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 without traverse of species I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 7/8/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/8/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations “a plurality of electrodes disposed on the first main surface, a connection wire at least partially disposed on the at least one selected side surface, and a drive circuit disposed on the second main surface, wherein the plurality of electrodes are electrically connected to the plurality of light emitters, and the connection wire electrically connects the drive circuit with the electrodes” of claim 7, and “a drive circuit disposed at the second main surface and near an edge of the second main surface, wherein the encapsulation layer further includes a second sub- encapsulation portion covering the drive circuit” of claim 8, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamakawa (US 2014/0036499).
Regarding claim 1, Yamakawa discloses, in FIG. 19 and in related text, a display baseplate, comprising:
a backplate (7), wherein the backplate comprises a first main surface (top surface) and a second main surface (bottom surface) that are opposite to each other and not coplanar, and a plurality of side surfaces connected to the first main surface and the second main surface;
a plurality of light emitters (8) on the first main surface; and
an encapsulation layer (10), at least partially on the first main surface and covering the plurality of light emitters (see Yamakawa, [0067]).
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (US 2022/0165922).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses, in FIG. 8 and in related text, a display baseplate, comprising:
a backplate (60), wherein the backplate comprises a first main surface (top surface) and a second main surface (bottom surface) that are opposite to each other and not coplanar, and a plurality of side surfaces connected to the first main surface and the second main surface;
a plurality of light emitters (20) on the first main surface; and
an encapsulation layer (30), at least partially on the first main surface and covering (side surfaces of) the plurality of light emitters (see Li, [0035], [0049]).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the display baseplate of claim 1.
Li discloses wherein the encapsulation layer (30) is black (see Li, [0041]).
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN 107331790; see copy with English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses, in FIG. 2 and in related text, a display baseplate, comprising:
a backplate (3), wherein the backplate comprises a first main surface (top surface) and a second main surface (bottom surface) that are opposite to each other and not coplanar, and a plurality of side surfaces connected to the first main surface and the second main surface;
a light emitter (4) on the first main surface; and
an encapsulation layer (2), at least partially on the first main surface and covering the plurality of light emitters (see Yang, page 16).
Yang discloses a light emitter.
Yang does not explicitly disclose a plurality of light emitters.
However, the limitation is merely duplication of parts and would have been found obvious unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960): Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See also, MPEP § 2144.04.
Regarding claim 2, Yang teaches the display baseplate of claim 1.
Yang discloses wherein at least one side surface of the plurality of side surfaces is a selected side surface (for example, right side surface of backplate 1 in FIG. 2), and the encapsulation layer (2) comprises a first sub-encapsulation portion (2 on the right side surface of backplate 1) encapsulating the selected side surface (see Yang, FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Yang teaches the display baseplate of claim 2.
Yang discloses wherein the first sub-encapsulation portion (2 on the right side surface of backplate 1) and a part, on the first main surface, of the encapsulation layer (2) are integrated together (see Yang, FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Yang teaches the display baseplate of claim 2.
Yang discloses wherein a side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion is an inclined surface, an included angle between the inclined surface and the first main surface is an acute angle; or wherein the side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion is perpendicular to the first main surface (see Yang, FIG. 2, page 17).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 are 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.
Claims 7-9 are objected and would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objections set forth in this Office action and to include 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 prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “wherein the side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion is an inclined surface, and a distance D1 between a light emitter closest to the side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion and an edge of the first sub-encapsulation portion satisfies the following relational formula:D1 ≥ H* tan(arcsin
1
n
) +
H
t
a
n
θ
wherein H refers to a thickness of a part, on the first main surface, of the encapsulation layer, n indicates a reflective index of the encapsulation layer, and θ indicates an included angle between the inclined surface and the first main surface; in a case where the side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion is perpendicular to the first main surface, a distance D2 between a light emitter closest to the first sub-encapsulation portion and the edge of the first sub-encapsulation portion satisfies the following relational formula: D2 ≥ H* tan(arcsin
1
n
) wherein, H refers to a thickness of a part, on the first main surface, of the encapsulation layer, n indicates a reflective index of the encapsulation layer” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 5.
The prior art of record, Yang, discloses wherein when the side surface of the first sub-encapsulation portion is an inclined surface, the included angle between the inclined surface and the first main surface is of 25° to 60°. The prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “the included angle between the inclined surface and the first main surface is greater than or equal to 85°” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 6.
The prior art of record, Li, discloses a plurality of electrodes disposed on the first main surface, wherein the plurality of electrodes are electrically connected to the plurality of light emitters. The prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “a connection wire at least partially disposed on the at least one selected side surface, and a drive circuit disposed on the second main surface, and the connection wire electrically connects the drive circuit with the electrodes” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 7.
The prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “drive circuit disposed at the second main surface and near an edge of the second main surface, wherein the encapsulation layer further includes a second sub- encapsulation portion covering the drive circuit” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIH TSUN A CHOU whose telephone number is (408)918-7583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-16:00 Arizona Time.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571) 272-1670. 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.
/SHIH TSUN A CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights