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
The previous restriction requirement has been withdrawn in view of the following.
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1 through 6, drawn to a product made of a display panel, classified in H10H20/83.
II. Claims 7 through 20, drawn to an apparatus of a bonding temperature measurement device, classified in H10W72/07141.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions of Groups II and I are related as apparatus and product made, respectively. The inventions in this relationship are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the apparatus as claimed is not an obvious apparatus for making the product and the apparatus can be used for making a materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different apparatus (MPEP § 806.05(g)). In this case, the product of Group I can be made by a materially different apparatus, such as one that does not have a laser, or laser beam.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; and/or,
(b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
If applicant elects the invention of Group II, then this application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
Species II-A, Claims 7 through 17; and
Species II-B, Claims 18 through 20.
The species are independent or distinct because:
Species II-A is directed to one embodiment disclosed in at least paragraph [0012] of their specification.
Species II-B is directed to another embodiment disclosed in at least paragraph [0023] of their specification.
In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable.
Currently, within the invention of Group II, there are no generic claims.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
(i) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries); and/or,
(ii) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with KYLE W. KELLAR, Attorney of Record, on July 29, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group II, Species II-A, Claims 7 through 17. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action.
Claims 1 through 6 and 18 through 20 have been withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the language includes a phrase that can be implied, e.g. “The present disclosure…”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claims 7 through 17 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.
In Claim 7, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “laser pressurizing head module…the first dummy electrode” (lines 2-5). A “laser pressurizing head module” can imply one single structure. However, the use of one single structure to carry out two functions of “for pressurizing light emitting elements respectively on a pixel electrode and a first dummy electrode of a substrate” and “for irradiating a laser beam to bond the light emitting elements to the pixel electrode and the first dummy electrode”, is misleading and contradicts the specification. Clearly the specification discloses two separate structural elements to carry out each function, respectively. For example, paragraph [00158] of the specification discloses that a pressurizing member (310, Fig. 14) performs the function of “for pressurizing light emitting elements respectively on a pixel electrode and a first dummy electrode of a substrate”. Paragraph [00156] discloses a laser generator (500, Fig. 19) performs the function of “for irradiating a laser beam to bond the light emitting elements to the pixel electrode and the first dummy electrode”. So the phrase raises a great deal of confusion and renders the claim as indefinite.
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 7, 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2021/0159208 to Wang et al (hereinafter “Wang”) in view of the teachings of U.S. 2015/0303166 to Momose et al (hereinafter “Momose”) and U.S. 2022/0020906 to Kim et al (hereinafter “Kim”).
Claim 7: Wang discloses a display panel bonding temperature measurement device (e.g. Fig. 3) comprising:
a laser pressurizing head module (e.g. 60, 61, 70) for pressurizing light emitting elements (e.g. 30) respectively on a pixel electrode (pixels) and a first electrode (e.g. 30) of a substrate (e.g. 10) and for irradiating a laser beam to bond the light emitting elements to the pixel electrode and the first electrode (e.g. Fig. 4, ¶¶ [0054], [0090]);
forming a second electrode (e.g. another 30) of the substrate;
wherein the substrate has a display area (e.g. 20) and a non-display area (e.g. 102, Fig. 2), and
wherein the first electrode is in the non-display area, and the second electrode is connected to the first dummy electrode (e.g. through 40 or 50, Fig. 3, ¶¶ [0053], [0055]).
Claim 16: Wang discloses the display panel bonding temperature measurement device of claim 9, wherein the laser pressurizing head module comprises:
a pressurizing member (e.g. 70) comprising a first light transmitting member (e.g. 90) formed of a rigid material (e.g. Fig. 3); and
a laser generator (e.g. 60, 61) on the pressurizing member and for irradiating the laser beam in a downward direction (e.g. Fig. 3).
The term of “dummy”, when describing the first and second electrodes, does not necessarily further limit the structure of the display bonding temperature measurement device. However if for some reason, the term of “dummy” does somehow further limit the structure of the device, then Kim discloses a method of manufacturing a display panel (e.g. Fig. 3A) that includes a display area (e.g. where PX is located). Kim teaches that electrodes (e.g. 166a, 166, 165, 165a) located outside of the display area, or located in a non-display area, can be referred to a “dummy” electrodes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the first and second electrodes of Wang can each be referred to as “dummy” electrodes, based on the teaching of Kim that dummy electrodes can be located in a non-display area.
Wang also does not teach a temperature measuring member.
Momose discloses bonding temperature measurement device (e.g. 100, Fig. 1) that comprises a bonding head module (e.g. 12, 13) for pressuring light emitting elements (e.g. 5) and bond them to a substrate (e.g. 1, ¶¶ [0033], [0034]). Included with the bonding head module is a temperature measuring member (e.g. 11c) for measuring a temperature of a second electrode (e.g. 7 or 9) on the substrate to control bonding properties (e.g. ¶ [0032])
Regarding Claim 9, Momose further teaches that the temperature measuring member comprises:
a temperature sensor (e.g. 11c) on the second dummy electrode (e.g. 7 or 9);
a control unit (e.g. 11d, Fig. 2) for receiving a potential difference generated from the temperature sensor and processing a signal (e.g. comparison result, ¶ [0032]);
and a temperature display unit (e.g. input device – not shown) connected to the control unit and configured to display a temperature state measured by the temperature sensor (e.g. ¶ [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the display panel bonding temperature measurement device of Wang by adding a temperature measuring member (e.g. temperature sensor, control unit, temperature display unit, etc.) that would connect to the second dummy electrode, as taught by Momose, to accurate measure and control the temperature necessary for bonding.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Kim and Momose, as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2021/0217804 to Takagi et al (hereinafter “Takagi”).
Wang, as modified by Kim and Momose, discloses the claimed display panel bonding temperature measurement device as relied upon above in Claim 7. The modified Wang device does not mention that the first and second dummy electrodes are formed of copper (Cu).
However, Cu is one of just many well-known conductive materials to form electrodes. As evidence of obviousness, see Takagi (e.g. 12, Fig. 1, ¶ [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the first and second electrodes of Wang with Cu, as taught by Takagi, to provide an art-recognized equivalent well-known conductive material for the first and second dummy electrodes.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 10, neither Wang, nor Kim, Momose, or Takagi, disclose that the temperature sensor is a thermocouple.
Regarding Claim 11, neither Wang, nor Kim, Momose, or Takagi, disclose that the pressurizing member has a sealed space between the first light transmitting member and the second light transmitting member. Also, neither Wang, nor Kim, Momose, or Takagi disclose a gas supply unit.
Regarding Claim 17, neither Wang, nor Kim, Momose, or Takagi, disclose that the laser pressurizing head module further comprises a sub-pressurizing member for pressurizing the second dummy electrode.
Accordingly, Claims 10 through 15 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication JP 2019-66786, disclose a display panel (e.g. 9, Fig. 12) having pixel electrodes (e.g. 90d) and dummy electrodes (e.g. 22s, Fig. 21, see SOLUTION).
b) Ryu et al, "Anisotropic Conductive Film Bonding by Making Use of a High-Power Diode Laser", discloses a laser pressurizing head for irradiating a laser beam to bond light emitting elements (diodes, Fig. 1, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 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, THOMAS J. HONG can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights