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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-6) in the reply filed on 02/06/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/06/2026.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cho (US 2022/0042159).
Regarding claim 1, Cho discloses an apparatus for manufacturing a display device (Fig. 1, numeral 1000), the apparatus comprising: a chamber (1100); a mask assembly (1500) arranged inside the chamber (1100) and facing a display substrate (D); a magnetic force portion (1600) arranged inside the chamber and applying a magnetic force to the mask assembly ([0094]); and a deposition source (1400) which is arranged inside the chamber (1100), faces the mask assembly (1500), and supplies a deposition material that passes through the mask assembly (1500) and is deposited on the display substrate (D) ([0081]), wherein the mask assembly includes: a first mask layer (Fig.2, numeral 400) including a first mask opening (OA); and a second mask layer (300); (200); (100) disposed on the first mask layer (400), the second mask layer includes: a metal layer (300) ([0094]) including a metal opening (300OP) corresponding to the first mask opening (OA); and an inorganic layer (100); (200) including an inorganic opening (OP1) corresponding to the first mask opening (OA) and the metal opening (300OP), and in a plan view (Fig.2), a width of the metal opening (300OP)is greater than a width of the inorganic opening (OP1) (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 2, Cho discloses wherein the inorganic layer (100) covers the metal layer (300) (Figs. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 3, Cho discloses wherein a portion of the metal layer (300) is exposed from the inorganic layer (100) (Fig.4).
Regarding claim 4, Cho discloses wherein the inorganic layer (100); (200) includes: a first inorganic portion (100); and a second inorganic portion disposed on the first inorganic portion (Fig.2; numeral 100), and the inorganic opening includes: a first inorganic opening (OP1) arranged in the first inorganic portion (100); and a second inorganic opening (OP2) arranged in the second inorganic portion (200) ([0087]) (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Cho discloses wherein, in a plan view, an area of the second inorganic opening (OP2) is greater than an area of the first inorganic opening (OP1) (Fig.3).
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) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ju (US 2020/0044010).
Regarding claims 4 and 6, Cho discloses wherein the inorganic layer (100); (200) includes: a first inorganic portion (Fig.4; numeral 200); and a second inorganic portion disposed on the first inorganic portion (100), and the inorganic opening includes: a first inorganic opening (OP2) arranged in the first inorganic portion (200); and a second inorganic opening (OP1) arranged in the second inorganic portion (100)),
Cho does not disclose wherein, in a cross-sectional view, a width of the first inorganic opening gradually decreases in a direction toward the second inorganic portion.
Ju however discloses wherein, in a cross-sectional view, a width of the first inorganic opening (Fig.17, numeral 111) gradually decreases in a direction toward the second inorganic portion (202).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Cho with Ju to have in a cross-sectional view, a width of the first inorganic opening gradually decreases in a direction toward the second inorganic portion for the purpose improving the positional accuracy of the light-emitting unit formed during evaporation and maintaining a good morphology (Ju, [0061]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA SLUTSKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-6 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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/JULIA SLUTSKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891