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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the specification, specifically the title of the invention, has overcome the previous objection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2020/0211437 to Ahn et al. (Ahn) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0057659 to Sun et al. (Sun).
As to claim 1, Ahn discloses a display device, comprising:
a lower substrate which includes an active area and a non-active area and is stretchable (Fig. 1; Para. 0058-0059, lower substrate, 110 which is made of a pliable material and being able to stretch and contract);
a pattern layer which is disposed on the active area of the lower substrate and includes a plurality of first plate patterns and a plurality of first line patterns (Fig. 1; Para. 0067, 0070, second substrates 112 may be connected by the connecting lines 180);
a plurality of pixels which is disposed on each of the plurality of first plate patterns (Fig. 1, 2; Para. 0099, three subpixels, SPX);
a plurality of connection lines respectively disposed on each of the plurality of first line patterns and configured to connect the pixels (Fig. 1, 2; Para. 0072, 0076, first connecting lines, 181 and second connecting lines 182); and
a plurality of power connection lines configured to supply a power voltage to the pixels (Fig. 1, 2; Para. 0146, 0150-0151, a high-potential power line 131b, and a low-potential power line 131c disposed on the second substrate 112),
wherein the power connection lines are disposed between the pixels on the active area (Fig. 1, 2).
Ahn does not expressly disclose wherein at least some of the power connection lines are disposed between first plate patterns adjacent to each other in a first direction among of the plurality of first plate patterns and extend in a second direction different from the first direction.
Sun teaches wherein at least some of the power connection lines are disposed between first plate patterns adjacent to each other in a first direction among of the plurality of first plate patterns and extend in a second direction different from the first direction (Fig. 4, 5; Para. 0059, VGH and VGL lines).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display device of Ahn to include the power connection lines of Sun because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the display device of Ahn as modified by the power connection lines of Sun can yield a predictable result of enabling the array substrate to withstand the stretch deformation uniformly to the maximum extent. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the display device of Ahn the ability to use the power connection lines of Sun since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 2, Ahn and Sun discloses the display device according to claim 1. Ahn discloses wherein the pixels includes:
a first pixel disposed on a first row and a first column (Fig. 1; Para. 0098-0099, pixel, PX, on second substrate, 112, located in the (1,1) matrix spot);
a second pixel disposed on the first row and a second column adjacent to the first column along a first direction (Fig. 1; Para. 0098-0099, pixel, PX, on second substrate, 112, located in the (1,2) matrix spot); a
third pixel disposed on a second row adjacent to the first row along a second direction and the first column (Fig. 1; Para. 0098-0099, pixel, PX, on second substrate, 112, located in the (2,1) matrix spot); and
a fourth pixel disposed on the second row and the second column (Fig. 1; Para. 0098-0099, pixel, PX, on second substrate, 112, located in the (2,2) matrix spot).
As to claim 14, Ahn and Sun discloses the display device according to claim 2. Ahn discloses wherein among the pixels, first pixels disposed on the first row and second pixels disposed on the second row are opposite to each other with respect to a reference line parallel to the first direction (Fig. 1).
As to claim 20, Ahn and Sun discloses the display device according to claim 1. Ahn discloses wherein the connection lines and the power connection lines include the same material (Para. 0146-0147, plurality of first connecting lines 181 and second connecting lines, 182, for example, may be made of a metal material such as copper (Cu), silver (Ag), and gold (Au)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-13 and 15-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 3, of which claims 4-13 and 15-19 are dependent.
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 Lisa S Landis whose telephone number is (571)270-1061. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at (571)272-3017. 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.
/LISA S LANDIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights