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
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/1/2026 has been entered. Currently, claims 1, 51 and 55-85 are pending.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 57 be found allowable, claim 60 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 69 uses the terms “first bending portion”, “bending portion” and “second bending portion”. From the structure of the claim, it appears the term “bending portion” refers to the “first bending portion” and not another bending portion. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 51 and 55-85 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.
Regarding claim 1, the specification fails to provide support for the limitation “the first conductive layer is configured into: a first touch sensor element …comprising first sensing regions electrically connected to each other, and a second touch sensor element …comprising second sensing regions electrically connected to each other,… wherein one of the first or second conductive layers forms the first or second sensing regions in the first and second touch sensor elements, and the other of the first or second conductive layers forms a bridge connecting a plurality of the first or second sensor regions”.
Regarding claim 69, the specification fails to provide support for the amended limitation “the first conductive layer configured into: a first touch sensor element …comprising first sensing regions electrically connected to each other, and a second touch sensor element …comprising second sensing regions electrically connected to each other,… wherein one of the first or second conductive layers forms the first and second sensing regions in the first and second touch sensor elements, and the other of the first or second conductive layers forms a bridge connecting a plurality of the first or second sensor regions”.
The underlined limitations of claims 1 and 69 do not find support in the disclosure as follows:
Both claims 1 and 69 initially recite “a first conductive layer disposed on the substrate, a first insulating layer disposed on the first conductive layer; and a second conductive layer disposed on the first insulating layer”. These elements appear to map in Fig. 2 as follows: first conductive layer maps to second touch electrode 150, first insulating layer maps to 140, and second conductive layer maps to first touch electrode 120. Note that Fig. 8 does not disclose the stacking of the conductive layers.
Subsequently, both claims 1 and 69 recite “the first conductive layer configured into: a first touch sensor element …comprising first sensing regions…, and a second touch sensor element…comprising second sensing regions”. These elements appear to map in Fig. 8 as follows: the first touch sensor element is TP1, the first sensing regions are P1, the second touch sensor element is TP2, the second sensing regions are P2. In the disclosure, the first sensing regions P1 are connected by a bridge B1A/B1B that overlaps a “neck” B2 of the second touch sensor element TP2 and the bridges B1A/B1B are separated from the neck by an insulator IN.
The disclosure fails to explain on what layers are TP1 and TP2 formed. However, following the language in the specification, TP1 and 120 are both referred to as “first touch electrode”, and TP2 and 150 are both referred to as “second touch electrode”. Thus, one of ordinary skill would assume sensor TP1 (Fig. 8) is formed in layer 120 (Fig. 2) and TP2 (Fig. 8) is formed in layer 150 (Fig. 2). Consequently, the disclosure fails to provide support for wherein one of the first or second conductive layers forms the first and second sensing regions in the first and second touch sensor elements as necessary for claim 69.
The disclosure also does not provide support for the bridges B1A/B1B formed on the other of the first 150 or second conductive layer 120, partly because the disclosure is silent regarding on what layer are the bridges B1A/B1B formed, it only discloses that they are formed insulated by an insulator IN from the neck B2, but the disclosure does not explain whether B1A/B1B are formed on the same layer as P1, the same layer as P2 or a different layer. As such, the disclosure fails to provide support for “the other of the first or second conductive layers forms a bridge connecting a plurality of the first or second sensor regions” as necessary for claims 1 and 69.
On the Remarks filed 4/1/2026 pg. 10, Applicant points to support in the original specification par. 55 and states that one skilled in the art would reasonably conclude that the bridge between touch sensor elements can then be formed in whichever conductive layer allows for a jumper, and thus can be formed in either the upper or lower conducting layer. This is not found persuasive, the bridge can also be formed in a layer separate from the first touch electrode layer or the second touch electrode layer, and it is not inherent from the disclosure that the Applicant or Inventor intended the bridge to be formed in the other of the first or second conductive layer.
Dependent claims 51, 55-68 and 70-85 inherit the issues of their corresponding independent claim 1 or 69.
Claim 67 recites “wherein the shape of at least one of the first or second sensing region has a geometric pattern other than a diamond, rectangle, hexagon, octagon, circle, or oval pattern”. The negative limitation appears to cover every shape that has been invented or will be invented except for the listed ones, but the disclosure does not exemplify any other shape other than the ones listed. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art is unable to ascertain what shape was in possession of the inventors that meets the negative limitation.
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.
Claims 1, 56, 61-62 and 66-68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. in US 2016/0170523 (hereinafter Park) in view of Han in US 2017/0147103 (hereinafter Han).
Regarding claim 1, Park disclose an electronic device (Park’s par. 71), comprising: a substrate (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 40: see 401) comprising a first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 70: TA2) and a first main portion (Park’s Fig. 1: top portion of TA1) and a second main portion (Park’s Fig. 1: bottom portion of TA1) connected to the first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 1), the combination of the first main portion and the second main portion and the first bending portion comprising a continuous display region (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 8, 79); a display layer (Park’s par. 5, 8, 79: display); a first conductive layer disposed on the substrate (Park’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer 410/420); a first insulating layer disposed on the first conductive layer (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 59: see 430); and a second conductive layer disposed on the first insulating layer (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 56: connection part 412), wherein in a cross-sectional view of the electronic device (Park’s Fig. 4), the first conductive layer is fabricated as a different layer from the second conductive layer (Park’s Fig. 4) on the first bending portion of the substrate (Park’s Figs. 4-5: see 412 in TA2), further wherein the first and second conductive layers are configured to perform a touch sensing function of the electronic device in a touch region (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 38: sense contact in touch region TA), further wherein the first conductive layer (Park’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer 410/420) is configured into:
a first touch sensor element extending in a first direction and comprising first sensing regions electrically connected to each other (Park’s Figs. 1-2 and par. 56: see 410 extending in the x direction with regions 410 electrically connected [by bridge 412]), and a second touch sensor element extending in a second direction and comprising second sensing regions electrically connected to each other (Park’s Figs. 1-2 and par. 56: see 420 extending in the y direction with regions 420 electrically connected by 422), further wherein the first and second direction are substantially perpendicular to each other (Park’s Fig. 2), the second direction (Park’s Figs. 2, 5: y direction) being substantially parallel to a bending axis of the bending portion (Park’s Fig. 5),
further wherein one of the first or second conductive layers forms the first or second sensing regions in the first and second touch sensor elements (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer forming first and second sensing regions 410 and 420), and the other of the first or second conductive layers forms a bridge connecting a plurality of the first or second sensing regions (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 58: see 410), and further wherein in the first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 5: see TA2), the bridge having portions which extend in a third direction different from the first direction and the second direction (Park’s Figs. 3, 5 and par. 76-77: see direction m with angle B from x); further wherein a transmission line (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 64: wires 411/412) electrically connects one of the first and second touch sensor elements to a driving unit (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 65: 410/420 to touch driver), further wherein the transmission line (Park’s Fig. 1: wires 411/412) is comprised of one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s par. 45).
Park fails to disclose wherein the first main portion and the second main portion are substantially plane and, when bent, can be faced to each other, or the transmission line having a segment which extends in a fourth direction which is different from the first direction and the second direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor of bendable displays, Han discloses a bending touch display where a first main portion and a second main portion are substantially plane (Han’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 80) and, when bent, can be faced to each other (Han’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 41), and where the transmission lines have segments extending in a fourth direction which is different from the vertical or horizontal (Han’s Fig. 3A: see fanout PO1/PO2 segments of TL1/TL2 which extend in a diagonal direction different for DR2 and DR3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park includes another main portion next to the bending portion such that the main portions face each other (as taught by Han’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 41), and that the transmission lines include a fanout portion extending in a diagonal direction (Han’s Fig. 3A), in order to obtain the benefit of multiple states, such as folded, wrapped or bent (Han’s par. 5), and the predictable result of conventional geometry of wiring to connect to a pad (Han’s Fig. 3A and par. 73: fanout).
By doing such combination, Park in view of Han disclose an electronic device (Park’s par. 71 and Han’s Figs. 1, 4), comprising:
a substrate (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 40: see 401) comprising a first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 70: TA2 equivalent to BF portions of Figs. 4 per par. 80) and a first main portion (Park’s Fig. 1: TA1 equivalent to top NBF portions of Fig. 4) and a second main portion (upon combination, Park’s Fig. 1 includes another fixed portion TA1 to equivalent to bottom NBF portions of Fig. 4) connected to the first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 1 and Han’s Figs. 4), the combination of the first main portion and the second main portion and the first bending portion comprising a continuous display region (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 8, 79 and Han’s Figs. 4 per par. 80);
a display layer (Park’s par. 5, 8, 79: display);
a first conductive layer disposed on the substrate (Park’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer 410/420);
a first insulating layer disposed on the first conductive layer (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 59: see 430); and
a second conductive layer disposed on the first insulating layer (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 56: connection part 412),
wherein in a cross-sectional view of the electronic device (Park’s Fig. 4), the first conductive layer is fabricated as a different layer from the second conductive layer (Park’s Fig. 4) on the first bending portion of the substrate (Park’s Figs. 4-5: see 412 in TA2),
further wherein the first and second conductive layers are configured to perform a touch sensing function of the electronic device in a touch region (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 38: sense contact in touch region TA),
further wherein the first conductive layer (Park’s Figs. 1, 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer 410/420) is configured into:
a first touch sensor element extending in a first direction and comprising first sensing regions electrically connected to each other (Park’s Figs. 1-2 and par. 56: see 410 extending in the x direction with regions 410 electrically connected [by bridge 412]), and
a second touch sensor element extending in a second direction and comprising second sensing regions electrically connected to each other (Park’s Figs. 1-2 and par. 56: see 420 extending in the y direction with regions 420 electrically connected by 422),
further wherein the first and second direction are substantially perpendicular to each other (Park’s Fig. 2), the second direction (Park’s Figs. 2, 5: y direction) being substantially parallel to a bending axis of the bending portion (Park’s Fig. 5),
further wherein one of the first or second conductive layers forms the first or second sensing regions in the first and second touch sensor elements (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 42: touch electrode layer forming first and second sensing regions 410 and 420), and the other of the first or second conductive layers forms a bridge connecting a plurality of the first or second sensing regions (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 58: see 410), and
further wherein in the first bending portion (Park’s Fig. 5: see TA2 equivalent to BF portions of Han’s Figs. 4), the bridge having portions which extend in a third direction different from the first direction and the second direction (Park’s Figs. 3, 5 and par. 76-77: see direction m with angle B from x),
further wherein the first main portion and the second main portion are substantially plane (Han’s Figs. 4 and par. 80: top and bottom portions NBF) and, when bent, can be faced to each other (Han’s Figs. 4 and par. 41);
further wherein a transmission line (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 64: wires 411/412) electrically connects one of the first and second touch sensor elements to a driving unit (Park’s Fig. 1 and par. 65: 410/420 to touch driver), the transmission line having a segment which extends in a fourth direction which is different from the first direction and the second direction (Park’s Fig. 1: wires 411/412 are equivalent to TL1/TL2 in Han’s Fig. 3A and include fanouts PO1/PO2 in a diagonal direction different than the vertical and horizontal for the electrodes TE), further wherein the transmission line (Park’s Fig. 1: wires 411/412) is comprised of one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s par. 45).
Regarding claim 56, Park in view of Han further disclose wherein one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) is made from the same material layer as an electrode layer in the display layer (Han’s par. 64: RX/TX made of ITO, par. 105, 125: anode/cathode made of ITO), and wherein the first and second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) are not directly electrically connected to a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2 which drives the OEL per par. 96, 85 and Fig. 5A).
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Regarding claim 61, Park in view of Han fail to disclose wherein the fourth direction is the same as the third direction.
However, both directions are shown as diagonals (Han’s Fig. 3A: see diagonal from bottom-left at PD1 to top-right at TL1 of fanout PO1) (Park’s Fig. 3: see direction m with angle B from x which goes from bottom-left to top-right), and there are only two options for the directions: they can be the same or different. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that the fourth direction (Han’s Fig. 3A: diagonal from bottom-left at PD1 to top-right at TL1 of fanout PO1) is the same as the third direction (Park’s Fig. 3: see direction m with angle B from x which goes from bottom-left to top-right), in order to obtain the predictable result of a known direction of laying interconnections.
Regarding claim 62, Park in view of Han disclose wherein the fourth direction (Han’s Fig. 3A: see diagonal from bottom-right at PD2 to top-left at TL2 of fanout PO2) is different than the third direction (Park’s Fig. 3: see direction m with angle B from x which goes from bottom-left to top-right).
Regarding claim 66, Park in view of Han disclose wherein the shape of at least one of the first or second sensing region has a diamond, rectangle, hexagon, octagon, circle, or oval pattern (Park’s Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 67, Park in view of Han disclose wherein the shape of at least one of the first or second sensing region has a geometric pattern other than a diamond, rectangle, hexagon, octagon, circle, or oval pattern (Park’s Fig. 3 and par. 53: quadrangle which protrusion).
Regarding claim 68, Park in view of Han disclose wherein the shape of at least one of the first or second sensing region has a geometric pattern consisting of more than four interior angles and more than four sides (Park’s Fig. 3 and par. 53: sensor 410 has a shape with eight sides and at least six interior angles).
Claims 51, 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Han, in further view of An et al. in US 2014/0253823 (hereinafter An823).
Regarding claim 51, Park fails to disclose wherein the touch region is larger than the display region, further comprising a second insulating layer disposed between the substrate and the first conductive layer, the first conductive layer being fabricated directly on the second insulating layer without using adhesive thereby forming a touch on display structure on the substrate, wherein the second insulating layer comprises at least two inorganic layers and one organic layer, the organic layer being between two of the at least two inorganic layers.
However, Han does disclose a second insulating layer disposed between the substrate and the first touch electrode (Han’s Figs. 2, 5C and par. 125-157: sealing layer SL between substrate FB and first touch electrode Tx, where TX makes contact with SL [without adhesive]) , Han also discloses that the sealing layer SL includes at least one of an organic layer or an inorganic layer (Han’s par. 125) and discloses an insulator with two inorganic layers sandwiching an organic layer (Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 128).
Therefore, it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to form the second insulating layer directly on the display (as taught by Han) and that the display sealing layer has a configuration of two inorganic and one organic layers (as taught by Han), in order to obtain the predictable result of an in-cell type display (Park’s par. 8) and the benefit of an insulating layer that may prevent the propagation of cracks when bending (Han’s par. 52).
Still, Park in view o Han fail to disclose wherein the touch region is larger than the display region.
Nevertheless, in the same field of endeavor of touch displays, An823 discloses wherein the touch region is larger than the display region (An823’s par. 51).
Thus, it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park in view of Han’s touch region is larger than the display region (as taught by An823’s par. 51), in order to obtain the benefit of detecting touch events in an area that is broader than the display area (An823’s par. 51).
By doing such combination, Park in view of Han and An823 disclose:
wherein the touch region is larger than the display region (An823’s par. 51), further comprising a second insulating layer (upon combination, Park’s Fig. 1 display includes a sealing layer SL between the display DP and the touch sensor TSU per Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125) disposed between the substrate and the first conductive layer (Han’s Fig. 5C: see SL between substrate FB and TX of Figs. 2B-2C per par. 126, where TX is equivalent to Park’s Figs. 1 layer 410/420), the first conductive layer being fabricated directly on the second insulating layer without using adhesive thereby forming a touch on display structure on the substrate (Han’s par. 126: touch sensing unit TSU [TX of Figs. 2B-2C] disposed and making contact with SL), wherein the second insulating layer comprises at least two inorganic layers and one organic layer (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: SL includes upon combination IOL2, SAM1, and IOL1 per Fig. 2B and par. 47), the organic layer being between two of the at least two inorganic layers (Han’s Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 55, Park in view of Han further disclose wherein one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) is made from the same material layer as an electrode layer in the display layer (Han’s par. 64: RX/TX made of ITO, par. 105, 125: anode/cathode made of ITO).
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Park in view of Han fail to disclose wherein the first and second conductive layers are electrically connected to a touch sensing control/driving unit which is different than the driving unit which performs the display control/driving function in the continuous display region.
However, in the same field of endeavor of touch displays, An823 discloses the touch sensor connected to a touch driving unit (An823’s Fig. 2B and par. 58-59: driving chip on film 420 for driving touch panel) which is different than the driving unit which performs the display driving (An823’s Fig. 2B and par. 64-65: display driver on film 410).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park in view of Han include two drivers as described by An823, in order to obtain the predictable result of a known manner of mounting drivers for touch and display. (An283’s Fig. 2B).
By doing such combination, Han in view of Park and An283 disclose:
wherein the first and second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 equivalent to touchscreen 515 in An823’s Fig. 2B per par. 58) are electrically connected to a touch sensing control/driving unit (An823’s Fig. 2B and par. 58-59: driving chip on film 420 for driving touch panel) which is different than the driving unit which performs the display control/driving function in the continuous display region (An823’s Fig. 2B and par. 64-65: display driver on film 410).
Claims 57-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Han, in further view of Yamazaki et al. in US 2010/0277443 (hereinafter Yamazaki).
Regarding claims 57 and 60, Park in view of Han further disclose a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2). It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Han in view of Park fail to disclose wherein one of the first or second conductive layers is made from the same material layer as a gate layer in a TFT.
However, in the same field of endeavor of touch panels, Yamazaki discloses the gate layer in a display TFT made of ITO (Yamazaki’s par. 246-247, 267).
Therefore, it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park in view of Han’s gate of TFT2 (Han’s Fig. 5A) is made of ITO (as taught by Yamazaki), in order to obtain the predictable result of a known material for the gate (Yamazaki’s par. 267).
By doing such combination, Park in view of Han and Yamazaki disclose:
wherein one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) is made from the same material layer as a gate layer in a TFT (Han’s Fig. 5A: gate of TFT2 which upon combination is made of ITO per Yamazaki’s par. 267) which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2).
Regarding claim 58, Park in view of Han further disclose a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2). It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Han in view of Park fail to disclose wherein one of the first or second conductive layers is made from the same material layer as a source layer in a TFT.
However, in the same field of endeavor of touch panels, Yamazaki discloses the source layer in a display TFT made of ITO (Yamazaki’s par. 246-247, 267).
Therefore, it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park in view of Han’s source of TFT2 (Han’s Fig. 5A) is made of ITO (as taught by Yamazaki), in order to obtain the predictable result of a known material for the source (Yamazaki’s par. 267).
By doing such combination, Park in view of Han and Yamazaki disclose:
wherein one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) is made from the same material layer as a source layer in a TFT (Han’s Fig. 5A: source of TFT2 which upon combination is made of ITO per Yamazaki’s par. 267) which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2).
Regarding claim 59, Park in view of Han further disclose a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2). It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Han in view of Park fail to disclose wherein one of the first or second conductive layers is made from the same material layer as a drain layer in a TFT.
However, in the same field of endeavor of touch panels, Yamazaki discloses the drain layer in a display TFT made of ITO (Yamazaki’s par. 246-247, 267).
Therefore, it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park in view of Han’s drain of TFT2 (Han’s Fig. 5A) is made of ITO (as taught by Yamazaki), in order to obtain the predictable result of a known material for the drain (Yamazaki’s par. 267).
By doing such combination, Park in view of Han and Yamazaki disclose:
wherein one of the first or second conductive layers (Park’s Fig. 4 and par. 43: 410/420 or 412 made of ITO and equivalent to Rx or Tx in Han’s Figs. 2 and par. 64) is made from the same material layer as a drain layer in a TFT (Han’s Fig. 5A: drain of TFT2 which upon combination is made of ITO per Yamazaki’s par. 267) which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5A), and wherein the first and second conductive layers are not directly electrically connected to the TFT (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including Tx/Rx are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2).
Claims 63-65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Han, in further view of Kwak et al. in US 2014/0217397 (hereinafter Kwak).
Regarding claim 63, Park in view of Han disclose wherein the transmission line is comprised of a first trace portion and a second trace portion (Park’s Fig. 1, Han’s Fig. 3A).
Park in view of Han fail to disclose each of the first trace portion and a second trace portion being in a separate conductive layer, the first trace portion and the second trace portion being electrically connected by a connection portion.
However, in the same field of endeavor of touch panels, Kwak discloses a transmission line (Kwak’s Figs. 1 and par. 66: wire 102A) comprised of a first trace portion (Kwak’s Fig. 1B and par. 66: see 121A) and a second trace portion (Kwak’s Fig. 1B and par. 66: see 122A), each of the first trace portion and a second trace portion being in a separate conductive layer (Kwak’s Fig. 1B and par. 67: multi-layer), the first trace portion and the second trace portion being electrically connected by a connection portion (Kwak’s Fig. 1B: 121A and 122A connected by the surfaces in contact).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that Park in view of Han’s transmission lines have the multi-layer structure as described by Kwak, in order to obtain the benefit of minimizing cracks upon bending (Kwak’s par. 67).
Regarding claim 64, Park in view of Han and Kwak further disclose wherein the first trace portion is made from the same material layer (Kwak’s par. 67: wire 120A formed of Ag, Au, Al, equivalent to TL in Han’s Fig. 3A and 411/421 in Park’s Fig. 1) as an electrode layer in the display layer (Han’s par. 105, 121-122: anode/cathode or auxiliary electrodes formed of Ag, Au, Al), and wherein the first trace portion is not directly electrically connected to a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Han’s Fig. 5C and par. 125: the touch sensor including TL are over the sealing layer SL, and as shown not in contact with SM2 which forms TFT2 which drives the OEL per par. 96, 85 and Fig. 5A).
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Han in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Regarding claim 65, Park in view of Han and Kwak further disclose wherein the first trace portion is made from the same material layer (Kwak’s par. 67: wire 120A formed of A or Al, equivalent to TL in Han’s Fig. 3A and 411/421 in Park’s Fig. 1) as a source or drain layer in the display layer (Kwak’s Fig. 2A and par. 112: drain and source formed of Au or Al), and wherein the first trace portion is not directly electrically connected to a TFT which drives a light emitting diode structure (Kwak’s Fig. 2A and par. 102: see 220A not in contact with TFT 240A which drives OLED 250A).
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Park includes the driving layers as described by Kwak in order to obtain the predictable result of a known display.
Allowable Subject Matter
No prior art was found to anticipate or make obvious ALL limitations of claim 69. However, due to the outstanding 112a rejection, the claim was not allowed.
Miyake et al. in US 10,372,163 discloses three main portions and two bending areas (Figs. 1A), but fails to disclose “further wherein the second and third main portions bend in the same direction, each capable of bending so that the second main portion and the third main portion each are substantially faced to the first main portion and wherein each of the first and second bending portions has a different radius of curvature when the second and the third main portions are bent” as necessary for claim 69.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Liliana Cerullo whose telephone number is (571)270-5882. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM to 3PM MT.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. 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.
/LILIANA CERULLO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights