CTNF 18/625,793 CTNF 89877 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 – 10, 12, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2023/0215973) . Regarding claim 1 , Chen teaches: An encapsulation structure, comprising: a flexible substrate (10) having an element area and a non-element area (FIG. 1) ; a plurality of electronic elements (12) disposed in the element area; and a plurality of light-guiding structures (110) disposed on the plurality of electronic elements, wherein each of the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises a convex structure or a concave structure, wherein the convex structure has at least two curved surfaces, at least two inclined surfaces, or a combination of at least one curved surface and one inclined surface in a cross-section; and wherein the concave structure has at least one curved surface or at least two inclined surfaces in a cross-section ([0024] – [0025]) . Regarding claim 2 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises a groove that is formed by two inclined surfaces or two curved surfaces (triangular/pyramidal trench [0025]) . Regarding claim 3 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises two inclined surfaces or two curved surfaces in two mutually perpendicular cross-sections (triangular/pyramidal structures [0025]) . Regarding claim 4 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises a triangular prism, a quadrangular prism, a quadrangular pyramid, or a combination thereof ([0025]) . Regarding claim 5 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises trapezoidal or arc-shaped in a cross-section ([0025]) . Regarding claim 6 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: a barrier layer covering the plurality of light-guiding structures (15) . Regarding claim 7 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of light-guiding structures corresponds to a pixel structure or a sub-pixel structure among the plurality of electronic elements (FIG. 1) . Regarding claim 8 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of electronic elements are embedded within the flexible substrate (FIG. 1) . Regarding claim 9 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of electronic elements are disposed on the flexible substrate (FIG. 1) . Regarding claim 10 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of buffer structures surrounding the plurality of electronic elements (14) . Regarding claim 12 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of electronic elements comprises: a control substrate connected to the flexible substrate; and a light-emitting structure disposed on the control substrate ([0028]) . Regarding claim 13 , Chen teaches (FIG. 4): The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 12, further comprising: a plurality of encapsulation bodies surrounding the plurality of light-emitting structures. Regarding claim 19 , Chen teaches: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein a light-emitting range of each of the plurality of electronic elements is within ±85° of an angle based on a normal line of each of the plurality of electronic elements (B, FIG. 1) . 07-15 AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Yamada et al. (US 2021/0055544) . Regarding claim 20 , Yamada teaches: An encapsulation structure, comprising: a flexible substrate (130) having an element area and a non-element area (FIG. 9) ; an electronic element (131) disposed in the element area; a deformable (100) light-guiding structure disposed on the electronic element; and a shape-adjusting pad (19b) in direct or in indirect contact with the deformable light-guiding structure for changing a shape of the deformable light-guiding structure (FIG. 8) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Joo et al. (US 2016/0104850) . Regarding claim 11 , Chen teaches material 20 which may be placed between light emitting devices, but fails to expressly disclose: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 10, further comprising: a plurality of elastic bodies disposed between at least two of the plurality of buffer structures. However, Joo teaches a stretchable flexible substrate having multiple material layers surrounding openings including buffer regions between first and second regions for the purpose of improving substrate flexibility when attaching to uneven surfaces ([0041] – [0049]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the buffer and elastic portions of Joo in the flexible substrate of Chen for the predictable advantage of improving substrate flexibility when mounting to uneven surfaces . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 14 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Yamada et al. (US 2021/0055544) . Regarding claim 14 , Chen teaches multiple light adjusting layers over the light guiding structures, but fails to expressly disclose: The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 13, wherein the plurality of encapsulation bodies are in direct contact with corresponding ones of the plurality of light-guiding structures, and each of the plurality of encapsulation bodies is a shape-adjusting pad for adjusting a shape of a corresponding one of the plurality of light-guiding structures. However, Yamada teaches shape-adjusting pads for adjusting the shape of light guiding structures, (FIG. 8, 9). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the shape-adjusting layer of Yamada in the light adjusting stack of Chen for the predictable advantage of enabling light focusing control functions. Regarding claim 15 , Yamada teaches (FIG. 9) : The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein at least one of the plurality of encapsulation bodies is divided into at least two sub-sections. Regarding claim 16 , Yamada teaches (FIG. 9) : The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 15, wherein the sub-sections are separated from each other. Regarding claim 17 , Yamada teaches ([0003]) : The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein the plurality of encapsulation bodies comprise piezoelectric material. Regarding claim 18 , Yamada teaches ([0003]) : The encapsulation structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein each of the plurality of light-guiding structures comprises a deformable bag of liquid or gel. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CORY W ESKRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)272-0543. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 - 5. 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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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. /CORY W ESKRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 2 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 3 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 4 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 5 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 6 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 7 Art Unit: 3624 Application/Control Number: 18/625,793 Page 8 Art Unit: 3624
Prosecution Insights