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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10 and 16 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 § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2020/0152892).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a display assembly (see figures 1-5B, for instance), comprising: a display layer (400); a contact component (520) in electrical communication with the display layer (400); and a conformal coating (540) at least partially covering the display layer (400, see figure 5A) and the contact component (520), the conformal coating (540) defining an orifice (where layer 530 meets 520, see figure 5B) in the conformal coating (540) positioned over a contact region of the contact component (520) to accommodate for a connection between the display layer (400) and the contact component (520) through the orifice ([0137]-[0142]).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1, further comprising a protective material (515) in contact with the display layer (400), wherein the conformal coating (540) at least partially covers the protective material.
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the contact component is a flex connector ([0139]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the display layer (400) comprises masked regions ([0094]) that prevent application of the conformal coating (540) at the masked regions.
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the conformal coating (540) protects the display assembly from water damage ([0112]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1, wherein the conformal coating (540) conforms to a shape of the contact component (520).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Lee et al. (2020/0014415).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1. However, Kim does not expressly disclose wherein the conformal coating has a thickness of about 2 microns to about 3 microns.
Lee discloses a display assembly (see figures 4-8, for instance), wherein the conformal coating (450) has a thickness of about 2 microns to about 3 microns ([0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the conformal coating thickness of Lee in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve protection against external impacts, as taught by Lee ([0104]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1. However, Kim does not expressly disclose wherein the conformal coating is applied by a vapor deposition process.
Lee discloses a display assembly (see figures 4-8, for instance), wherein the conformal coating is applied by a vapor deposition process ([0100]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use vapor deposition to form the conformal coating as Lee in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have to inhibit the torn-off phenomenon of the ends of the film layer, as taught by Lee ([0007]).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Kim (US 2017/0309843; hereafter Kim 1).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses the display assembly of claim 1. However, Kim does not expressly disclose wherein the conformal coating comprises parylene.
Kim 1 discloses a display assembly (see figures 1-2 and 20, for instance), wherein the conformal coating (261a,b) comprises parylene ([0176]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use parylene as the material of the conformal coating as Kim 1 in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have to use a suitable transparent polymer that exhibits water-resistance properties for reducing stress imposed on each of the adhesive films, as taught by Kim 1 ([0176]; [0179]).
Claim(s) 10-12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim in view of Lu et al. (US 2019/0239375).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses a display assembly (see figures 1-5B, for instance), comprising: a display component (400); a filler material (540) at least partially surrounding a periphery of the display component (400) and positioned in a volume outside the display component (400); a contact component (520) having a contact region; and a conformal coating (545) at least partially covering the display component (400), a part of the contact component (520), and the filler material (540). However, Kim does not expressly disclose a frame comprising sidewalls, the display component and the frame at least partially defining a volume, the conformal coating positioned between the filler material and the frame.
Lu discloses a display assembly (see figure 1A, for instance), comprising a frame (100) comprising sidewalls (110), the display component (200) and the frame (100) at least partially defining a volume (see figure 5, for instance), the conformal coating (340) positioned between the filler material (400) and the frame (100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the frame structure of Lu in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a supporting strength to prevent the electronic element from being damaged due to an excessive compression to the cover by the external force, as taught by Lu ([0051]).
Regarding claim 11, Kim in view of Lu discloses the display assembly of claim 10, wherein the filler material (540) is disposed between the display component (330) and the conformal coating (545).
Regarding claim 12, Kim in view of Lu discloses the display assembly of claim 10, wherein the conformal coating (545) conforms to an exterior shape of the filler material (540).
Regarding claim 14, Kim in view of Lu discloses the display assembly of claim 10, wherein the conformal coating (545) contacts a bend region and a portion of the frame (Lu 110).
Regarding claim 15, Kim in view of Lu discloses the display assembly of claim 10, wherein the conformal coating (545) is water resistant ([0142]).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses an electronic device (see figures 1-5B, for instance) comprising: a display component (400) defining a bend region (see figure 5B); a filler material (540) contacting the bend region; and a conformal coating (545) at least partially covering the bend region, the conformal coating (545) defining an orifice (where layer 530 meets 520, see figure 5B) in the conformal coating positioned over a contact region (at 520) to accommodate for a connection between the display component (100) and a contact component through the orifice (at intersection of 520 and 530). However, Kim does not expressly disclose a frame defining an aperture, the display component positioned in the aperture.
Lu discloses a display assembly (see figure 1A, for instance), comprising a frame (100) defining an aperture (120), the display (200) component positioned in the aperture (120).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the frame structure of Lu in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a supporting strength to prevent the electronic element from being damaged due to an excessive compression to the cover by the external force, as taught by Lu ([0051]).
Regarding claim 17, Kim in view of Lu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the orifice (occupied by 520, 530) defined by the conformal coating (545) accommodates for an electrical connection between the display component (100) and a flex connector (500).
Regarding claim 18, Kim in view of Lu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the conformal coating (545) seals the display component (100).
Regarding claim 19, Kim in view of Lu discloses the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the conformal coating (545) contacts the filler material (540).
Claim(s) 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim in view of Lu, and in further view of Lee.
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Lu discloses the display assembly of claim 10. However, Kim in view of Lu does not expressly disclose wherein the conformal coating has a thickness of about 1 micron to 5 microns.
Lee discloses a display assembly (see figure 6, for instance), wherein the conformal coating (450) has a thickness of about 1 micron to 5 microns ([0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the conformal coating thickness of Lee in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to have the device be protected from damage by an external impact, as taught by Lee ([0104]).
Regarding claim 20, Kim in view of Lu discloses the electronic device of claim 16. However, Kim in view of Lu does not expressly disclose wherein the coating is applied to the frame.
Lee discloses a display assembly (see figures 4-8, for instance), wherein the coating (450) is applied to the frame (410, 420).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the conformal coating to the frame as Lee in the device of Kim. The motivation for doing so would have been to protect the side of the frame by absorbing any such shocks, thereby reducing the likelihood of damage due to external impact, as taught by Lee ([0092]).
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 NATHANAEL R BRIGGS whose telephone number is (571)272-8992. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571)-272-9791. 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.
/NATHANAEL R BRIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871 1/27/2026
Prosecution Insights