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 .
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 of the language in the first sentence, i.e., it appears the first sentence could be deleted or replaced by, e.g., “A displaying base and a displaying device.”
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).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. For example, a more descriptive title could be, “DISPLAYING BASE AND DISPLAYING DEVICE WITH DAM AND BLOCKING UNIT”.
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.
Claim 5 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 5 recites a limitation, “the blocking unit among the at least one blocking unit”, that renders the claim indefinite because “the blocking unit” in independent claim 1 must be the same as “at least one blocking unit”; otherwise, claim 1 would indefinite for lacking antecedent basis for “the blocking unit”.
For the purpose of examination, “the blocking unit among the at least one blocking unit”, recited in claim 5 is interpreted as, “the blocking unit” (which is the same as the “at least one blocking unit” in claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-13, 17, 18 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2019/0157607 A1; hereinafter, “Kim”).
Regarding claims 1-13, 17, 18 and 21:
re claim 1, Kim discloses a displaying base plate (e.g., the structure in Fig. 7), wherein the displaying base plate comprises:
a displaying region AA (Figs. 1, 7 and [0033]); and
a non-displaying region NA (Figs. 1, 7 and [0033]) surrounding the displaying region, comprising a first dam region (region containing “106”, “170”, “172” and “174” in Figs. 1 and 7), wherein the first dam region surrounds the displaying region;
wherein the first dam region comprises a dam 106 (Fig. 1, 7 and [0032]), at least one blocking unit 170/172/174 (Figs. 1, 3, 4D, 7 and [0059], wherein “170” comprises “172” and “174” in Fig. 7) located at one side of the dam 106 (Fig. 7) away from the displaying region AA, the dam 106 and the blocking unit 170/172/174 are disposed within at least a part of the first dam region, and the blocking unit 170/172/174 is patterned (Figs. 4D and 7);
re claim 2, the displaying base plate according to claim 1, wherein the first dam region
comprises one dam 106 (Fig. 7);
re claim 3, the displaying base plate according to claim 2, wherein the non-displaying region NA further comprises a driving-circuit region (e.g., region for “150” in Fig. 1 and [0029]), and the driving-circuit region is located at one side of the first dam region away from the displaying region AA (Fig. 1); and the dam 106 (Fig. 1) and the blocking unit 170 (Fig. 1) are disposed at at least one side of the first dam region close to the driving-circuit region (Fig. 1);
re claim 4, the displaying base plate according to claim 3, wherein the dam 106 and the blocking unit 170 (Fig. 1) are disposed within a whole of the first dam region, and surround the displaying region A1 (i.e., in Fig. 1, the first dam region comprises the region containing “106” and “107”);
re claim 5 (as interpreted), the displaying base plate according to claim 2, wherein the blocking unit 170/172/174 (Figs. 1 and 7)
re claim 6, the displaying base plate according to claim 2, wherein the blocking unit comprises a patterned protrusion 170/172/174 (Figs. 3 and 7);
re claim 7, the displaying base plate according to claim 6, wherein the non-displaying region NA (Fig. 7) further comprises a substrate 101 [0033], and the patterned protrusion 172/174 (Fig. 7) is disposed on the substrate 101; and the protrusion comprises a first planarization part (e.g., element 172 provides a first planarized surface in Fig. 7) and/or
re claim 8, the displaying base plate according to claim 7, wherein when the protrusion
comprises the first planarization part (e.g., planarized surface of “172” in Fig. 7), the first planarization part is patterned (e.g., patterned as shown in Fig. 7 or in Fig. 3 for element “170”);
re claim 9, the displaying base plate according to claim 7, wherein when the protrusion
comprises the first planarization part (e.g., planarized surface of “172” in Fig. 7) and the first pixel defining part (i.e., the protrusion of “142” that is directly above 172 is considered to be the first pixel defining part), the protrusion comprises the first planarization part and the first pixel defining part that are arranged in layer configuration on the substrate, and the first planarization part is patterned and/or the first pixel defining part is patterned (i.e., “172” and “142” are arranged in layer configuration on the substrate, and both “172” and “142” are patterned);
re claim 10, the displaying base plate according to claim 7, wherein the non-displaying region NA further comprises a packaging layer 146 (Fig. 7 and [0043]) disposed at one side of the patterned protrusion away from the substrate 101, and the packaging layer 146 covers the protrusion (of “172” in Fig. 7);
re claim 11, the displaying base plate according to claim 2, wherein the first dam region
comprises two blocking units 172, 174 (Fig. 7);
re claim 12, the displaying base plate according to claim 7, wherein a shape of an orthographic projection of the patterned protrusion in a direction perpendicular to the substrate comprises a planar shape or an annular shape (e.g., blocking unit 170/172/174 comprises an annular shape, see Fig. 4D, wherein element “170” has annular shapes connected together);
re claim 13, the displaying base plate according to claim 12, wherein when the shape of the orthographic projection of the patterned protrusion (of “172”) in the direction perpendicular to the substrate comprises the annular shape (Fig. 4D, wherein “170” comprises “172”), the dam region comprises a plurality of patterned protrusions (172 and 172 in Fig. 7), and at least some neighboring patterned protrusions are connected (wherein “172” and “174” are connected through layer 114 in Fig. 7);
re claim 17, the displaying base plate according to claim 2, wherein the non-displaying region NA further comprises a crack dam region (region containing “180” and “182” in Figs. 1, 7 and [0051]), and the crack dam region surrounds the first dam region (region containing “106”, “170”, “172” and “174” in Figs. 1 and 7), and is broken within the driving-circuit region 150 (Fig. 1, i.e., the crack dam region comprises elements 182 that are broken around the display region, see Fig. 4C; accordingly, the crack dam region is also broken within the region for 150 because the crack dam region and the region for 150 essentially overlap, or are connected, in Fig. 1); and the crack dam region comprises at least one slot (Fig. 4D), and the slot surrounds the first dam region 106 (i.e., the crack dam region surrounds the dam region in Fig. 1), and is broken within the driving-circuit region (i.e., elements 182 are broken throughout the crack dam region);
re claim 18, the displaying base plate according to claim 17, wherein the non-displaying
region NA (Fig. 7) further comprises a buffer layer 112 [0040], a gate insulating layer 104 [0040] and an inter-layer-medium layer 114 [0040] that are arranged in layer configuration (Fig.7);
all of the inter-layer-medium layer 114, the gate insulating layer 104 and the buffer layer 112 are located within the displaying region AA (Fig. 7), the first dam region (in NA, Fig. 7) and the crack dam region (in NA, Fig. 7); and
the slot extends throughout at least a part of the inter-layer-medium layer 114 that is located within the crack dam region (i.e., the slot between “182” is filled with layer 114 in Fig. 7); and
re claim 21, A displaying device, wherein the displaying device comprises the
displaying base plate according to claim 1 (Fig. 1).
Therefore, Kim anticipates claims 1-13, 17, 18 and 21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim.
Regarding claims 14-16:
The current claims contain limitations directed to specific ranges for height and widths, and although Kim is silent regarding ranges for height and widths, the current claims are deemed obvious because the general conditions of the claimed invention are disclosed, and given Kim, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to find optimum or workable ranges for height and width without extensive experimentation. In other words, the claimed height and widths would depend on a desired thickness and size of a display device, and given specific design requirements, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to determine an optimum or workable range, wherein the currently claimed height and widths are considered to be optimum or workable range for some given, or desired, display dimension. Note it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Jeon et al. (US 2021/0265436 A1; hereinafter, “Jeon”)
Regarding claim 19:
Kim anticipates claim 1 and further discloses wherein the displaying base plate
further comprises a substrate 101, and a driving unit 130 (Fig. 3 and [0040])
the driving unit 130 is located within the displaying region AA,
Kim does not disclose a touch unit. However, Jeon teaches a touch unit 700 (Figs. 2, 4 and [0131]) incorporated into a device similar to that of Kim, wherein the touch unit 700 is located within a displaying region (e.g., cross section A-B in Fig. 4) and the non-display region (e.g., cross section C-D in Fig. 4) and covers a driving unit T1 (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim by incorporating a touch unit, as taught by Jeon, because the modification would allow the displaying base plate to be incorporated into modern devices such as smart phones.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed on the attached PTO-892 disclose display devices comprising dams and/or crack-stopping patterns having some similarities to the current invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEX H MALSAWMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (4-12 Hours, between 5:30AM-10PM).
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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.
/LEX H MALSAWMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892