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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The applicant has amended their application as follows:
Amended: 1
Cancelled: 8
Added: None
Therefore, claims 1-7 and 8-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Her (US 2015/0049030 A1, hereinafter “Her”) in view of Chien et al. (US 2010/0136868 A1, hereinafter “Chien”).
As to claim 1, Her (Fig. 17) discloses a display device, comprising:
a substrate (SUB) including a display area (DA);
a display element (OLED) in the display area on the substrate (SUB), the display element including a bank (PDL) between at least two anode electrodes (AE);
a planarization layer (ECL) on the display element (OLED);
a touch sensor (SP2-C) on the planarization layer in the display area of the substrate (DA), the touch sensor including touch electrodes (Fig. 8 element TE1, TE22) each having mesh-type configuration (Para. 0101);
a touch sensing line (IS-1) electrically connected to the touch sensor (SP2; Para. 0092);
a black matrix (Fig. 17 element BM1) disposed on the planarization layer (ECL), the black matrix including a first black matrix portion (Left BM1) and a second black matrix portion (middle BM1); and
a bridge electrode (Fig. 19 element BE) disposed on a different layer (ECL) from the touch electrodes (Para. 0116; CP1, CP2 are disposed on BM1), the bridge electrode (BE) overlapping at least one of the black matrix (BM1) and coupling adjacent two touch electrodes (CP2-L2),
wherein the black matrix (BM1) covers and overlaps the touch electrodes (CP2) , and
wherein the touch sensor includes an opaque metal material (Para. 0101, 0115, 0126, copper or aluminum).
Her does not disclose a color filter (CF) disposed between the first black matrix portion (Left TS-BM) and the second black matrix portion (Right TS-BM);
the bridge electrode overlapping at least one of the black matrix and the color filter and coupling adjacent two touch electrodes,
wherein a first side of the color filter contacts the first black matrix portion and a second side of the color filter contacts to the second black matrix portion, and
wherein the touch electrodes are not in contact with the color filter.
However, Chien (Fig. 8) teaches a color filter (128) disposed between the first black matrix portion (Left 124) and the second black matrix portion (Right 124);
the bridge electrode (122) overlapping at least one of the black matrix (124) and the color filter (Fig. 5 element 116; Figs. 7, 8 element 122; if insulating layer 116 is overlapping color filter, than the bridge electrode 122 should overlap the color filter) and coupling adjacent two touch electrodes (Fig. 5 element 108),
wherein a first side of the color filter (Fig. 8 element 128, left side) contacts the first black matrix portion (left 124) and a second side of the color filter 9128, right side) contacts to the second black matrix portion (right 124), and
wherein the touch electrodes (120) are not in contact with the color filter (128).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Chien to include the color filters in the device disclosed by Her. The motivation would have been to provide various colors with different intensities (Chien; Para. 0033).
As to claim 2, Her (Fig. 19) discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the bridge electrode (BE) is electrically connected between adjacent touch electrodes of the touch electrodes (CP2-L2; Para. 0115).
As to claim 3, Her (Fig. 17) discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the display element includes:
an organic emitting layer (CEL, EML) on the at least two anode electrodes (CEL layers is formed on two AE); and
a cathode electrode (CE) on the organic emitting layer (CEL, EML).
As to claim 4, Her (Fig. 19) discloses the display device of claim 1, further comprising:
an insulating layer (portions of BM1, BM2) between the bridge electrode (BE) and the touch sensor (CP2);
a contact hole (CH3) extending into the insulating layer (BM1; Para. 0115),
wherein the bridge electrode (BE) is electrically connected to the touch sensor (CP2) through the contact hole (CH2, CH3).
As to claim 5, Her (Fig. 19) discloses the display device of claim 4, wherein the touch electrodes comprise:
first touch electrodes (CP1);
second touch electrodes (CP2) on a same layer (ECL) as the first touch electrodes (CP1); and
touch lines (CP-C1, CP-C2) coupled to the first touch electrodes (CP1), wherein the bridge electrode (BE) is coupled to the second touch electrodes (CP2; Para. 0114-0116).
As to claim 7, Her (Fig. 17) discloses the display device of claim 5, wherein the display element comprises:
an organic emitting layer (CEL, EML) on the at least two anode electrodes (AE); and
a cathode electrode (CE) on the organic emitting layer (CEL, EML).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Her and Chien as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Hirakata et al. (US 2016/0282989 A1, hereinafter “Hirakata”).
As to claim 6, Her discloses the display device of claim 5, wherein the touch lines has a mesh-type configuration (Para. 0101).
Her does not expressly disclose the bridge electrode have a mesh-type configuration.
However, Hirakata (Fig. 4B) teaches the bridge electrode (24b) have a mesh-type configuration (Para. 0074, 0085).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Hirakata to have a mesh-type configuration for the bridge electrode in the device disclosed by Her/Chien. The motivation would have been to enable an image displayed on the display portion to be seen through the touch sensor (Hirakata; Para. 0074).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
The prior art does not disclose the limitation “a bridge electrode extending in a horizontal direction to extend through the first side surface of the first black matrix element and the second side surface of the first black matrix element, the bridge electrode extending through the third side surface of the second black matrix element and further extending in a vertical direction to electrically connect to the touch sensor” when combined with other limitations of independent claim 9. The similar idea is embodied in the independent claim 12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant‘s disclosure.
Zou (US 2015/0277186 A1) discloses a flattening layer between the color filters and the touch electrodes (Fig. 3 element 27).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPIN GYAWALI whose telephone number is (571)272-1597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30 PM.
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, Will Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
BIPIN GYAWALI
Examiner
Art Unit 2625
/BIPIN GYAWALI/Examiner, Art Unit 2625