DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
General Remarks
2. 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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection.
3. When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with paragraph numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist the examiner in locating appropriate paragraphs.
4. Per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable
interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments, see Rejections Under Section 102 and Section 103, filed 5/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Son, Sung-Sik et al. (Pub No. US 20210204454 A1) (hereinafter, Son) in view of Awano, Masaharu (Pub No. CN 105992483 A) (hereinafter, Awano).
6. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 17 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.
For above mentioned reasons, the rejection is deemed proper and considered final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. Claims 1, 14-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son, Sung-Sik et al. (Pub No. US 20210204454 A1) (hereinafter, Son), and further in view of Awano, Masaharu (Pub No. CN 105992483 A) (hereinafter, Awano).
Son, Figs 4-5: Cross-sections of display apparatuses
PNG
media_image1.png
368
206
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
294
363
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 1, (Currently Amended) Son teaches a display apparatus, comprising:
a display panel (Panel; 110; Fig 4; ¶[0040]);
a cover member (Cover member; 180; Fig 4; ¶[0040]) disposed on a front surface (Panel 110 on rear surface of cover member 180; ¶[0040]) of the display panel;
a set frame (Heat dissipation sheet/Guide plate; 400/200; Figs 3A/5; ¶[0062]) arranged on a back surface (Rear surface of 180; Fig 4) of the cover member, the set frame including a fastening member (Guide plate; 200; Fig 5; ¶[0062]);
a core plate (Intermediate plate; 700; Fig 5; ¶[0062]) arranged on a back surface (Rear surface of 200; Fig 5) of the set frame, the core plate including a coupling block (Coupling portion; 220; Fig 5; ¶[0062]);
a fastener (Heat-conductive tape; 500; Fig 5; ¶[0062]) coupled to the coupling block and the fastening member to couple (Guide plate 200 couples heat dissipation sheet 400 to the intermediate plate 700; Fig 5) the set frame to the core plate; and
a stress distribution device (Bent extended portion; 210; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) arranged on the fastening member, the stress distribution device configured to disperse stress (Absorb vibrations/shocks between panel 110 and intermediate plate 700; ¶[0068]) applied to the cover member as a result of the coupling of the set frame to the core plate with the fastener,
However, Son does not teach wherein the core plate is coupled to the set frame via the fastener inserted through the coupling block and the fastening member.
In the same field of endeavor, Awano teaches wherein the core plate (Base portion of bracket; 121; Fig 17; ¶[0066]; Note: See Awano - Description for the correct paragraph number) is coupled to the set frame (Chassis; 8; Fig 17; ¶[0066]) via the fastener (Screw; 17; Fig 17; ¶[0066]) inserted through the coupling block (Convex portion; 128; Fig 17; ¶[0066]) and the fastening member (Space occupied by screw 17 (not labelled); Fig 17).
Awano, Fig 17: Bracket for electronic device comprising fastener, core plate, and frame
PNG
media_image3.png
282
411
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used the core plate which is coupled to the set frame via the fastener inserted through the coupling block and the fastening member, as taught by Awano, with the semiconductor device as taught by Son. One would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because the fastener of Awano, i.e. a screw, provides advantages over a conductive tape such as fastening the core plate and set frame to be raised above the display panel to protect the display panel from surrounding components, whereas an adhesive tape acting as the fastening member may cause unwanted damage to the display panel, therefore electronic device reliability may be improved (Awano; ¶[0063]).
Re Claim 14, (Currently Amended) Son teaches a display apparatus, comprising:
a display panel (Panel; 110; Fig 4; ¶[0040]);
a cover (Cover member; 180; Fig 4; ¶[0040]) disposed on the display panel;
a frame (Heat dissipation sheet/Guide plate; 400/200; Figs 3A/5; ¶[0062]) on the cover, the frame including a fastening member (Guide plate; 200; Fig 5; ¶[0062]);
a fastener (Heat-conductive tape; 500; Fig 5; ¶[0062]) configured to be received by the fastening member to couple (Guide plate 200 couples heat dissipation sheet 400 to the intermediate plate 700; Fig 5) the frame to the cover;
a stress distribution device (Bent extended portion and cavity below with distance (d); 210/d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) on the fastening member, the stress distribution device having a width (Bent extended portion 210 has a greater width than heat-conductive tape 500; Fig 5; ¶¶[0062, 0068]) that is greater than a width of the fastening member to disperse stress (Absorb vibrations/shocks between panel 110 and intermediate plate 700; ¶[0068]) applied to the cover in response to the coupling of the frame to the cover via the fastener.
However, Son does not teach a core plate disposed on the frame, the core plate including a coupling block aligned with the fastening member; and
wherein the core plate is coupled to the set frame via the fastener inserted through the coupling block and fastening member.
In the same field of endeavor, Awano teaches a core plate (Second portion of bracket; 22; Fig 7; ¶[0066]; Note: See Awano - Description for the correct paragraph number) disposed on the frame (Chassis; 8; Fig 7; ¶[0066]: Note: Chassis may be interpreted as a frame and also as the set frame), the core plate including a coupling block (First and second step portions; 28A/28B; Fig 7; ¶[0068]) aligned with the fastening member (Space occupied by screw 17 (not labelled); Fig 7); and
wherein the core plate is coupled to the set frame (Chassis/First fixing portion; 8/23; Fig 7; ¶[0076]) via the fastener (Screw; 17; Fig 7; ¶[0066]) inserted through the coupling block and fastening member.
Awano, Fig 7: Bracket for electronic device comprising of core plate coupled to a set frame via a fastener
PNG
media_image4.png
338
453
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have used a core plate disposed on the frame, the core plate including a coupling block aligned with the fastening member, wherein the core plate is coupled to the set frame via the fastener inserted through the coupling block and fastening member, as taught by Awano, with the semiconductor device as taught by Son. One would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because the fastener of Awano, i.e. a screw, provides advantages over a conductive tape such as fastening the core plate, set frame and frame to be raised above the display panel to protect the display panel from surrounding components, whereas an adhesive tape acting as the fastening member may cause unwanted damage to the display panel, therefore electronic device reliability may be improved (Awano; ¶[0063]).
Son, Fig 3A: Perspective view of rear surface of display apparatus including set frame
PNG
media_image5.png
431
303
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 15, (Currently Amended) Son teaches the display apparatus of claim 14, wherein the frame (Heat dissipation sheet/Guide plate; 400/200; Figs 3A/5; ¶[0062]) is a set frame (Guide plate; 200; Figs 3A/5; ¶[0062]).
Re Claim 17, (Original) Son teaches the display apparatus of claim 15, wherein the stress distribution device (Bent extended portion and cavity below with distance (d); 210/d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) includes an expansion member (Bent extended portion and cavity below with distance (d); 210/d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]).
However, Son does not teach a hollow cavity inside the expansion member.
In the same field of endeavor, Awano teaches a hollow cavity (Gap; G; Fig 17; ¶[0066]; Note: See attached disclosure of Awano for paragraph numbers) inside the expansion member (Chassis and base portion; 8/121; Fig 17; ¶[0066]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined the hollow cavity inside the expansion member, as taught by Awano, with the semiconductor device as taught by Son. One would have been motivated to do this with a reasonable expectation of success because inserting a hollow cavity inside the expansion member (between bent extension portion 210 and coupling portion 220; Fig 5) would provide additional absorption to vibrations that would be transferred between intermediate plate and the guide plate of Son (¶[0071]).
Re Claim 18, (Original) Son teaches a display apparatus of claim 15, wherein the hollow cavity (Cavity below bent extended portion 210 with distance (d); d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) is arranged around a location (Above cover member 180; Fig 5) on the cover aligned with the fastener (Heat-conductive tape; 500; Fig 5; ¶[0062]), the hollow cavity configured to disperse stress (Per ¶[0071] When the spacing distance d is greater than 2 mm, the bent section of the bent extended portion 210 is lengthened, and thus shock-absorbing performance may be deteriorated) away from the location on the cover (Cover member; 180; Fig 4; ¶[0040]) aligned with the fastener (Heat-conductive tape; 500; Fig 5; ¶[0062]).
Re Claim 19, (Original) Son teaches the display apparatus of claim 17, wherein the stress distribution device (Bent extended portion/cavity below with distance (d)/internal components adjacent to coupling portion 220 (not labelled); 210/d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) further includes least one support member (Internal components adjacent to coupling block 220 (not labelled); Fig 5), the at least one support member on the expansion member (Bent extended portion and cavity below with distance (d); 210/d; Fig 5; ¶[0068]) and on the fastening member (Guide plate; 200; Fig 5; ¶[0062]).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 2-13 and 20 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.
11. Regarding claim 2, the closest prior art Son, Sung-Sik et al. (Pub No. US 20210204454 A1) (hereinafter, Son) and Nakamura, Daiki et al. (Pub No. WO 2018178797 A1) (hereinafter, Nakamura) either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious
“The display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the stress distribution device further includes:
an expansion member arranged at a lower portion of the fastening member and extending outward from the fastening member; and
a stress-free space inside the expansion member and in communication with a fastening hole in the coupling block,”
in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as claimed and defined by applicant.
In the instant case, re claim 2, Son teaches an expansion member in space comprising of distance d (Fig 5) which may anticipate the stress-free space of claim 2, however, the space of distance d does not comprise of being in communication with a fastening hole in the coupling block (Coupling portion; 220) disposed above the fastening member (Guide plate, 200).
Furthermore, referring to Fig. 10C, Nakamura teaches a stress-free space (Guide portion; 502a), wherein “[the] guide portion is provided between a printed circuit board and a flexible display panel to prevent breakage by overload at a bend portion of the flexible printed circuit board” (¶[0027]). The stress-free space, however, is not located nor in communication with a fastening hole in a coupling block, therefore to combine the elements of Nakamura with that of Son would not render a predictable result, as neither reference has a stress-free space which in communication with a coupling block of any kind.
12. Regarding claim 20, the closest prior art Son, Sung-Sik et al. (Pub No. US 20210204454 A1) (hereinafter, Son) and Awano, Masaharu et al. (Pub No. CN 105992483 A) (hereinafter, Awano) either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious
“The display apparatus of claim 19, wherein the at least one support member is a plurality of support braces spaced from each other radially around the fastening member,”
in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as claimed and defined by applicant.
In the instant case, re claim 20, combining the fastening member (Chassis; 8; Fig 17) of Awano with the fastening member (Guide plate; 200; Fig 5; ¶[0062]) of Son would not be obvious to try, as the fastening member of Son must connect the frame to the cover, would not require support braces extending radially around it due to the design of the device (Fig 5), wherein the fastening member occupies the complete space of the surrounding components already.
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 TIMOTHY EDWARD DUREN whose telephone number is (703)756-1426. The examiner can normally be reached 07:30 - 17:00 PST.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/T.E.D./
Examiner
Art Unit 2817
/ELISEO RAMOS FELICIANO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights