DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendments filed on July 29, 2026. 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 3/8/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
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.
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 1-4, 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nitta (US 2022/0199937) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) and in further view of Kim (US 2020/0035762).
With respect to Claim 1, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) most aspects of the current invention including a motherboard for display device (DSP), comprising:
a plurality of panel portions (PX) each including a display area (DA) where a plurality of display elements are arranged;
a margin area (area outside display area) around the plurality of panel portions;
wherein the panel portion includes:
an organic insulating layer (11; par 41),
a lower electrode (E1, E11, E12) arranged above the organic insulating layer,
an upper electrode (E2, E21, E22) opposed to the lower electrode, and
an organic layer (OR, OR1, OR2) arranged between the lower electrode and the upper electrode to emit light, in accordance with a potential difference between the lower electrode and the upper electrode
the organic insulating layer (11) extends from the display area to the margin area, the organic insulating layer arranged in the margin area
Furthermore, although Nitta discloses an insulating layer (12) covering the organic insulating layer and also arranged in both the display area and the margin area and forms, in the display area, a rib (12) including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode; Nitta fails to explicitly disclose an alignment mark arranged in the margin area, and wherein the insulating layer covering the organic insulating layer is an inorganic insulating layer, wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Takata teaches (Fig 1) a display device, comprising a panel portion including a display area (DA) wherein the panel portion includes an organic insulating layer (110), a lower electrode (300), an upper electrode (320) opposed to the lower electrode, an organic layer (310) arranged between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, an inorganic insulating layer (330) covering the organic insulating layer and wherein the inorganic insulating layer (330) forms, in the display area, a rib (330) including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode. Takata teaches the inorganic insulating layer is used to cover circumference portions of the lower electrodes so as to section the respective lower electrodes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Nitta to have wherein the insulating layer covering the organic insulating layer to be an inorganic insulating layer, as taught by Takata because the inorganic insulating layer is used to cover circumference portions of the lower electrodes so as to section the respective lower electrodes.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the inorganic insulating layer in the structure of Nitta, as taught by Takata because inorganic insulating material is known in the semiconductor art as being equivalent, and suitable material for forming a rib including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode, and selecting among them would have been obvious to the skilled artisan. See In re KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
However, Takata does not disclose an alignment mark arranged in the margin area and wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches (Fig. 18,26-28) most aspects of the current invention including a motherboard for display device, comprising a panel portion (PX) including a display area (DPA) where a plurality of display elements are arranged, a margin area (NDA) around the plurality of panel portions and an alignment mark (141,153) arranged in the margin area, and furthermore wherein the panel portion includes an inorganic insulating layer (183; see par 89,96,101) that extends from the display area to the margin area and covers the alignment mark (141,153). Kim teaches the alignment marks are used as an identification mark for recognizing the position of the display module or aligning the display module in the process of attaching the display module to a window (par 129).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the arrangement of an alignment mark arranged in the margin area and wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark in the structure of Nitta and Takata, as taught by Kim because the alignment marks are used as an identification mark for recognizing the position of the display module or aligning the display module in the process of attaching the display module to a window.
With respect to Claim 2, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein an end part of the lower electrode is covered with the rib. Furthermore, Takata teaches (Fig 1) wherein an end part of the lower electrode is covered with the rib.
With respect to Claim 3, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein the panel portion further includes a partition (30) arranged above the rib, and the partition is connected to the upper electrode. Furthermore, Takata teaches (Fig 1) wherein the panel portion further includes a partition (340/350) arranged above the rib, and the partition is connected to the upper electrode.
With respect to Claim 4, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein the panel portion further includes a circuit layer (3) arranged under the organic insulating layer. Furthermore, Kim teaches (Fig. 18,26-28) wherein the panel portion further includes a circuit layer (140) arranged under an organic insulating layer (182), and the alignment mark is formed of the same conductive material as a wire included in the circuit layer.
With respect to Claim 7, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) most aspects of the current invention including a display device (DSP), comprising:
a display area (DA) where a plurality of display elements (PX) are arranged
a surrounding area (area outside display area) around the display area
wherein: an organic insulating layer (11; par 41), a lower electrode (E1,E11,E12) arranged above the organic insulating layer, an upper electrode (E2,E21,E22) opposed to the lower electrode, and an organic layer (OR,OR1,OR2) arranged between the lower electrode and the upper electrode to emit light, in accordance with a potential difference between the lower electrode and the upper electrode are provided in the display area
the organic insulating layer (11) extends from the display area to the surrounding area, the organic insulating layer arranged in the surrounding area
Furthermore, although Nitta discloses an insulating layer (12) covering the organic insulating layer and also arranged in both the display area and the surrounding area and forms, in the display area, a rib (12) including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode; Nitta fails to explicitly disclose an alignment mark arranged in the surrounding area, and wherein the insulating layer covering the organic insulating layer is an inorganic insulating layer, wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Takata teaches (Fig 1) a display device, comprising a panel portion including a display area (DA) wherein the panel portion includes an organic insulating layer (110), a lower electrode (300), an upper electrode (320) opposed to the lower electrode, an organic layer (310) arranged between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, an inorganic insulating layer (330) covering the organic insulating layer and wherein the inorganic insulating layer (330) forms, in the display area, a rib (330) including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode. Takata teaches the inorganic insulating layer is used to cover circumference portions of the lower electrodes so as to section the respective lower electrodes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Nitta to have wherein the insulating layer covering the organic insulating layer to be an inorganic insulating layer, as taught by Takata because the inorganic insulating layer is used to cover circumference portions of the lower electrodes so as to section the respective lower electrodes.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the inorganic insulating layer in the structure of Nitta, as taught by Takata because inorganic insulating material is known in the semiconductor art as being equivalent, and suitable material for forming a rib including a pixel aperture through which the organic layer is in contact with the lower electrode, and selecting among them would have been obvious to the skilled artisan. See In re KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
However, Takata does not disclose an alignment mark arranged in the surrounding area and wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches (Fig. 18,26-28) most aspects of the current invention including a motherboard for display device, comprising a panel portion (PX) including a display area (DPA) where a plurality of display elements are arranged, a surrounding area (NDA) around the plurality of panel portions and an alignment mark (141,153) arranged in the margin area, and furthermore wherein the panel portion includes an inorganic insulating layer (183; see par 89,96,101) that extends from the display area to the surrounding area and covers the alignment mark (141,153). Kim teaches the alignment marks are used as an identification mark for recognizing the position of the display module or aligning the display module in the process of attaching the display module to a window (par 129).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the arrangement of an alignment mark arranged in the surrounding area and wherein the inorganic insulating layer is above the alignment mark in the structure of Nitta and Takata, as taught by Kim because the alignment marks are used as an identification mark for recognizing the position of the display module or aligning the display module in the process of attaching the display module to a window.
With respect to Claim 8, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein an end part of the lower electrode is covered with the rib. Furthermore, Takata teaches (Fig 1) wherein an end part of the lower electrode is covered with the rib.
With respect to Claim 9, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein the panel portion further includes a partition (30) arranged above the rib, and the partition is connected to the upper electrode. Furthermore, Takata teaches (Fig 1) wherein the panel portion further includes a partition (340/350) arranged above the rib, and the partition is connected to the upper electrode.
With respect to Claim 10, Nitta discloses (Fig. 1-5) wherein the panel portion further includes a circuit layer (3) arranged under the organic insulating layer. Furthermore, Kim teaches (Fig. 18,26-28) wherein the panel portion further includes a circuit layer (140) arranged under an organic insulating layer (182), and the alignment mark is formed of the same conductive material as a wire included in the circuit layer.
Claims 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nitta (US 2022/0199937) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) and in further view of Kim (US 2020/0035762) and Lee (US 2014/0138646).
With respect to Claim 5, Nitta in view of Takata and in further view of Kim discloses most aspects of the present invention. However, the combination of references does not show wherein the alignment mark is formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches (Fig 1-3a) a motherboard for display device, comprising a plurality of panel portions (Panel 11 – Panel 23) each including a display area (102) where a plurality of display elements are arranged, and a margin area (vacant area 10) around the display area, an alignment mark (107a) arranged in the margin area, wherein the alignment mark is formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view (see Fig 3a; par 62).
However, it is noted that the specification fails to provide teachings about the criticality of having the alignment mark formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view, as claimed in the instant application.
Therefore, absent any criticality, this limitation is only considered to be an obvious modification of the alignment mark disclosed by Lee as the courts have held that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is within the level of skill in the art, as the particular alignment mark shape claimed by applicant is nothing more than one of numerous alignment mark shapes that a person having ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide using routine experimentation based on its suitability for the intended use of the invention. See In re Daily, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
With respect to Claim 11, Nitta in view of Takata and in further view of Kim discloses most aspects of the present invention. However, the combination of references does not show wherein the alignment mark is formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches (Fig 1-3a) a motherboard for display device, comprising a plurality of panel portions (Panel 11 – Panel 23) each including a display area (102) where a plurality of display elements are arranged, and a margin area (vacant area 10) around the display area, an alignment mark (107a) arranged in the margin area, wherein the alignment mark is formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view (see Fig 3a; par 62).
However, it is noted that the specification fails to provide teachings about the criticality of having the alignment mark formed in a cross shape, a grating shape, or a shape formed by combining a plurality of L letters, in plan view, as claimed in the instant application.
Therefore, absent any criticality, this limitation is only considered to be an obvious modification of the alignment mark disclosed by Lee as the courts have held that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is within the level of skill in the art, as the particular alignment mark shape claimed by applicant is nothing more than one of numerous alignment mark shapes that a person having ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide using routine experimentation based on its suitability for the intended use of the invention. See In re Daily, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nitta (US 2022/0199937) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) and in further view of Kim (US 2020/0035762) and Cheng (US 11,737,318).
With respect to Claim 6, Nitta in view of Takata and in further view of Kim discloses most aspects of the present invention. However, the combination of references does not show wherein the panel portion further includes a surrounding area around the display area and an additional alignment mark is arranged in the surrounding area.
On the other hand, and in the same field of endeavor, Cheng teaches (Fig 1a) a motherboard for display device, comprising a panel portion including a display area (display region) where a plurality of display elements are arranged, and a margin area (second frame region; area outside display area) around the display area, an alignment mark (41) arranged in the margin area, and the panel portion further includes a surrounding area (first frame region/area immediately surrounding display region) around the display area and an additional alignment mark (141/144) is arranged in the surrounding area. Cheng teaches the additional alignment marks are conducive to improving the ability of the alignment device to identify the cover plate alignment marks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the arrangement of wherein the panel portion further includes a surrounding area around the display area and an additional alignment mark is arranged in the surrounding area in the structure of Nitta, Takata and Kim, as taught by Cheng because the additional alignment mark is conducive to improving the ability of the alignment device to identify the cover plate alignment marks.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicants’ amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUINTON A BRASFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-0804. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, Wael Fahmy can be reached on 571-272-1705. 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.
/Q.A.B/ Examiner, Art Unit 2814
/WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights