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 .
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, 3-4 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2022/0373837) in view of Harada et al. (US 2020/0117031) and Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153).
As to claim 1, Zhang discloses in figure 6, an electronic device comprising: an antenna structure 2; and a liquid crystal display panel (optoelectronic component) comprising an array substrate 20, color filter substrate 30, and a liquid crystal layer 50 disposed between the array substrate and color filter substrate.
Zhang does not disclose electrodes having a specified sheet resistance. However, it was conventional for a liquid crystal display panel to include pixel electrodes and a common electrode made of a transparent conductive material for applying a voltage to the liquid crystal layer. Harada discloses in paragraphs [0006]-[0007], forming the common electrode and pixel electrodes from an ITO film having a specified sheet resistance in order to control the pre-tilt applied to the liquid crystal material within a proper range. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by providing a common electrode and pixel electrodes formed from an ITO film with a specified sheet resistance as disclosed by Harada in order to control the pre-tilt applied to the liquid crystal material within a proper range.
Zhang in view of Harada does not disclose wherein each of the one or more electrodes includes at least one boundary layer, the at least one boundary layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the one or more antennas and at least one of the electrodes of at least one of the one or more optoelectronic components. Zhu discloses in figure 2, a magnet isolating layer 120 (boundary layer) provided between the antenna layer 210 and the first electrode layer 110, the magnet isolating layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the antenna layer and the first electrode layer, thereby avoiding loss of the magnetic field and avoiding the magnetic field affecting the signal in the first electrode layer. See column 4, lines 25-52. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang wherein each of the one or more electrodes includes at least one boundary layer, the at least one boundary layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the one or more antennas and at least one of the electrodes of at least one of the one or more optoelectronic components as disclosed by Zhu in order to avoid loss of the magnetic field and avoid the magnetic field affecting the signal in each of the one or more electrodes.
As to claim 3, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Harada further discloses in paragraph [0004], that an ITO film has a nano order (sub-wavelength) surface roughness.
As to claim 4, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Harada further discloses in paragraph [0004], that an ITO film has a nano order surface roughness. Therefore, the common electrode and pixel electrodes are nano imprinted with a nano order surface roughness.
As to claim 10, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Zhang further discloses in figure 6, wherein the antenna 2 is positioned over the optoelectronic components in the liquid crystal display panel.
As to claim 11, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 10. Zhang further discloses in figure 6, wherein the antenna 2 is positioned in a first layer of the electronic device and the optoelectronic components in the liquid crystal display panel are positioned in a second layer of the electronic device under the first layer.
As to claim 12, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1. Harada further discloses wherein the common electrode and pixel electrodes comprise indium tin oxide (ITO).
As to claim 13, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 12. Harada further discloses in paragraph [0026], wherein the indium tin oxide (ITO) is trimmed (patterned) to form a plurality of pixel electrodes 9a. The pixel electrodes create a gray scale (gradual tint) in the liquid crystal layer.
As to claim 14, Zhang discloses in figure 6, an electronic device comprising: an antenna structure 2; and a liquid crystal display panel (optoelectronic component) comprising an array substrate 20, color filter substrate 30, and a liquid crystal layer 50 disposed between the array substrate and color filter substrate. The preamble reciting a head-mounted display device merely constitutes a statement of intended use. The device of Zhang is perfectly capable of being incorporated into a head-mounted display and performing the intended use as required. See MPEP 2111.02, Section II. Furthermore, because Zhang discloses a liquid crystal display panel, Zhang discloses a display optically coupled with the electronic device.
Zhang does not disclose electrodes having a specified sheet resistance. However, it was conventional for a liquid crystal display panel to include pixel electrodes and a common electrode made of a transparent conductive material for applying a voltage to the liquid crystal layer. Harada discloses in paragraphs [0006]-[0007], forming the common electrode and pixel electrodes from an ITO film having a specified sheet resistance in order to control the pre-tilt applied to the liquid crystal material within a proper range. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by providing a common electrode and pixel electrodes formed from an ITO film with a specified sheet resistance as disclosed by Harada in order to control the pre-tilt applied to the liquid crystal material within a proper range.
Zhang in view of Harada does not disclose wherein each of the one or more electrodes includes at least one boundary layer, the at least one boundary layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the one or more antennas and at least one of the electrodes of at least one of the one or more optoelectronic components. Zhu discloses in figure 2, a magnet isolating layer 120 (boundary layer) provided between the antenna layer 210 and the first electrode layer 110, the magnet isolating layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the antenna layer and the first electrode layer, thereby avoiding loss of the magnetic field and avoiding the magnetic field affecting the signal in the first electrode layer. See column 4, lines 25-52. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang wherein each of the one or more electrodes includes at least one boundary layer, the at least one boundary layer isolating a magnetic coupling effect between the one or more antennas and at least one of the electrodes of at least one of the one or more optoelectronic components as disclosed by Zhu in order to avoid loss of the magnetic field and avoid the magnetic field affecting the signal in each of the one or more electrodes.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2022/0373837) in view of Harada et al. (US 2020/0117031) and Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Chien et al. (US 2017/0102577).
Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrodes comprise aluminum doped zinc oxide. Chien discloses in paragraph [0091], that based on the comparison of the results of the transmission spectrum and sheet resistance, the aluminum zinc oxide (AZO) layer utilized by the embodiments of the electro-optical device of the present invention was found to have similar performance in transparency and conductivity as electro-optical devices using an indium-tin-oxide (ITO) layer. The electro-optical performance of the fabricated TN LC cells show negligible variance. Thus, the AZO substrates of the embodiments of the present invention are capable of replacing ITO substrates in electro-optical devices, such as liquid crystal display (LCD) devices, while maintaining the same overall performance. In addition, the manufacturing process used to form the AZO layer of the embodiments of the present invention may be further enhanced to achieve increased quality, and improved stability of AZO-based transparent conductive materials. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang by forming the common electrode and pixel electrodes with aluminum doped zinc oxide (AZO) instead of ITO because it was an art recognized equivalent to ITO as taught by Chien.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2022/0373837) in view of Harada et al. (US 2020/0117031) and Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of De Sio et al. (US 2015/0077699).
Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrodes comprise electroplated electrodes. However, electroplating was a conventional method of forming electrodes in a liquid crystal device as evidenced by paragraph [0156] of De Sio. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further Zhang wherein the one or more electrodes comprise electroplated electrodes because conventional manufacturing techniques were known to be cost effective and reliable.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2022/0373837) in view of Harada et al. (US 2020/0117031) and Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2007/0002231).
Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more electrodes are aligned via field induced alignment. However, it was conventional to use the electrodes to align the liquid crystal by field induced alignment in order to produce an image as evidenced by paragraph [0005] of Lee. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang wherein the one or more electrodes are aligned via field induced alignment because it was a conventional method of forming an image with a liquid crystal display panel.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2022/0373837) in view of Harada et al. (US 2020/0117031) and Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Nakahori et al. (US 2006/0267120).
As to claim 7, Zhang in view of Harada and Zhu discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the one or more electrodes comprise one or more boundary layers. Nakahori discloses in figure 2, a pixel electrode 11 comprising a boundary layer 12. Nakahori discloses in paragraph [0029], that the boundary layer prevents corrosion of the pixel electrode during the patterning process. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang wherein the pixel electrode has a boundary layer as disclosed by Nakahori in order to prevent corrosion of the pixel electrode during the patterning process.
As to claims 8-9, Zhang in view of Harada, Zhu and Nakahori discloses all of the elements of the claimed invention discussed above regarding claim 7. Nakahori further discloses in paragraph [0044], that the boundary layer 12 is formed of a transparent conductive film such as ITO or IZO, but does not disclose indium molybdenum oxide or indium niobium oxide. However, indium molybdenum oxide and indium niobium oxide were art recognized equivalent transparent conductive material to ITO or IZO. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Zhang wherein the boundary layer comprises indium molybdenum oxide or indium niobium oxide because they were art recognized transparent conductive material to the ITO or IZO disclosed by Nakahori.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 14 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection. The new ground of rejection relies on the newly cited prior art of Zhu et al. (US 11,005,153).
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 David Chung whose telephone number is (571)272-2288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 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, Michael Caley can be reached at (571)272-2286. 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.
/DAVID Y CHUNG/Examiner, Art Unit 2871