DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 without traverse of Invention group I, Species A4 (Figs. 11A-b), C1 (Fig. 2B), B4 (Figs. 12-E-12F), and D1 (Fig. 2B) in the reply filed on 01/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicants amended claims 1-2 and cancelled claims 12-30. Applicants did not identify which claims read into the elected Species.
However, the examiner notices that the election of A4 (plurality of coupling portions) is inconsistent with B4 (single coupling portion).
After deliberation, the examiner considers that group B also need to have another subspecies B5 that is shown in Fig. 2B. This is consistent with the election of C1 and D1 (both refers to Fig. 2B regarding tension portion and opening area) and is consistent with A4 (Figs. 11A-11B).
A phone call to Applicants’ representative on 02/06/2026, the examiner explains the inconsistency above and suggested to switch to Species B5 (Fig. 2B) along with A4, C1, C2 previous elected). Applicants agreed.
The examiner considers “the first coupling portions each have a width in the first direction, which increases from an end adjacent to the at least one first side of the second body part toward the at least one first side of the first body part, and
the second coupling portions each have a width in the first direction, which increases from an end adjacent to the at least one first side of the first body part toward the at least one first side of the second body part“ of claim 4 is a feature of Species B2, (Fig. 10, [00156]) and should be withdrawn.
The examiner considers “second sub-coupling portions which protrude from the at least one first side of the first body part at a second height different from the first height in the thickness direction” of claim 5 is a feature of Species B3, (Fig. 12B, [00195]) and also should be withdrawn.
The examiner also notices that claim 8 is a feature of claim 7, since it is readily found in the search, the examiner decides to rejoin Fig. 7 with Fig. 2B and examined it together.
Claims 4-5 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species B2,B3, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/06/2026.
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
The “the second tension portions and the second coupling portions do not overlap the at least one second deposition opening, when viewed in the first direction and the second direction” of claim 7 is not clear because the first direction and the second direction is horizontal direction, as such the second tension portions RS2-1, RS2-2, RS2-3 and the second coupling portions C2-1, C2-2, and C2-3 is in the same horizontal plane as the second deposition opening OP2 and they do overlap. From Fig. 2, it is that in a plan view from the third direction that ““the second tension portions and the second coupling portions do not overlap the at least one second deposition opening” (in a direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction).
This portion of claim 7 will be examined inclusive both interpretations.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by IKEHARA (JP 2010090415, from IDS, hereafter ‘415).
‘415 teaches all limitations of:
Claim: As shown in FIG. 1A, the vapor deposition mask 1 includes a frame body 10 and a plurality of mask pieces 11 … The welded portion 13 is a portion where the mask piece 11 and the frame-like body 10 are joined by spot welding. The mask piece 11 has a plurality of opening areas 12, and a large number of mask openings 121 are provided in the opening area 12 (English translation, middle of P4, includes the claimed “A mask assembly, comprising: a frame extending in a first direction and a second direction intersecting each other, the frame including a frame opening; and a mask sheet coupled to the frame,” and as shown in Figs. 1a-1b. Note Figs. 1(a), note labels “12” and “13” were mistakenly exchanged, and Fig. 1(b) labels “13” and “131” should be “12” and “121”, see Figs. 3, 5-6 for openings “121”);
The mask pieces 11A and 11B of the present embodiment are thinned by removing a predetermined thickness by etching (half etching) at a portion that becomes the peripheral portion 112 in the base metal thin plate (P5, last complete paragraph), a large number of mask openings 121 are provided in the opening area 12 (middle of P4), As shown in FIGS. 2A and 2B, the peripheral edge 112 of one mask piece 11A of the pair of mask pieces is thinned from the back surface 115 side of the contact surface 111. In the other mask piece 11B of the pair of mask pieces, the peripheral edge 112 is thinned from the contact surface 111 side (P5, 2nd last complete paragraph, includes the claimed “the mask sheet including: a first mask that includes: a first body part having: at least one first deposition opening corresponding to the frame opening; and at least one first coupling portion, each of which protrudes from at least one first side of the first body part, which overlaps the frame opening; and a second mask that includes: a second body part having: at least one second deposition opening corresponding to the frame opening; and at least one second coupling portion, each of which protrudes from at least one first side of the second body part, which overlaps the frame opening, wherein
the at least one first side of the first mask and the at least one first side of the second mask face each other in the frame opening, the at least one first coupling portion overlap the at least one second coupling portion, respectively”),
the peripheral portion 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B is thinned to a plate thickness of about 25 μm by removing a thickness portion of about 25 μm from a thin metal plate having a plate thickness of about 50 μm. That is, the plate thicknesses at the peripheral portions 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B are substantially the same, and the total thickness (about 50 μm) at the peripheral portions 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B is the plate at the central portion of the mask pieces 11A and 11B (P5, bottom paragraph, includes the claimed “and a sum of respective thicknesses of the at least one first coupling portion and the at least one second coupling portion, which overlap each other, is equal to at least one of the thickness of the first body part and the thickness of the second body part“ and as shown in Fig. 2(b)).
Claim 2: the peripheral portion 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B is thinned to a plate thickness of about 25 μm by removing a thickness portion of about 25 μm from a thin metal plate having a plate thickness of about 50 μm. That is, the plate thicknesses at the peripheral portions 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B are substantially the same, and the total thickness (about 50 μm) at the peripheral portions 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B is the plate at the central portion of the mask pieces 11A and 11B (P5, bottom paragraph, includes the claimed “wherein a thickness of the at least one first coupling portion is less than a thickness of the first body part, a thickness of the at least one second coupling portion is less than a thickness of the second body part”, note claim 2 is tighter than the amended portion of claim 1).
Claim 3: Fig. 2(b) shows the claimed “wherein the at least one first coupling portion are each in contact with the at least one first side of the second body part, and the at least one second coupling portion are each in contact with the at least one first side of the first body part”).
Claims 10 and 11: Fig. 1(a) shows the claimed “wherein the at least one first deposition opening includes a plurality of first deposition openings, the at least one second deposition opening includes a plurality of second deposition openings, and the plurality of first deposition openings are disposed in the same shape as the plurality of second deposition openings” of claim 10 and “wherein the plurality of first deposition openings are disposed apart from each other in the first direction” of claim 11).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘415, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, in view of NAKAMURA et al. (US 20190378984, hereafter ‘984).
‘415 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 6: wherein the first mask further comprises first tension portions which protrude from at least one second side of the first body part, and each of which has at least a portion overlapping the frame, and
the second mask further comprises second tension portions which protrude from at least one second side of the second body part, and each of which has at least a portion overlapping the frame.
Claim 8: wherein the first mask further comprises first sub-tension portions which protrude from the at least one second side of the first body part, each of which is disposed between two of the first tension portions, and
the second mask further comprises second sub-tension portions which protrude from the at least one second side of the second body part, each of which is disposed between two of the second tension portions.
‘984 is analogous art in the field of DEPOSITION MASK DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING DEPOSITION MASK DEVICE (title). ’984 teaches that A joint piece 44 is formed between two adjacent notches 42. In other words, the joint piece 44 is located between the two adjacent notches 42. The vapor deposition mask 20 is joined to the frame 15 at the joint piece 44. That is, the joint piece 44 and the frame 15 are fixed to each other via the joint portion 60 (Fig. 3, [0084], see also Fig. 1), for the purpose of suppressing the occurrence of wrinkles and deformation in the vapor deposition mask ([0014]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added joint pieces 44 of ‘984 to the mask pieces 11A and 11B that overlaps with frame 10 of ‘415, for the purpose of suppressing the occurrence of wrinkles and deformation in the vapor deposition mask, as taught by ‘984 ([0014]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘415 and ‘984, as being applied to claim 6 rejection above, further in view of HIRAI 平井 et al. (JP 3785509, from IDS, hereafter ‘509).
The combination of ‘415 and ‘984 further teaches some limitations of:
Claim 7: Fig. 1(a) and 2(a) of ‘415 show that the coupling portion 112 does not overlap with the opening area 12, and ‘984 shows the joint pieces 44 do not overlap with through holes 25 (includes the claimed “the first tension portions and the first coupling portions do not overlap the at least one first deposition opening, and the second tension portions and the second coupling portions do not overlap the at least one second deposition opening, when viewed in the first direction and the second direction”, see 112b rejection above).
The combination of ‘415 and ‘984 does not teach the other limitations of:
Claim 7: wherein each of the at least one first coupling portion and the at least one second coupling portion is provided in plurality.
‘509 is analogous art in the field of Metal Mask And Manufacturing Method Thereof (title). ’509 teaches that A meshing portion 26 that meshes with each other is formed at the central portion of each of the adjacent frames 21a, 21b, 21c, and 21d, and a half-etching 24 is formed on the entire edge including the meshing portion 26. . As described above, the frames 21a, 21b, 21c, and 21d are integrally connected in a state where the half-etched portions 24 are superposed on each other (English translation, [0040], Fig. 3(b) shows more than one meshing portion for each side of the frames 21a, 21b), for the purpose of suppressing scratches, sagging, and excellent dimensional accuracy ([0013]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have added multiple mesh portion of ‘509 to the peripheral edge 112 of the mask pieces 11A and 11B of ‘415, for the purpose of suppressing scratches, sagging, and excellent dimensional accuracy, as taught by ‘509 ([0013]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘415, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, in view of White et al. (US 20160043319, hereafter ‘319).
‘415 teaches some limitations of:
Claim 9: The mask piece 11 of the present embodiment is made of a thin metal plate having a thickness of about 50 μm, and the material of the thin metal plate is preferably a material having a small thermal expansion coefficient such as invar, super invar, or stainless invar (top of page 5, includes the claimed “wherein the first mask, and the second mask each comprise at least one of invar and stainless steel”).
‘415 does not teach the limitations of:
Claim 9: wherein the frame, (the first mask, and the second mask) each comprise at least one of invar and stainless steel.
‘319 is analogous art in the field of FINE METAL MASK (title). ’319 teaches that the frame 112 is composed of INVAR (Fig. 1A-1B, [0028], 2nd last sentence), Suitable materials for the fine metal mask 106 or components thereof include, but are not limited to INVAR (64FeNi), ASTM Grade 5 titanium (Ti-6Al-4V), titanium, aluminum, molybdenum, copper, 440 stainless steel, HASTELLOY® alloy C-276, nickel, chrome-molybdenum steel, 304 stainless steel, other iron containing compositions, or combinations thereof (2nd half of [0027]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted invar as the material for mask frame of ‘415, as taught by ‘319, for the purpose of matching thermal expansion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20140069331 is cited for “a sum of respective thicknesses of the at least one first coupling portion and the at least one second coupling portion, which overlap each other, is equal to at least one of the thickness of the first body part and the thickness of the second body part” (Fig. 2) and “each of the at least one first coupling portion and the at least one second coupling portion is provided in plurality” (Fig. 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00 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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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.
/KEATH T CHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716