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
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. The examiner proposes DISPLAY WITH TRACES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF TRENCHES
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because FIG. 3 has various instances of the character “å” on it, and it is not clear why.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “13” has been used to designate both first pixel drive circuits and a first planarization layer pattern. See [0061], [0064], FIGS. 2 and 3.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1 recites that “the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at an edge of the groove.” The other independent claims have analogous recitations. The plain meaning of “fracture” is “to cause a crack or break in (something hard, such as a bone)”. (https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/fracture). That is, to fracture is to cause a break in something solid. The applicant has not set forth a special definition in the specification, and there is not an art-specific meaning different than the ordinary meaning. There is no disclosure of such a process of fracture here. The present specification recites that “[d]ue to the presence of the undercut structure, upon a conductive structure layer is formed on the insulating layer 22 having the groove c, the conductive structure layer easily fractures at the edge of the groove c, so as to form a part of the structure disposed on the insulating layer 22 and another part of the structure disposed in the groove c. A part of the structure disposed on the insulating layer 22 includes the second trace pattern 24, and a part of the structure disposed in the groove includes the first trace pattern 23.” The only disclosure in the specification is of depositing a layer partly in the groove and partly on the upper part of the insulating layer. The ordinary deposition methods in the art involve gas or ion precursors, or perhaps liquid (as in spin coating). However, no specific method of deposition is disclosed in the specification at all. Those in the art would not know how to form the two trace patterns “by fracture at an edge of the groove” as claimed.
Claim 17 recites that acquiring the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern by processing the conductive material layer comprises: coating the conductive material layer with a photoresist layer; processing the photoresist layer into a photoresist pattern through an exposure process and a development process; and acquiring the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern by processing the conductive material layer by taking the photoresist pattern as a mask. The conductive material layer is the layer that makes up the traces; see claim 13: “forming a conductive material layer on the substrate having the insulating layer formed thereon, the conductive material layer fracturing at the edge of the groove”. There is no disclosure in the specification of coating a photoresist layer on this conductive material layer; photoresist 251 is formed on shielding pattern 25, not on t1 and t2. See FIGS. 9-12 and accompanying text. The applicant has not enabled claim 17.
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependencies.
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 1-20 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 1 recites that “the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at an edge of the groove.” The other independent claims have analogous recitations. The plain meaning of “fracture” is “to cause a crack or break in (something hard, such as a bone)”. (https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/fracture). That is, to fracture is to cause a break in something solid. The applicant has not set forth a special definition in the specification, and there is not an art-specific meaning different than the ordinary meaning. There is no disclosure of such a process of fracture here. The present specification recites that “[d]ue to the presence of the undercut structure, upon a conductive structure layer is formed on the insulating layer 22 having the groove c, the conductive structure layer easily fractures at the edge of the groove c, so as to form a part of the structure disposed on the insulating layer 22 and another part of the structure disposed in the groove c. A part of the structure disposed on the insulating layer 22 includes the second trace pattern 24, and a part of the structure disposed in the groove includes the first trace pattern 23.” The only disclosure in the specification is of depositing a layer partly in the groove and partly on the upper part of the insulating layer. The ordinary deposition methods in the art involve gas or ion precursors, or perhaps liquid (as in spin coating). However, no specific method of deposition is disclosed in the specification at all. Those in the art would not know how to form the two trace patterns “by fracture at an edge of the groove” as claimed. As the ordinary meaning of the claim is not enabled, and claims are to be read in light of the specification, it would not be clear to those in the art if some different, not-well-explained meaning of this term is meant to be applied.
As noted above, claim 17 is not enabled by the specification. The claims are to be read in light of the specification, it would not be clear to those in the art what the scope of claim 17 should be, as it is not explained in the specification in a way that would make it make sense in light of the specification and other claims.
Claim 20 recites that “an overlapping region is present between an orthographic projection of the sensor on the display panel and the light-transmitting display region.” It is not clear what this means. In the disclosure, the orthographic projection of the sensor is within the light transmitting region: “an orthographic projection of the sensor on the display panel is within the light-transmitting display region of the display panel.” [0130]. In what sense is the overlapping region present between the two? This is not clear.
Claims 17 and 20 have not been rejected over the prior art because, in light of the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections supra, there is sufficient uncertainty that it would not be proper to reject the claims on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.
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.
Claims 1-5, 9-13, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1) as being anticipated by Wu, CN 113327940 A.
Claim 1: Wu discloses
a substrate (1), an insulating layer (201) disposed on the substrate and provided with a patterned groove (22);
and a first trace pattern (4) and a second trace pattern (3), wherein the first trace pattern is disposed in the groove, the second trace pattern is disposed on the insulating layer (FIG. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
249
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 also recites that the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at an edge of the groove. This is a product-by-process limitation; it limits the claim scope only as to the resulting structure, not as to the process of formation. See MPEP 2113. In this case, the traces on top of the strips 21 go to the edges, and the traces 4 in the grooves have the same width as the space between the traces 3, which would be the case if it were formed by fracturing. Further, the traces 3 and 4 are made of indium tin oxide ([0054]). They are the same material, as would be expected if they were formed by fracturing at the edge of the groove. Indium tin oxide is disclosed in the present specification as being an appropriate material for formation by fracturing ([0076]). Thus the structure of Wu is consistent with a structure formed by fracturing.
Claim 2: Wu discloses a shielding pattern (bottom portion of 3), wherein the shielding pattern is disposed between the second trace pattern (top of 3) and the insulating layer (201), an orthographic projection of the second trace pattern on the substrate is within an orthographic projection of the shielding pattern on the substrate, and an edge of the shielding pattern protrudes out of an edge of an end, distal from the substrate, of a groove wall of the groove (FIG. 5). Note that no structural, material, etc. differences are recited between the shielding pattern and the second trace layer, and thus the bottom portion of 3 can be the shielding pattern.
Claim 3: a material of the shielding pattern is a conductive material ([0051]).
Claim 4: the material of the shielding pattern comprises indium tin oxide ([0054]), and the insulating layer is an inorganic insulating layer (silicon oxide, [0058]).
Claim 5: the groove comprises one or more first groove walls, wherein the first groove wall and the substrate are perpendicular to each other, and the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at the first groove wall (Wu FIG. 5). The groove walls are perpendicular to the surface of the substrate at least at one point:
PNG
media_image2.png
198
618
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 9: Wu discloses
a light-transmitting display region (A) and a conventional display region (B) at least partially surrounding the light-transmitting display region (FIG. 2);
wherein the display panel further comprises a plurality of light-emitting devices (90 connected to electrode 7) and a plurality of pixel drive circuits (11) disposed in the conventional display region, wherein the plurality of pixel drive circuits comprise a plurality of first pixel drive circuits (8) and a plurality of second pixel drive circuits (6), and the plurality of first pixel drive circuits are electrically connected to the light-emitting devices disposed in the conventional display region ([0070]);
and the display panel further comprises a light-emitting device (90 connected to electrode 9) disposed in the light-transmitting display region, wherein the plurality of second pixel drive circuits are electrically connected, through the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern, to the light-emitting device disposed in the light-transmitting display region ([0064]-[0065]).
Claim 10: materials of the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern comprise indium tin oxide ([0054]).
Claim 11: Wu has a display region (A+B, FIG. 2), wherein the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are both disposed in the display region (FIGS. 2 and 3).
Claim 12: Wu discloses
providing a substrate (1);
forming an insulating material layer (201) on the substrate;
acquiring an insulating layer by forming a patterned groove (22) on the insulating material layer;
and forming a first trace pattern (4) and a second trace pattern (3) on the insulating layer,
wherein the first trace pattern is disposed in the groove, the second trace pattern is disposed on the insulating layer (5).
Claim 12 also recites that the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at an edge of the groove. The examiner interprets this here to mean the two traces are formed with a separation that could be formed by a break at the edge of the groove, which Wu (FIG. 5) discloses.
Claim 13: acquiring the insulating layer by forming the patterned groove on the insulating material layer comprises:
forming a shielding pattern (202) on the insulating material layer;
and acquiring the insulating layer with the patterned groove by processing the insulating material layer, wherein an edge of the shielding pattern protrudes out of an edge of an end, distal from the substrate, of a groove wall of the groove (FIG. 5);
and forming the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern on the insulating layer comprises:
forming a conductive material layer on the substrate having the insulating layer formed thereon, the conductive material layer fracturing at the edge of the groove ([0062]);
and acquiring the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern by processing the conductive material layer (allowing the conductive material layer to divide at the edge).
Claim 18:
a substrate (1), an insulating layer disposed (201) on the substrate and provided with a patterned groove (22);
and a first trace pattern (4) and a second trace pattern (3), wherein the first trace pattern is disposed in the groove, the second trace pattern is disposed on the insulating layer, and the first trace pattern and the second trace pattern are patterns formed by fracture at an edge of the groove (FIG. 5).
Claim 19: the sensor comprises at least one of a biological information sensor, an optical sensor, and a distance sensor (camera, [0003]).
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 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Nho, US 2015/0331508 A1.
Claim 6: Wu does not disclose the claimed connection to the traces. However, it was well-known in the art to have multi-layer interconnections for signal lines in order to connect to the necessary elements. See Nho, FIG. 3A, which discloses a bridging line, wherein the groove comprises one or more second groove walls, an obtuse included angle is formed between the second groove wall and a groove bottom, and the bridging line is bridged on the second groove wall with one end disposed on the insulating layer:
PNG
media_image3.png
534
812
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nho discloses this as directly connected to the subpixel, but it would have been obvious to have connected it to the trace pattern when applying it to Wu. It would have been within ordinary skill in the art to apply known connection methods to connect lines in any manner to drive circuits, etc.
Claim 7: it would have been obvious for the bridging line and the first trace pattern are in a same layer, as the bridging line is connected to the subpixel in Nho to drive it, and the traces of Wu are to drive the subpixels in the transparent area A. Thus it would have been expected for these to be in the same layer.
Claim 8: Nho discloses three planarization patterns 306/308; Wu also discloses various planarization layers. Wu discloses source-drain trace pattern 611/612, anode pattern 13, and trace patterns 3 and 4. It would have been obvious to arrange these according to ordinary design considerations; such rearrangement of parts would not be a source of patentable distinction.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Yeh, US 2014/0175405 A1.
Claim 15: Wu does not disclose the claimed method of forming the groove. However, Yeh discloses:
forming a photoresist pattern (702) on the substrate having the shielding pattern formed thereon;
and acquiring the insulating layer with the patterned groove (S) by processing the insulating material layer by taking the photoresist pattern as a mask (FIG. 7C, [0056]).
PNG
media_image4.png
242
386
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to have used such a method as known in the art to form grooves.
In Wu in view of Yeh, an orthographic projection of the shielding pattern on the substrate is within an orthographic projection of the photoresist pattern on the substrate.
Claim 16: Yeh discloses acquiring the insulating layer with the patterned groove by performing dry-etching on the insulating material layer by taking the photoresist pattern as the mask ([0056]).
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 USC 112 as set forth above, and is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. However, if the 112 rejection is addressed and if claim 14 is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, it is possible that claim 14 would be allowable. The examiner did not find the claimed method of wet etching an ITO layer and using it to separate lower and upper sets of traces.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-1596. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached at 469.295.9060. 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.
/PETER BRADFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights