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 .
This is a Final office action based on application 18/427,741 filed June 8, 2026. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (Pre-Grant Publication 2016/0293884) in view of Hao (Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0066196).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses a display device comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 8c, 36) comprising a semiconductor chip (Fig. 5a/5b, 30), and having a display region (AA), and a peripheral region (IA) adjacent to the display region;
pixels (Fig. 1, 22) above the substrate in the display region; and
a crack detection line (810-1/810/2) above the substrate in the peripheral region.
Zhang does not explicitly disclose the crack detention line configured to apply a voltage to one or more of the pixels such that the one or more of the pixels emits light when a crack occurs in the peripheral region. However Hao discloses a crack detecting method for a display panel comprising:
A crack detection circuit (Fig. 1a/1c, 210/211) in a peripheral region of a display panel wherein the crack detection circuit is configured to apply voltage to a sub-pixel (110) to emit light when a crack occurs (Paragraph [0084]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply a voltage to a pixel to emit light when a crack occurs because a crack can be effectively determined due to the pixel emitting light, thereby improving the detection rate of cracks in the peripheral region (Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 2, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line has a multi-layer structure (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line comprises: a first metal layer (42’); and a second metal layer (46’) above the first metal layer.
Regarding claim 4, Zhang further discloses:
the first metal layer (42’) comprises a reflective metal material (Paragraph [0046]), and
wherein the second metal layer (46’) comprises a transparent conductive material or a translucent conductive material (Paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang further discloses:
the substrate further comprises: a first blocking layer (810-1; 50’, 52’, 54’, 56’) in the peripheral region; and a second blocking layer (810-2; 50’ 52’ 54’ 56’) in the peripheral region adjacent to the first blocking layer.
Regarding claim 8-10, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line is above the first blocking layer and the second blocking layer.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (Pre-Grant Publication 2016/0293884) in view of Hao (Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0066196) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US Patent 11,800,776).
Regarding claim 5-6, Zhang and Hao disclose all of the limitations of claim 3 (addressed above). Neither reference disclose the crack detection line further comprises a third metal layer above the second metal layer. However Kim discloses a display device comprising:
A crack detection line (Fig. 16 & 17) in a peripheral region comprising a first crack detection electrode (CDE1), a second crack detection electrode (CDE2) and a third crack detection electrode (CDE5) above the second crack detection electrode wherein the third crack detection electrode comprise a chemical resistant metal material (Col. 24, Lines 22-25).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the crack detection line including a third metal layer above the second metal layer because it will allow damage to the display panel/apparatus to be detected more accurately in a broader range (Col. 37, Lines 30-42).
Claim(s) 11-14 & 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (Pre-Grant Publication 2016/0293884) in view of Murao 2010/0020263) and Hao (Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0066196).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang discloses a display device comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 8c, 36) having a display region (AA), and a peripheral region (IA) adjacent to the display region;
pixels (Fig. 1, 22) above the substrate in the display region; and
a crack detection line (810-1/810/2) above the substrate in the peripheral region.
Zhang does not explicitly disclose the peripheral region having a width of tens of micrometers or less or the crack detention line configured to apply a voltage to one or more of the pixels such that the one or more of the pixels emits light when a crack occurs in the peripheral region.. However Muaro discloses a display device comprising:
A display device having a display region (Fig. 1, 10) and a peripheral region (35) wherein a width of the peripheral region has a width of about 50-100 micrometers (Paragraph [0087]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the peripheral region having a width of tens of micrometer because it will serve to prevent display unevenness when flexing is experienced in the peripheral region and provide sufficient margin to reduce misalignment of an microlens array (Paragraph [0087]).
Hao discloses a crack detecting method for a display panel comprising:
A crack detection circuit (Fig. 1a/1c, 210/211) in a peripheral region of a display panel wherein the crack detection circuit is configured to apply voltage to a sub-pixel (110) to emit light when a crack occurs (Paragraph [0084]).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply a voltage to a pixel to emit light when a crack occurs because a crack can be effectively determined due to the pixel emitting light, thereby improving the detection rate of cracks in the peripheral region (Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line has a multi-layer structure (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line comprises: a first metal layer (42’); and a second metal layer (46’) above the first metal layer.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang further discloses:
the first metal layer (42’) comprises a reflective metal material (Paragraph [0046]), and
wherein the second metal layer (46’) comprises a transparent conductive material or a translucent conductive material (Paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 17, Zhang further discloses:
the substrate further comprises: a first blocking layer (810-1; 50’, 52’, 54’, 56’) in the peripheral region; and a second blocking layer (810-2; 50’ 52’ 54’ 56’) in the peripheral region adjacent to the first blocking layer.
Regarding claim 18-20, Zhang further discloses:
the crack detection line is above the first blocking layer and the second blocking layer.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (Pre-Grant Publication 2016/0293884) in view of Murao (Pre-Grant Publication 2010/0020263) and Hao (Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0066196) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kim (US Patent 11,800,776)
Regarding claim 15-16, Zhang, Murao and Hao disclose all of the limitations of claim 13 (addressed above). Neither reference disclose the crack detection line further comprises a third metal layer above the second metal layer. However Kim discloses a display device comprising:
A crack detection line (Fig. 16 & 17) in a peripheral region comprising a first crack detection electrode (CDE1), a second crack detection electrode (CDE2) and a third crack detection electrode (CDE5) above the second crack detection electrode wherein the third crack detection electrode comprise a chemical resistant metal material (Col. 24, Lines 22-25).
It would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to form the crack detection line including a third metal layer above the second metal layer because it will allow damage to the display panel/apparatus to be detected more accurately in a broader range (Col. 37, Lines 30-42).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 & 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Further Applicant's arguments filed June 8, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argument regarding the prior art of record Zhang not teaching the crack detection line configured to apply a voltage to one or more of the pixels such that the one or more of the pixel emit light when a crack occurs in the peripheral region is not considered persuasive because the claim has no structural limitations to differentiate the claim invention from the prior art. As Zhang meets all of the structure limitations of claims 1 & 11 the structure of Zhang can be considered “configured to” apply voltage to a pixel during a crack occurring in the peripheral region.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 BRANDON C FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5016. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Jeff W Natalini can be reached at 571-272-2266. 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.
/BRANDON C FOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/DAVID VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights