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 .
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 9 is 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.
Regarding Claim 9, the first line includes a 1st-1 line and a 1st-2 line which are described in the specification as 1st-1 peripheral detection line 611 and 1st-2 peripheral detection line 612 and the second line includes 2nd-1 line and a 2nd-2 line which is described in the specification as a 2nd-1 peripheral detection line 621 and 2nd-2 peripheral detection line 622.
It is unclear how these lines are intended to be disposed at distinct edges (i.e., a 1st-1 line extending along an edge of the substrate and a 1st-2 line extending along another edge of the substrate) as Figs. 5 and 7 show these features being disposed substantially at the same edge but different sides of a substrate relative to a vertical center axis.
For examination purposes, the 1st-1 line and 2nd-1 line are interpreted as being disposed along a same side of the substrate and being spaced apart and the 1st-2 and 2nd-2 lines are interpreted as being disposed at another side of the substrate and being spaced apart from each other as shown in Figs. 5 and 7 of the instant application.
Claims 10-20 are further rejected due to their dependence on claim 9 and lack of further clarity.
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) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mandlik (US 20180174505 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Mandlik teaches a display apparatus (shown Fig. 10) comprising:
a first area (22A) including a display area (see also Fig. 2, a display area being defined by pixels 24), a second area (32), and a bending area (22T, see also Fig. 1) disposed between the first area and the second area (shown Fig. 10);
a substrate (see [0028]);
a display element (24) disposed on the substrate in the display area (shown Fig. 2);
a first line (80, see also [0047] describing a crack detection line) extending to surround at least a portion of the display area (shown Fig. 10);
a first test pad (126), a second test pad (122), and a third test pad (128), disposed in the second area (shown Fig. 10);
a first test line (vertical portion of line 80B extending through region 22T and connecting at terminal 126, shown Fig. 10) electrically connected to the first line (shown Fig. 10) in the second area and electrically connected to the first test pad (shown Fig. 10);
a second test line (vertical portion of line 80A extending through region 22T and connecting at terminal 122, shown Fig. 10) extending through the bending area, the second test line being electrically connected to the first line in the first area (connected via a plurality of bridges between 80A and 80B), and the second test line being electrically connected to the second test pad (shown Fig. 10); and
a third test line (vertical portion of line 80B extending through region 22T and connecting at terminal 128, shown Fig. 10) spaced apart from the first test line, the third test line being electrically connected to the first line in the second area, and the third test line being electrically connected to the third test pad (shown Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 2, Mandlik teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the substrate is bent in the bending area (see Fig. 1), and a back surface of the second area faces at least a portion of a back surface of the first area (shown Fig. 1, wherein a “back surface” is interpreted as a surface facing the bend axis 28).
Regarding Claim 3, Mandlik teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:
a fourth test pad (124) disposed in the second area (shown Fig. 10); and
a fourth test line (vertical portion of line 80A extending through region 22T and connecting at terminal 124, shown Fig. 10) extending through the bending area, the fourth test line being electrically connected to the first line in the first area, and the fourth test line being electrically connected to the fourth test pad (shown Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 4, Mandlik teaches the display apparatus of claim 3, wherein
the first test line and the second test line are disposed on a side of the substrate (left side, shown Fig. 10), and
the third test line and the fourth test line are disposed on another side (right side, shown Fig. 10) of the substrate opposite to the side of the substrate.
Regarding Claim 5, Mandlik teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first line, the first test line, the second test line, and the third test line are integral with each other (shown Fig. 10, wherein the first line and first through third test lines are formed in a same metal layer of line 80).
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.
Claim(s) 6-9 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mandlik (US 20180174505 A1) in further view of Lee (US 20210217336 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Mandlik teaches the display apparatus of claim 1.
Mandlik does not explicitly teach a through hole and a through-hole detection line being implemented in the crack detection circuitry of the main display area.
Lee teaches a display apparatus (see Lee: Fig. 6) wherein crack detection circuitry (test controller 700’, test pads P1-P7, and a first line DR1 and DR2 connected to the plurality of test pads through a plurality of test lines as shown in Figs. 6-8) further comprises:
a substrate (Lee: 110) having a through hole (Lee: HA) included in a first area (region above bending area BA, shown Fig. 6), and
the display apparatus further comprises:
a through-hole detection line (Lee: HCD) electrically connected to the first line and adjacent to the through hole (shown Fig. 6 being electrically connected to DR1); and
a second line (Lee: DT1, DT2) electrically connected to the through-hole detection line and extending to surround at least a portion of the display area (shown Fig. 6).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to integrate a through hole and hole crack detection circuitry with the crack detection circuitry of Mandlik to further accommodate devices such as a camera, a flash, a speaker, and an optical sensor in the display area in order to minimize the non-display area on a front surface and maximize display area on a front surface while further enabling crack detection in the hole area (see Lee: [0006] and [0039-0040]).
Regarding Claim 7, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 6, wherein the through-hole detection line has a shape that surrounds or dually surrounds the through hole (see Lee: Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 8, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 6, wherein the first line is disposed outside of the second line (see Lee: Fig. 6, wherein at least a portion of DR2 is disposed outside of DT2).
Regarding Claim 9, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 6, wherein
the first line includes a 1st-1 line (80B, left side) extending along an edge of the substrate (left vertical edge) and a 1st-2 line (80B, right side) extending along another edge of the substrate (right vertical edge, shown in Mandlik: Fig. 10), and
the second line includes a 2nd-1 line (DT1, left side) extending along an edge of the substrate and a 2nd-2 line (DT2, right side) extending along another edge of the substrate (shown Lee: Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 18, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 9. Mandlik further teaches:
a fourth test pad (124) disposed in the second area (shown Fig. 10); and
a fourth test line (vertical portion of line 80A extending through region 22T and connecting at terminal 124, shown Fig. 10) extending through the bending area, the fourth test line being electrically connected to the first line in the first area, and the fourth test line being electrically connected to the fourth test pad (shown Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 19, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 18, wherein:
the first test line and the second test line are electrically connected to the 1st-1 line, and
the third test line and the fourth test line are electrically connected to the 1st-2 line (shown Mandlik: Fig. 10).
Regarding Claim 20, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 19, wherein the first test line and the second test line are disposed on a side of the substrate (left side), and the third test line and the fourth test line are disposed on another side of the substrate (shown Mandlik: Fig. 10) opposite to the side of the substrate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-17 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claims 10 and 14, Mandlik as modified by Lee teaches the display apparatus of claim 9. Lee as applied to Mandlik further teaches a first pad (P1) and a second pad (P2), wherein at least a first voltage (P1(V)) and second voltage (P2(V)) are applied respectively and the pads are connected to a second line (DT1, DT2). Mandlik explicitly shows 2nd-1 line DT1 being electrically connected to P1 and thus electrically connected to a first voltage line, while a 2nd-2 line DT2 is connected to P2 and a second voltage line.
The prior art does not explicitly teach or suggest in any combination a first voltage line being electrically connected to the first pad and a second voltage line being electrically connected to the 2nd-1 line or a third voltage line electrically connected to a second pad and a fourth voltage line electrically connected to a 2nd-2 line as taught in the instant application.
As such, claims 10 and 14 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form with base claim 1 and intervening claims 6 and 9.
Claims 11-13 and 15-17 would further be allowable as they require all limitations of dependent claims 10 and 14 respectively.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY PAUL BOATMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4778. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM - 5:30 PM ET.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at (571)270-3042. 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.
/C.P.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights