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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
Receipt is acknowledged of a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) and a submission, filed on 05/28/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image1.png
665
589
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee discloses wherein the display panel includes a plurality of side surfaces, and the first packages and the second packages are attached to same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and
wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction DR2, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap (FPC1 and IC1 partially overlap as IC1 is only partially as big as FPC1) with the first packages in a second direction DR1 which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Drawings Objections
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, in claims 1 and 11, “the first packages and the second packages are attached to same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap with the first packages in a second direction which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3 and 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11 recites “the first packages and the second packages are attached to same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap with the first packages in a second direction which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction” is new matter.
PNG
media_image2.png
326
502
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Applicant fig. 5 discloses “the first packages 131s and the second packages 121/122 are attached to on opposite side surface and not on same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction 10, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap with the first packages in a second direction which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction”.
Note fig. 5 of applicant discloses “the first packages 131s and the second packages 121/122 are attached to on opposite side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction 10, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap with the first packages in a second direction which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction”. As such this is new matter.
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 1, 3 and 5-12 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.
Claims 1 and 12 recites “the first packages” and “the second packages” in lines 4-9 lacks antecedent basis. It is unclear if the “the first packages” is a subset of the plurality of first packages and if “the second packages” is a subset of the plurality of second packages.
Claims 3, 5-7 and 11 recites “the first packages” and “the second packages” in lines 4-9 lacks antecedent basis. It is unclear if the “the first packages” is a subset of the plurality of first packages and if “the second packages” is a subset of the plurality of second packages.
Claims 6-7 recites “their surfaces” lacks antecedent basis. Is surfaces that of each packages or a single surface from each packages making surfaces as claimed. It is unclear and indefinite as to what surfaces are their surfaces.
Claim 6 recites “the same direction” lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 8-10 recites “the first packages” and “two different first packages” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 11 recites “the other surface” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 5-8 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LEE et al. 20210033909.
PNG
media_image1.png
665
589
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, figs. 1-2 of Lee discloses a display device comprising:
a display panel DP displaying data on a screen; and
a plurality of first packages (FPC1 as labeled by examiner above) and a plurality of second packages (IC1 as labeled by examiner above) where chips (both have chips in them) for driving the display panel are installed, the first packages and the second packages being attached to an end portion of the display panel,
wherein the display panel includes a plurality of side surfaces, and the first packages and the second packages are attached to same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and
wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction DR2, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap (FPC1 and IC1 partially overlap as IC1 is only partially as big as FPC1) with the first packages in a second direction DR1 which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Regarding claim 12, figs. 1-2 of Lee discloses a substrate package attached to an end portion of a display panel, which displays data on a screen, comprising:
a plurality of first packages (FPC1 as labeled by examiner above) and a plurality of second packages (IC1 as labeled by examiner above) where chips (both have chips in them) for driving the display panel are installed, the first packages and the second packages being attached to an end portion of the display panel,
wherein the display panel includes a plurality of side surfaces, and the first packages and the second packages are attached to same side surface among the plurality of side surfaces, and
wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in a first direction DR2, respectively, and the second packages partially overlap (FPC1 and IC1 partially overlap as IC1 is only partially as big as FPC1) with the first packages in a second direction DR1 which is a direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Regarding claim 3, figs. 1-2 of Lee discloses a display device comprising: wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged in parallel to each other along a length direction of the display panel.
Regarding claim 5, figs. 6-10 of Lee discloses wherein the first packages and the second packages are chip-on-films (COFs – ACF1).
Regarding claim 6, fig. 1 of Lee discloses wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged such that their surfaces where the chips are installed are oriented in the same direction.
Regarding claim 7, fig. 1 of Lee discloses wherein the first packages and the second packages are arranged such that their surfaces where the chips are installed are oriented in opposite directions (left and right sides are opposite).
Regarding claim 8, fig. 2 of Lee discloses wherein among the first packages, two different first packages are attached at a distance from each other.
Regarding claim 11, figs. 6 and 9 of Lee discloses wherein the first packages and the second packages are bent (to a degree as bent is a term of degree) over toward one surface or the other surface of the display panel after attached to the display panel.
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.
Claim(s) 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Regarding claim 9, it would have been obvious to form a display panel comprising wherein the distance between the two different first packages varies depending on a type of the display panel and the type of the display panel affects the side of the panel and therefore changes the distance to some degree.
Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to form a display panel comprising wherein the distance between the two different first packages varies depending on a length and channel quantity of the first packages, resolution, subpixel quantity, and a length of one side of the display panel as these variables affect the size of the display panel.
Conclusion
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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. 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.
/VONGSAVANH SENGDARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights