left), a second portion (right), and a third portion (middle) between the first portion and the second portion (bottom of fig 5);
a first display support (516, fig 5) supporting the first portion of the flexible display;
a second display support (518) supporting the second portion of the flexible display;
a flexible support (508 and 510 fig 5) continuously supporting the third portion of the flexible display in a closed position (top of fig 5) and an open position (bottom of fig 5),
wherein the first display support and the second display support are rotatably connected to a first hinge (522, fig 5) and a second hinge (other instance of 522, fig 5), respectively,
wherein, when the flexible display is in the open position, the flexible support is positioned under a surface of the third portion of the flexible display and the flexible support and laterally extend over both the first hinge and the second hinge (fig 5 shows 510 laterally extends over the entirety 514), and
However Bohn fails to teach a spring tape supporting the flexible support when the flexible display is in the open position; and
the spring tape laterally extends over both the first hinge and the second hinge
wherein, when the flexible display is in the open position (Bohn fig 5), the display device comprises a gap between the spring tape and at least the first portion and the second portion
Visser teaches a spring tape (37, 38, fig 3) supporting a flexible support (31-36, 31a-36a) when the flexible display is in the open position (since elements 37, 38 are present and holding the device together in both an open and closed position)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the arrangement as taught by Visser into the device of Bohn. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Bohn in the above manner for the purpose of pulling together the rod segments (Visser [0033] recites ‘the individual segments are pulled together by an action of the tension of the elastic mechanism 37, 38’).
Although Bohn fails to teach a spring tape in isolation, the combination of references teaches the limitation wherein, when the flexible display is in the open position (Bohn fig 5), the display device comprises a gap between the spring tape and at least the first portion and the second portion (Bohn fig 5 shows a gap between 508 and the left and right portions of 506). Since the spring tape of Visser supports rods which are analogous to element 508 of Bohn (Bohn [0030] recites ‘display support 508 may be implemented as a flexible support and/or as any of the flexure assemblies that include individual and/or integrated pivotable links as described with reference to FIGS. 1-3’, see also rods 204 of Bohn fig 2), the combination of references teaches a spring tape running through element 508 of Bohn fig 5.
The combination of references also teaches the limitation:
the spring tape laterally extends over both the first hinge and the second hinge
Since Visser fig 3 indicates terminal portions 39a, 39b external to the lower protective sheet, it makes the most sense for the terminal portions of the spring tape to correspond to portions inside of the first and second display supports 516, 518 of Bohn fig 5.
Claim 2. Bohn in view of Visser teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the flexible support facilitates a curved portion of the flexible display in the closed position (Bohn fig 5).
Claim 3. Bohn in view of Visser teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein both end portions of the flexible support are rolled with a first hinge and a second hinge in the open position (Bohn fig 5) such that the flexible support is stretchable (Bohn [0030] recites ‘display support 508 may be implemented as a flexible support and/or as any of the flexure assemblies that include individual and/or integrated pivotable links as described with reference to FIGS. 1-3’, while fig 1 indicates stretching) to support the third portion of the flexible display (fig 5).
Claim 4. Bohn in view of Visser teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the flexible support comprises a plurality of rods (Bohn 204, fig 2; Visser 31-36),
wherein the spring tape supports the plurality of rods when the flexible display is in the open position (the combination of references teaches a spring tape running through Bohn elements 204 positioned along element 508 of Bohn fig 5), and
wherein an end portion of the spring tape is connected to at least one of a first display support (Bohn 516, fig 5; Visser 5, fig 2) and a second display support (Bohn 518, fig 5; Visser 16a, 18a, fig 2).
Claim 5. Bohn in view of Visser teach the display device of claim 4, wherein when the flexible display is in the open position, the gap is between the plurality of rods and the spring tape (Visser fig 3 shows a gap between the rods and terminal portions 39a, 39b which overlaps with the gap in Bohn is between 508 and the outside portions of 506 since the terminal portions 39a, 39b of Visser would be placed in display supports 516, 518 of Bohn fig 5).
Claim 6. Bohn in view of Visser teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the flexible support comprises a plurality of rods (Bohn 204, fig 2) supporting the third portion of the flexible display (Bohn [0030] recites ‘display support 508 may be implemented as a flexible support and/or as any of the flexure assemblies that include individual and/or integrated pivotable links as described with reference to FIGS. 1-3’, see also fig 5).
Claim 8. Bohn in view of Visser teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein when the flexible display is in the open position (bottom of Bohn fig 5), the flexible display is contacted and supported by the first display support (bottom of Bohn fig 5), the second display support (bottom of Bohn fig 5) and the flexible support (bottom of Bohn fig 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not found persuasive. Applicant argues:
‘In other words, the combination would now require inserting the spring tape into the flexible backlight 510 for the lateral extension of both the flexible support and the spring tape to be disclosed by the cited references, and this does not appear to be a functional combination since element 510 is an electrical component.’
The combination would not require inserting the spring tape into element 510 of Bohn.
Applicant further argues:
‘Specifically, there is no gap between 508/510 and either the first portion or the second portion 506 in Bohn when the device is in the open position. As the flexible support is now both 508 and 510 in Bohn, a gap between the flexible support 508/510 and 506 no longer exists. 510 cannot be simultaneously present for establishing that the flexible support laterally extends over the first hinge and the second hinge, while also being missing for establishing the gap between the spring tape.’
However, the claimed gap is in relation to the spring tape rather than the flexible support. The claimed invention does not require for the gap to be between the flexible support and the first/second portions. The claimed invention requires the gap to be between the spring tape and the first/second portions.
Applicant further argues:
‘Applicant further notes that it does not appear operable to suggest that the spring in Visser can run through element 510 of Bohn, as element 510 of Bohn is an electrical backlight component.’
True, however the rejection is based upon a spring tape running through element 508 of Bohn without running through element 510 of Bohn.
Applicant further argues:
‘Visser only shows a spring being inserted into a support and not a separate component that can be spaced apart from the support in any position, let alone a closed position.’
A spring tape running through element 508 of Bohn matches the claimed invention.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS R BURTNER whose telephone number is (571)272-0966. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Allen Parker can be reached on 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/DOUGLAS R BURTNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841