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 .
Claim Status
The examiner notes that claims 1-9 are pending and claims 10-20 are withdrawn from consideration.
Specification
The corrections made to specification and abstract in the reply filed on June 23, 2026 are accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 recites the Markush Group “wherein the ions include fluorine ions or boron ion,” on page 1 lines 16-17. The Markush Group renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what elements are included in the Markush Group. The examiner first notes that, “Although the term "Markush claim" is used throughout the MPEP, any claim that recites alternatively usable members, regardless of format, should be treated as a Markush claim.” See MPEP § 2117 I. The examiner next notes that the Markush Group is introduced by an open-ended transitional phrase, “include,” and thus, the Markush Group includes additional unrecited elements. The examiner now notes that “If a Markush grouping requires a material selected from an open list of alternatives (e.g., selected from the group ‘comprising’ or ‘consisting essentially of’ the recited alternatives), the claim should generally be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite because it is unclear what other alternatives are intended to be encompassed by the claim.” See MPEP § 2173.05(h) I.
The examiner notes that applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are persuasive, and thus, the rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn. The examiner also notes that applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are not persuasive because claim 3 does not recite the claim language being argued.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-3, 5-6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2014/0339517) in view of Tong (US 7,109,092) further in view of Qin (US 2019/0044079).
Regarding Claim 1:
Park discloses a display apparatus comprising:
a first substrate (first plastic layer, See fig. 4, ref. no. 1PL, paragraphs 67 and 95-96) including a polymer resin (polyimide, See paragraph 67);
a first barrier layer (first barrier layer, See fig. 4, ref. no. 1BL and paragraph 95) on the first substrate;
a second substrate (second plastic layer, See fig. 4, ref. no. 2PL, paragraphs 67 and 95-96) on the upper surface of the first barrier layer and including a polymer resin (polyimide, See paragraph 67);
a buffer layer (buffer layer formed on second burrier layer, See fig. 4, ref. nos. 110, 2BL, paragraphs 74-75 and 95) on the second substrate;
a first thin-film transistor (thin film transistor, See fig. 2, ref. no. TFT, fig. 4, ref. no. 110, paragraphs 74-75 and 95) on the buffer layer; and
a light-emitting diode (OLED, See fig. 2, ref. nos. OLED, 120, fig. 4, ref. no. 120, paragraphs 77 and 95) electrically connected to the first thin-film transistor.
Park does not disclose a portion of the first barrier layer doped with ions and wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer.
Tong discloses a portion of the first barrier layer doped with ions (implanting fluorine ions into bonding layers on substrates, See fig. 1, ref. no. 11, fig. 2, ref. nos. 201, 204, and col. 4 lines 9-47). (The examiner notes that implanting fluorine ions into an entire layer includes implanting fluorine ions into a portion of the layer that includes an upper surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Park to include implanting fluorine ions into the first barrier layer as taught by Tong in order to increase the strength of the bond between the first barrier layer and the second plastic layer. (See Tong col. 4 lines 46-56.)
The above stated combination of Park and Tong does not disclose wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer.
Qin discloses wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer (a buffer layer having a concentration of ions that gradually decreases from the top side to the bottom side with a non-implantation region at the bottom side, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 102, 104, 1021, 1022, and paragraphs 69-71).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Park and Tong to include wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer as taught by Qin in order to reduce the amount of time spent implanting ions into the first barrier layer by implanting ions into a portion of the first barrier layer rather than the entire first barrier layer and thereby reducing the manufacturing time for the display apparatus.
Regarding Claim 2:
Park discloses wherein the first barrier layer includes at least one of silicon oxide (silicon oxide, See paragraph 70), silicon nitride (silicon nitride, See paragraph 70), or silicon oxynitride.
Regarding Claim 3:
Tong discloses wherein the ions include fluorine ions (fluorine, See col. 4 lines 9-47) or boron ions.
Regarding Claim 5:
Park discloses wherein adhesive force of the first barrier layer is 200 gf/inch or more (an adhesive force of 216.41 gf/inch for a silicon nitride barrier layer, See table 1, paragraphs 103 and 107. The examiner also notes that modifying Park to increase the adhesive strength of the barrier would increase the adhesive force beyond 216.41 gf/inch).
Regarding Claim 6:
Park discloses wherein the first thin-film transistor includes: a first semiconductor layer including a silicon semiconductor (semiconductor layer, See fig. 2, ref. no. 111 and paragraph 74); and a first gate electrode (gate electrode, See fig. 2, ref. no. 113 and paragraph 74) insulated from the first semiconductor layer (there is a gate insulating layer between the gate electrode and the semiconductor layer, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 111, 112, 113, and paragraph 74).
Regarding Claim 9:
Park discloses a second barrier layer (second barrier layer, See figs. 2, 4, ref. no. 2BL, paragraphs 75 and 96) between the second substrate and the buffer layer.
Claims 1-3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2022/0199720) in view of Tong (US 7,109,092) further in view of further in view of Qin (US 2019/0044079).
Regarding Claim 1:
Kim discloses a display apparatus comprising:
a first substrate (first base layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 100a and paragraphs 132-133) including a polymer resin (polymer resin, See paragraph 133);
a first barrier layer (first barrier layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 100b and paragraphs 132-133) on the first substrate;
a second substrate (second base layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 100c and paragraphs 132-133) on the upper surface of the first barrier layer and including a polymer resin (polymer resin, See paragraph 133);
a buffer layer (buffer layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 111 paragraph 169) on the second substrate;
a first thin-film transistor (thin film transistor, See fig. 8, ref. no. T1 and paragraphs 176-177) on the buffer layer; and
a light-emitting diode (OLED2, See fig. 8, ref. nos. OLED2, T1, and paragraph 193) electrically connected to the first thin-film transistor.
Kim does not disclose a portion of the first barrier layer doped with ions and wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer.
Tong discloses a portion of the first barrier layer doped with ions (implanting fluorine ions into bonding layers on substrates, See fig. 1, ref. no. 11, fig. 2, ref. nos. 201, 204, and col. 4 lines 9-47). (The examiner notes that implanting fluorine ions into an entire layer includes implanting fluorine ions into a portion of the layer that includes an upper surface.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Kim to include implanting fluorine ions into the first barrier layer as taught by Tong in order to increase the strength of the bond between the first barrier layer and the second base layer. (See Tong col. 4 lines 46-56)
The above stated combination of Kim and Tong does not disclose wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer.
Qin discloses wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer (a buffer layer having a concentration of ions that gradually decreases from the top side to the bottom side with a non-implantation region at the bottom side, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 102, 104, 1021, 1022, and paragraphs 69-71).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Kim and Tong to include wherein the portion includes a region adjacent to an upper surface of the first barrier layer having a higher concentration of the ions than a remainder of the first barrier layer as taught by Qin in order to reduce the amount of time spent implanting ions into the first barrier layer by ion implanting ions into a portion of the first barrier layer rather than the entire first barrier layer and thereby reducing the manufacturing time for the display apparatus.
Regarding Claim 2:
Kim discloses wherein the first barrier layer includes at least one of silicon oxide (silicon oxide, See paragraph 134), silicon nitride (silicon nitride, See paragraph 134), or silicon oxynitride (silicon oxynitride, See paragraph 134).
Regarding Claim 3:
Tong discloses wherein the ions include fluorine ions (fluorine, See col. 4 lines 9-47) or boron ions.
Regarding Claim 6:
Kim discloses wherein the first thin-film transistor includes: a first semiconductor layer including a silicon semiconductor (first semiconductor layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. Act1 and paragraph 176); and a first gate electrode (first gate electrode, See fig. 8, ref. no. GE1 and paragraph 176) insulated from the first semiconductor layer (there is a first gate insulating layer between the first gate electrode and the first semiconductor layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 112 and paragraph 177).
Regarding Claim 7:
Kim discloses an insulating layer (first insulating layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 113 and paragraph 178) covering the first gate electrode; and a second thin-film transistor (second thin film transistor, See fig. 8, ref. no. T2 and paragraph 176) on the insulating layer and including a second semiconductor layer (second semiconductor layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. Act2 and paragraph 176) and a second gate electrode (second gate electrode, See fig. 8, ref. no. GE1 and paragraph 176) insulated from the second semiconductor layer (there is a second gate insulating layer between the second gate electrode and the second semiconductor layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. 115 and paragraph 169), wherein the second semiconductor layer includes an oxide semiconductor (the second semiconductor layer may include oxide semiconductor, See paragraph 180).
Regarding Claim 8:
Kim discloses a bottom metal layer (bottom metal layer, See fig. 8, ref. no. BML and paragraph 169) between the second substrate and the buffer layer.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2014/0339517), Tong (US 7,109,092), and Qin (US 2019/0044079) further in view of Zhao (US 2021/0036068).
Regarding Claim 4:
The above stated combination of Park, Tong, and Qin discloses the above stated display apparatus.
The above stated combination of Park, Tong, and Qin does not disclose wherein the second substrate includes transparent polyimide.
Zhao discloses a substrate is a flexible transparent polyimide substrate (See fig. 1, ref. no. 1 and paragraph 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Park, Tong, and Qin to include the second substrate include transparent polyimide as taught by Zhao in order to increase light transmittance. (See Zhao paragraph 28.)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2022/0199720), Tong (US 7,109,092), and Qin (US 2019/0044079) further in view of Zhao (US 2021/0036068).
Regarding Claim 4:
The above stated combination of Kim, Tong, and Qin discloses the above stated display apparatus.
The above stated combination of Kim, Tong, and Qin does not disclose wherein the second substrate includes transparent polyimide.
Zhao discloses a substrate is a flexible transparent polyimide substrate (See fig. 1, ref. no. 1 and paragraph 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display apparatus of Kim, Tong, and Qin to include the second substrate include transparent polyimide as taught by Zhao in order to increase light transmittance. (See Zhao paragraph 28.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 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
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 BRETT SQUIRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8214. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:30pm.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/CALEEN O SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/B.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights