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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0088392 A1) (“Park”), in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0134007 A1) (“Lee”) and Park et al. (US 2019/0143638 A1) (“Park 2”).
With respect to claim 1, Park discloses a screen cover configured to cover a flexible display (abstr., 0006, 0007), the screen cover comprising a buffer layer – element 13 – comprising a first side – implied - configured to be positioned away from the flexible display and a second side configured to be positioned close to the flexible display (0056, Figs. 3 and 7), wherein the buffer layer is configured to absorb stress of impact from a secondary object through elastic deformation – implied in par. [0056]-[0059], a second film layer – element 11 - covering the second side of the buffer layer and a second adhesive layer – element 14 – bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer (0048, 0060, Figs. 3 and 7). Park is silent with respect to the first film layer and a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the first side of the buffer layer.
Lee discloses a screen cover for a flexible display device (abstr.), the screen cover including a first film layer – element 120 attached to a second side of a buffer layer – element 130 (0011, 0046, Fig. 1), the configuration of the buffer layer between two film layers providing for improved impact resistance of the cover (0009, 0011, 0044, 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the screen cover of Park with a first film layer as disclosed in Lee for improved impact resistance. Lee is silent with respect to the first adhesive layer as recited in the claim, however, since Park discloses an adhesive layer bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the first side of the buffer layer of Park.
Regarding a first modulus of the first film layer being greater than a third modulus of the buffer layer and a second modulus of the second film layer being greater than the third modulus, Park discloses a modulus of the buffer layer of 7-30 MPa (abstr., 0008), while Lee discloses modulus of the film layer of no less than 1.5 GPa (0016).
Park 2 discloses a screen cover for a flexible display (abstr., 0005, 0006), wherein a film layer – the first base member - has a modulus greater than the buffer layer (0007, 0017-0019, 0101), the cover having improved impact resistance to an external impact (0005). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the screen cover of Park and Lee wherein a first modulus of the first film layer is greater than a third modulus of the buffer layer and a second modulus of the second film layer is greater than the third modulus, as such configuration is known in the art of screen covers for flexible displays as it improves impact resistance to an external impact.
Regarding claim 2, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the cover of claim 1. Park discloses the thickness of the second film layer of about 10 µm to about 150 µm (0050). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 2; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
As to claim 3, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the cover of claim 1. Park discloses the thickness of the second film layer of about 10 µm to about 150 µm (0050). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim ; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
With respect to claim 4, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the cover of claim 1. Lee discloses modulus of the film layer of equal or greater than 1 GPa (0016), thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the second modulus in the cover according to the references as disclosed in Lee, as such modulus of films is known in the art of screen covers for flexible displays.
Regarding claim 5, Park, Lee and Park 2, teach the cover of claim 1. Park discloses the second film layer – element 11 - comprises colorless polyimide or polyester (0048, 0049).
As to claim 6, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the cover of claim 1. Lee discloses the first and second film layers made of the same material (0047).
Claim(s) 7, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0088392 A1) (“Park”), in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0134007 A1) (“Lee”) and Park et al. (US 2019/0143638 A1) (“Park 2”).
With respect to claim 7, Park discloses a foldable display apparatus (abstr., 0007, 0027), comprising a flexible display comprising a flexible display surface (0027), and a screen cover covering a flexible display surface (abstr., 0006, 0007), the screen cover comprising a buffer layer – element 13 – comprising a first side – implied - away from the flexible display and a second side close to the flexible display (0056, Figs. 3 and 7), wherein the buffer layer is configured to absorb stress of impact through elastic deformation – implied in par. [0056]-[0059], a second film layer – element 11 - covering the second side of the buffer layer and a second adhesive layer – element 14 – bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer (0048, 0060, Figs. 3 and 7). Park is silent with respect to the first film layer and a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the first side of the buffer layer.
Lee discloses a screen cover for a flexible display device (abstr.), the screen cover including a first film layer – element 120 attached to a second side of a buffer layer – element 130 (0011, 0046, Fig. 1), the configuration of the buffer layer between two film layers providing for improved impact resistance of the cover (0009, 0011, 0044, 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the screen cover of Park with a first film layer as disclosed in Lee for improved impact resistance. Lee is silent with respect to the first adhesive layer as recited in the claim, however, since Park discloses an adhesive layer bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the first side of the buffer layer of Park.
Regarding a first modulus of the first film layer being greater than a third modulus of the buffer layer and a second modulus of the second film layer being greater than the third modulus, Park discloses a modulus of the buffer layer of 7-30 MPa (abstr., 0008), while Lee discloses modulus of a film layer of no less than 1.5 GPa (0016).
Park 2 discloses a screen cover for a flexible display (abstr., 0005, 0006), wherein a film layer – the first base member - has a modulus greater than the buffer layer (0007, 0017-0019, 0101), the cover having improved impact resistance to an external impact (0005). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the screen cover of Park and Lee wherein a first modulus of the first film layer is greater than a third modulus of the buffer layer and a second modulus of the second film layer is greater than the third modulus, as such configuration is known in the art of screen covers for flexible displays as it improves impact resistance to an external impact.
Regarding claim 19, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the apparatus of claim 7. Park discloses the second film layer comprises a thickness of about 10 µm to about 150 µm (0050). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 19; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
As to claim 20, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the apparatus of claim 7. Park discloses the second film layer comprises a thickness of about 10 µm to about 150 µm (0050). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 20; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05).
Claim(s) 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0088392 A1) (“Park”), in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0134007 A1) (“Lee”) and Park et al. (US 2019/0143638 A1) (“Park 2”).
With respect to claim 8, Park discloses a foldable display apparatus (abstr., 0007, 0027), comprising a flexible display comprising a flexible display surface (0027), and a screen cover covering the flexible display surface (abstr., 0006, 0007), the screen cover comprising a buffer layer – element 13 – having a buffer layer thickness – implied – comprising a first side – implied - away from the flexible display (0056, Figs. 3 and 7), wherein the buffer layer is configured to absorb stress of impact through elastic deformation – implied in par. [0056]-[0059]. Park is silent with respect to a third adhesive layer bonding the buffer layer to the flexible display surface as recited in the claim. Lee discloses a foldable display apparatus comprising a third adhesive layer – element 300 - bonding the buffer layer to a flexible display surface, wherein the third adhesive layer comprises a third adhesive layer thickness that is not less than half of the buffer layer – element 130 – thickness (0041, 0048, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the screen cover of Park a third adhesive layer as disclosed in Lee to bond the buffer layer to the flexible display surface.
Regarding a first film layer and a first adhesive layer a recited in the claim, Lee discloses a screen cover for a flexible display device (abstr.), the screen cover including a first film – element 120 attached to a second side of a buffer layer – element 130 (0011, 0046, Fig. 1), the configuration of the buffer layer between two film layers providing for improved impact resistance of the cover (0009, 0011, 0044, 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the screen cover of Park with a first film layer covering the first side as disclosed in Lee for improved impact resistance. Lee is silent with respect to the first adhesive layer as recited in the claim, however, since Park discloses an adhesive layer bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the buffer layer of Park.
Regarding a first modulus of the first film layer being greater than a second modulus of the buffer layer, Park discloses a modulus of the buffer layer of 7-30 MPa (abstr., 0008), while Lee discloses modulus of a film layer of no less than 1.5 GPa (0016).
Park 2 discloses a screen cover for a flexible display (abstr., 0005, 0006), wherein a film layer – the first base member - has a modulus greater than the buffer layer (0007, 0017-0019, 0101), the cover having improved impact resistance to an external impact (0005). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the screen cover of Park and Lee wherein a first modulus of the first film layer is greater than a second modulus of the buffer layer as such configuration is known in the art of screen covers for flexible displays as it improves impact resistance to an external impact.
As to claim 9, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 8. Lee discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of equal to or greater than 10 µm and equal to or less than 30 µm (0020), which overlaps the recited range; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
With respect to claim 10, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 8. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 10. Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
As to claim 11, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 8. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 11; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
As to claim 12, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 8. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 12; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
Regarding claim 13, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 8. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 13; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Regarding the thickness of the third adhesive layer as recited in the claim, Lee discloses that the thickness of the buffer layer is equal to or greater than 10 µm and equal to or less than 30 µm (0020), while element 300 of Lee in Fig. 1 is being interpreted as corresponding to the third adhesive layer (0043), thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the thickness of the third adhesive layer of Lee is not less than 75 µm.
Claim(s) 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 2018/0088392 A1) (“Park”), in view of Lee et al. (US 2018/0134007 A1) (“Lee”) and Park et al. (US 2019/0143638 A1) (“Park 2”).
With respect to claim 14, Park discloses an electronic device (abstr., 0007, 0027), comprising a flexible display comprising a flexible display surface (0027), and a screen cover covering the flexible display surface (abstr., 0006, 0007), the screen cover comprising a buffer layer – element 13 – having a buffer layer thickness – implied – comprising a first side – implied - away from the flexible display (0056, Figs. 3 and 7), wherein the buffer layer is configured to absorb stress of impact through elastic deformation – implied in par. [0056]-[0059].
Park is silent with respect to a third adhesive layer bonding the buffer layer to the flexible display surface as recited in the claim. Lee discloses a foldable display apparatus comprising a third adhesive layer – element 300 - bonding the buffer layer to a flexible display surface, wherein the third adhesive layer comprises a third adhesive layer thickness that is not less than half of the buffer layer – element 130 – thickness (0041, 0048, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the screen cover of Park a third adhesive layer as disclosed in Lee to bond the buffer layer to the flexible display surface.
Regarding a first film layer and a first adhesive layer a recited in the claim, Lee discloses a screen cover for a flexible display device (abstr.), the screen cover including a first film layer – element 120 attached to a second side of a buffer layer – element 130 (0011, 0046, Fig. 1), the configuration of the buffer layer between two film layers providing for improved impact resistance of the cover (0009, 0011, 0044, 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the screen cover of Park with a first film layer covering the first side as disclosed in Lee for improved impact resistance. Lee is silent with respect to the first adhesive layer as recited in the claim, however, since Park discloses an adhesive layer bonding the second film layer to the second side of the buffer layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a first adhesive layer bonding the first film layer to the buffer layer of Park.
Regarding a first modulus of the first film layer being greater than a second modulus of the buffer layer, Park discloses a modulus of the buffer layer of 7-30 MPa (abstr., 0008), while Lee discloses modulus of a film layer of no less than 1.5 GPa (0016).
Park 2 discloses a screen cover for a flexible display (abstr., 0005, 0006), wherein a film layer – the first base member - has a modulus greater than the buffer layer (0007, 0017-0019, 0101), the cover having improved impact resistance to an external impact (0005). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the screen cover of Park and Lee wherein a first modulus of the first film layer is greater than a second modulus of the buffer layer as such configuration is known in the art of screen covers for flexible displays as it improves impact resistance to an external impact.
As to claim 15, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 14. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 12; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
As to claim 16, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 14. Lee discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of equal to or greater than 10 µm and equal to or less than 30 µm (0020), which overlaps the recited range; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
With respect to claim 17, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 14. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 17. Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
As to claim 18, Park, Lee and Park 2 teach the display of claim 14. Park discloses the buffer layer having a thickness of about 100 µm to about 300 µm (0059). The range of thickness overlaps the range recited in claim 18; overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP 2144.05). Lee discloses a thickness of the third adhesive layer of 50 µm as a first adhesive layer 300 (0043, Table 1, p. 3), which is within the recited range.
Information Disclosure Statement
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOANNA PLESZCZYNSKA whose telephone number is (571)270-1617. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~ 11:30-8.
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, Maria Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
/Joanna Pleszczynska/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights