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
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-13, 15-17, 19 and 23 in the reply filed on 5/11/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 26 and 28 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/11/2026.
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 11-13 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 11 recites the limitation “a third groove”, however there is no recitation of a second groove. Claim 1, from which claim 11 depends from, only recites “a first groove” and there is no recitation of a second groove. Thus, it is unclear if there is a second groove or if the “third groove” is a second groove. Appropriate correction is requested.
Claim 12 recites “a fifth plane”, however there are no recitations of first, second, third and fourth planes. Claims 1 and 11, from which claim 12 depends from, do not recite first, second, third and fourth planes. Thus, it is unclear if there are first, second, third and fourth planes, or if the “fifth plane” is a first plane. Appropriate correction is requested.
Claim 13 is also rejected as being dependent on claim 11 and including the indefinite aspects thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
Claims 1-7, 11-13 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Song et al. (CN112863355A) [refer to U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0094074A1 for English translation].
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses a display apparatus (Figs. 1-2), comprising a display panel (2), comprising a bendable region (region 20; paragraphs [0058-0061]) and a non-bending region, and a supporting member (1) on a back of the display panel, comprising a bendable portion (10) configured to support the bendable region, wherein at least one side of the bendable portion (10) is provided with a first groove (recessed area on top and bottom of portion 102), and a supporting portion (11) connected to the bendable portion through the first groove (paragraph [0072]), and configured to support the non-bending region (Fig. 1), wherein a density of a material of the bendable portion (10) is different from a density of a material of the supporting portion (11; paragraphs [0062-0064]).
Regarding claim 2, Song discloses the bendable portion (10) comprising N openings (Figs. 3-4, holes 1010), the N openings are obtained through a first opening process, and wherein N is greater than 1 (Figs. 3-4). It is to be pointed out that claim 2 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “a time length for processing N openings in the material of the bendable portion using the first opening process is less than a time length for processing N openings in the material of the supporting portion using the first opening process" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 2 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies forming N openings in the material of the bendable portion and in the material of the supporting portion. As shown above, Song suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 3, Song discloses wherein the at least one side of the bendable portion (10) extends in a direction parallel to the display panel (2), and wherein the supporting portion (11) comprising a first protrusion (protrusion portion of supporting portion 11 on top and bottom of portion 102), and the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove (recessed region on top and bottom of portion 102; paragraph [0072]).
Regarding claim 4, Song discloses a right-angle groove (recessed area on top of portion 102) facing the display panel (2), and a shape of the first protrusion (protrusion portion of supporting portion 11 on top of portion 102) is matched with the right-angle groove (Fig. 1; paragraph [0072]).
Regarding claim 5, Song discloses the bendable portion (10) comprises a first plane (top plane of portion 101) facing the display panel (2), the supporting portion (11) comprises a second plane (top plane of portion 11) facing the display panel (2), and the first plane is coplanar with the second plane (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Song discloses the bendable portion (10) further comprising a third plane (bottom plane of portion 101) opposite to the first plane, the supporting portion (11) further comprising a fourth plane (bottom plane of portion 11) opposite to the second plane, and the third plane is coplanar with the fourth plane (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Song discloses the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove through bonding (Fig. 1; paragraph [0099]). It is to be pointed out that claim 7 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “through hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 7 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the first protrusion being matched and connected with the first groove. As shown above, Song suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 11, Song discloses the supporting portion (11) comprising a third groove on a side away from the display panel (2), and at least part of the bendable portion (10) is embedded into the third groove (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Song discloses the supporting portion (11) comprising a fifth plane facing the display panel (2), and the fifth plane is between the bendable portion (102) and the display panel (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Song discloses at least one side of the bendable portion (10) is provided with S first grooves (recessed area on top or bottom of portion 102), and each first groove is filled with a part of the material of the supporting portion (11), and wherein S is greater than or equal to 1 (Fig. 1), and wherein each first groove is filled with the part of the material of the supporting portion (Fig. 1, portion 11). It is to be pointed out that claim 13 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “by hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 13 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the at least part of the supporting portion is filling into each first groove. As shown above, Song suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 23, Song discloses the density of the material of the bendable portion is greater than the density of the material of the supporting portion (paragraphs [0063-0064]).
Claims 1-13, 17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (CN217640538U) [hereinafter Yang].
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a display apparatus (Figs. 1-7), comprising a display panel (20), comprising a bendable region (region 21) and a non-bending region (22), and a supporting member (10) on a back of the display panel, comprising a bendable portion (11; and 111/112) configured to support the bendable region, wherein at least one side of the bendable portion (11) is provided with a first groove (Fig. 5; lower surface of second region 112 is provided with a first step surface 115 or 123; paragraph [0073]), and a supporting portion (12) connected to the bendable portion through the first groove (Fig. 5), and configured to support the non-bending region (22), wherein a density of a material of the bendable portion (11) is different from a density of a material of the supporting portion (claim 12).
Regarding claim 2, Yang discloses the bendable portion (11) comprising N openings (Figs. 3-6), the N openings are obtained through a first opening process, and wherein N is greater than 1 (Figs. 3-6; paragraphs [0081]). It is to be pointed out that claim 2 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “a time length for processing N openings in the material of the bendable portion using the first opening process is less than a time length for processing N openings in the material of the supporting portion using the first opening process" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 2 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies forming N openings in the material of the bendable portion and in the material of the supporting portion. As shown above, Yang suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 3, Yang discloses wherein the at least one side of the bendable portion (11) extends in a direction parallel to the display panel (20), and wherein the supporting portion (12) comprising a first protrusion (Fig. 5; protrusion portion 113 of supporting portion 12 on bottom of stepped surface 115/123), and the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove (Fig. 5; stepped surface 115/123).
Regarding claim 4, Yang discloses a right-angle groove (stepped surface 115/123) facing the display panel (20), and a shape of the first protrusion (protrusion portion 113 of supporting portion 12 on bottom of stepped surface 115/123) is matched with the right-angle groove (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, Yang discloses the bendable portion (11) comprises a first plane (top plane of portion 111/112) facing the display panel (20), the supporting portion (12) comprises a second plane (top plane of portion 12) facing the display panel (20), and the first plane is coplanar with the second plane (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Yang discloses the bendable portion (11) further comprising a third plane (bottom plane of portion 111/112) opposite to the first plane, the supporting portion (12) further comprising a fourth plane (bottom plane of portion 12) opposite to the second plane, and the third plane is coplanar with the fourth plane (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 7, Yang discloses the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove through bonding (Fig. 5; claim 10). It is to be pointed out that claim 7 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “through hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 7 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the first protrusion being matched and connected with the first groove. As shown above, Yang suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claims 8-10, Yang discloses a bottom of the first groove is provided with M second grooves (recesses/holes 121), each second groove is filled with a part of the material of the supporting portion, the part of the material of the supporting portion is fixedly connected to the first protrusion, and wherein M is greater than or equal to 1 (Figs. 5-6, protrusions 113 and depressions 121; paragraphs [0060-0072]). The limitation “by hot pressing” in claim 10 is deemed a process limitation Thus, claim 10 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the at least part of the supporting portion is filling into each second groove. As shown above, Yang suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 11, Yang discloses the supporting portion (12) comprising a third groove on a side away from the display panel, and at least part of the bendable portion (112) is embedded into the third groove (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Yang discloses the supporting portion (12) comprising a fifth plane facing the display panel (20), and the fifth plane is between the bendable portion (11) and the display panel (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 13, Yang discloses at least one side of the bendable portion (11) is provided with S first grooves (stepped surfaces 115/123), and each first groove is filled with a part of the material of the supporting portion (12), and wherein S is greater than or equal to 1 (Fig. 5), and wherein each first groove is filled with the part of the material of the supporting portion (Fig. 5, portion 12). It is to be pointed out that claim 13 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “by hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 13 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the at least part of the supporting portion is filling into each first groove. As shown above, Yang suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 17, Yang discloses the material of the supporting portion (12) is plastic (claim 13), the at least one side of the bendable portion (11) comprises L fourth protrusions extending in a direction parallel to the display panel, the first groove is formed between any two adjacent fourth protrusions, and wherein L is greater than or equal to 2, wherein at least part of the plastic is filled into each first groove, and wherein a length of a bottom of the first groove is greater than a length of a notch of the first groove (Figs. 3 and 5). It is to be pointed out that claim 17 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “through an injection molding process" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 17 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the at least part of the plastic of the supporting portion is filling into each first groove. As shown above, Yang suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 23, Yang discloses the density of the material of the bendable portion is greater than the density of the material of the supporting portion (claim 12).
Claims 1-7, 11-13, 15, 16 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zou et al. (CN114257668A) [hereinafter Zou].
Regarding claim 1, Zou discloses a display apparatus (Figs. 2 and 7), comprising a display panel (104), comprising a bendable region (region 350) and a non-bending region (region outside of bendable region 350), and a supporting member (33) on a back of the display panel, comprising a bendable portion (35) configured to support the bendable region, wherein at least one side of the bendable portion (35) is provided with a first groove (Fig. 7; recessed area 3011 and/or 3013), and a supporting portion (33) connected to the bendable portion through the first groove (Fig. 7), and configured to support the non-bending region (Fig. 7; paragraph [0120]), wherein a density of a material of the bendable portion (35) is different from a density of a material of the supporting portion (paragraphs [0077] and [0090]).
Regarding claim 2, Zou discloses the bendable portion (35) comprising N openings (Fig. 2, openings 351; paragraph [0066]), the N openings are obtained through a first opening process, and wherein N is greater than 1 (Fig. 2, openings 351). It is to be pointed out that claim 2 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “a time length for processing N openings in the material of the bendable portion using the first opening process is less than a time length for processing N openings in the material of the supporting portion using the first opening process" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 2 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies forming N openings in the material of the bendable portion and in the material of the supporting portion. As shown above, Zou suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 3, Zou discloses wherein the at least one side of the bendable portion (35) extends in a direction parallel to the display panel (104), and wherein the supporting portion (33) comprising a first protrusion (protrusion portion of supporting portion 33 overlapping L-shaped surface 3011 of bendable portion 35), and the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Zou discloses a right-angle groove (L-shaped surface 3011 formed in the bendable portion 35) facing the display panel (104), and a shape of the first protrusion (protrusion portion of supporting portion 33 overlapping L-shaped surface 3011 of bendable portion 35) is matched with the right-angle groove (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 5, Zou discloses the bendable portion (35) comprises a first plane (top plane of portion 35) facing the display panel (104), the supporting portion (33) comprises a second plane (top plane of portion 33) facing the display panel (104), and the first plane is coplanar with the second plane (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 6, Zou discloses the bendable portion (35) further comprising a third plane (bottom plane of portion 35) opposite to the first plane, the supporting portion (33) further comprising a fourth plane (bottom plane of portion 33) opposite to the second plane, and the third plane is coplanar with the fourth plane (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 7, Zou discloses the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove through bonding (Fig. 7; paragraph [0075]). It is to be pointed out that claim 7 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “through hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 7 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the first protrusion being matched and connected with the first groove. As shown above, Zou suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 11, Zou discloses the supporting portion (33) comprising a third groove on a side away from the display panel (104), and at least part of the bendable portion (35) is embedded into the third groove (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 12, Zou discloses the supporting portion (33) comprising a fifth plane (3016) facing the display panel (104), and the fifth plane is between the bendable portion (35) and the display panel (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 13, Zou discloses at least one side of the bendable portion (35) is provided with S first grooves (L-shaped surface 3011 or 3013), and each first groove is filled with a part of the material of the supporting portion (33), and wherein S is greater than or equal to 1 (Fig. 7), and wherein each first groove is filled with the part of the material of the supporting portion (Fig. 7, portion 33). It is to be pointed out that claim 13 defines the product by how the product was made. The limitation “by hot pressing" is deemed a process limitation. Thus, claim 13 is a product-by-process claim. For purposes of examination, product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulation of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. In the present case, the recited step implies the at least part of the supporting portion is filling into each first groove. As shown above, Zou suggests such a product. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself. See MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 15, Zou discloses the first groove comprises a riveting hole, and the supporting portion (33) is connected to the bendable portion (35) through the first groove by using a riveting process (Fig. 7; paragraph [0086]).
Regarding claim 16, Zou discloses a bottom of the first groove is provided with at least one riveting hole, and the first protrusion is matched and connected with the first groove through a riveting process (Fig. 7; paragraph [0086]).
Regarding claim 23, Zou discloses the density of the material of the bendable portion is greater than the density of the material of the supporting portion and wherein an elastic modulus of the material of the bendable portion is greater than an elastic modulus of the material of the supporting portion (paragraphs [0077] and [0090]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 is 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The cited prior art above fail to teach or reasonably suggest the distinct features of “wherein the material of the supporting portion is carbon fiber prepreg, and the supporting portion is formed by laying K layers of carbon fiber prepreg, and wherein K is an odd number greater than 1, and wherein an elastic modulus of one of any adjacent two layers of carbon fiber prepreg among the K layers of carbon fiber prepreg is different from an elastic modulus of the other one of the any adjacent two layers of carbon fiber prepreg among the K layers of carbon fiber prepreg”, as recited in dependent claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE A SIMONE whose telephone number is (571)272-1501. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Frank Vineis can be reached at 571-270-1547. 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.
CATHERINE A. SIMONE
Examiner
Art Unit 1781
/Catherine A. Simone/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights