CTNF 18/487,788 CTNF 97058 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Claims 1-14 are under consideration Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 8-14 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. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the patterns". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the sake of examination, the examiner will interpret “the patterns” as “the second patterns”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-15 AIA Claim s 8, 10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim (US 20190066592 A1, published 2019) . Regarding claims 8, 10, and 14 , Kim teaches a micro-LED display device (panel substrate) comprising of a substrate with a plurality of pixel regions (aligning to the instant sub-pixel regions), a plurality of thin-film transistors disposed on the substrate, an overlying insulating layer, a third insulating layer 260 (instant first optical functional layer) comprising of a first region 262 (first patterns) of the third insulating layer 260 can have a relatively small height and a second region 264 (second patterns) of the third insulating layer 260 can have a relatively large height (alternating arrangement), and a plurality of micro-LEDs disposed over the first region 264 [abstract, 0078, 0081, 0083, fig. 6], reading on instant claim 14 . Kim further teaches the micro-LED display device 200 is exposed to outer (or external) visible-ray without the visible-ray irradiation operation. Since the visible-ray is also blocked by the reflection plate 272 of the micro-LED 270, the hydrophilicity of the second region 264 becomes smaller than the hydrophilicity of the first region 262, where since the visible-ray to the first region is blocked, the hydrophilicity of the first region is substantially maintained such that the adhesion strength between the micro-LED to the first region is substantially maintained [0116, 0123], reading on instant claims 8 and 10 . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Yu (US 20210384379 A1, published 2021) . Regarding claims 1-3 , Yu teaches a display panel (instant panel substrate and display device) including a substrate (including a plurality of sub-pixel regions where a light emitting device is formed in a display panel), a plurality of thin film transistors (driving circuit element 162) arranged in each of the plurality of sub-pixel regions, an interlayer insulating film (insulating layer structure IL) disposed on the thin film transistors, a first optical functional layer (light shielding layer 130 ) located on the interlayer insulating film and blocking transmission and reflection of light, and a second optical functional layer (light guide pillar 140 and positioning adhesive layer 150) [abstract, 0032-0045, figs 1-2]. Examiner notes that a thickness of a portion of the light guiding pilar in the direction perpendicular to the surface of the substrate would be smaller than the thickness of the positioning adhesive layer due to the trapezoidal shaped of the light guiding pillar, reading on instant claim 2 . Yu teaches the light guide pillar 140 (instant second patterns) may be made of a non-sticky photoresist material, and the positioning adhesive layer 150 (instant first patterns) may be made of a sticky photoresist material [0041]. Yu teaches forming the light-emitting device 120 over the instant first patterns, which may be micron light-emitting diodes (micro-LEDs) [0035, fig 2], reading on instant claims 1 and 3 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (US 20210384379 A1, published 2021) as applied to claim s 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Takemoto (JP2007141863A, published 2007, references made to the provided translation) . Regarding claim 4 , Yu teaches the above limitations set forth. Yu is silent to the material composition of their light shielding layer. Takemoto, analogous art, teaches a display device comprising of LEDs [0001] and a hygroscopic layer DCTS which may be a known material as long as it is a material capable of shielding ultraviolet rays having a wavelength of 300 nm to 450 nm, and a substance known as a desiccant (for example, barium oxide, calcium oxide, zeolite or the like as a main component). A composition in which black powder such as carbon black or titanium black is mixed at 1% to 30% can be used [0026]. Takemoto further teaches that according to this embodiment, it is possible to shield without adding any special light shielding means, and to maintain a desired performance (voltage / current characteristics) and to provide a high-quality display device. It can be obtained at low cost [0026]. As both Takemoto and Yu teach display devices comprising of LEDs, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that to use the light-shielding composition of Takemoto in forming the light shielding layer of Yu for the benefits disclosed by Takemoto, reading on instant claim 4 . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 5-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Independent claim 1 discloses a panel substrate comprising: a base substrate including a plurality of sub-pixel areas; a plurality of thin-film transistors disposed over a corresponding one of the plurality of sub-pixel areas; an interlayer insulating film disposed over the thin-film transistor; a first optical functional layer disposed on the interlayer insulating film so as to prevent transmission and reflection of light ; a second optical functional layer disposed on the first optical functional layer, wherein the second optical functional layer has first patterns and second patterns, wherein the first patterns have first adhesiveness while the second patterns have second adhesiveness less adhesive than the first adhesiveness; and a plurality of micro-LEDs respectively disposed on the first patterns of the second optical functional layer. Dependent claim 5 depends on independent claim 1, and further discloses the second optical functional layer includes an adhesive composite whose adhesiveness is removed when light is irradiated thereto . A search did not find the claimed invention. The closest prior arts Yu and Kim , as disclosed above, teach similar products. However, Yu fails to teach an adhesive composite whose adhesiveness is removed when light is irradiated thereto . Kim fails to teach a first optical functional layer disposed on the interlayer insulating film so as to prevent transmission and reflection of light . Neither Kim, Yu, nor the prior art in general provide sufficient motivation to make it obvious to modify their inventions to arrive at the instantly claimed invention. Claims 6-7 depend on claim 5 . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2261. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5:30 EST. 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, Keith Walker can be reached at (571) 272-3458. 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. /Alexander N. Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 2 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 3 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 4 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 5 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 6 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 7 Art Unit: 1737 Application/Control Number: 18/487,788 Page 8 Art Unit: 1737
Prosecution Insights