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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendment filed September 4, 2026.
Specification
The objection to the title of the invention has been withdrawn due to the amendment filed.
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 –
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jeong et al. (EP 3460622 A2).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
In regard to claim 1, Jeong et al. teach a display device comprising: a substrate 100 including a first area 1A, a second area 2A, and a bent area BA, wherein the bent area BA is connected between the first area 1A and the second area 2A, is bent according to a bending axis BAX; a display element 300 on the substrate 100; and an edge protection unit (in 2A) comprising an organic insulating layer 260 (140a/150a/170a), the edge protection unit (in 2A) arranged at an edge of the substrate 100, wherein the edge protection unit (in 2A) extends from a portion of the substrate 100 to an outermost side of the substrate 100 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 2, Jeong et al. teach a planarization layer 140 spaced from the organic insulating layer and positioned between the display element 300 and the substrate 100; a pixel-defining layer 150 spaced from the organic insulating layer 260 and directly contacting the display element 300; and a spacer 170 spaced from the organic insulating layer 260, wherein the pixel-defining layer 150 is positioned between the spacer 170 and the substrate 100, and wherein the organic insulating layer 260 is formed of a same material as at least one of the planarization layer 140, the pixel-defining layer 150, and the spacer 170 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 3, Jeong et al. teach an inorganic insulating layer 125 (110/121/122/130) arranged between the substrate 100 and the organic insulating layer 260 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 4, Jeong et al. teach the inorganic insulating layer 125 is positioned between the second area 2A and the organic insulating layer 260 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 5, Jeong et al. teach a buffer layer 110 arranged between the substrate 100 and the organic insulating layer 260 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 6, Jeong et al. teach the buffer layer 110 is positioned between the organic insulating layer 260 and the first area 1A (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 7, Jeong et al. teach the first area 1A comprising: a display area DA; and a peripheral area NDA surrounding the display area DA, and wherein the display element 300 overlaps the display area DA (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 8, Jeong et al. teach a display device comprising: a substrate 100; a display element 300 on the substrate 100; an organic insulating layer 260 spaced from the display element 300, and arranged at an edge of the substrate 100, wherein the organic insulating layer 260 comprises a face (at 170a) disposed at an outermost side of the substrate 100 and the face (at 170a) of the organic insulating layer 260 is coplanar with the edge of the substrate 100 (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 9, Jeong et al. teach a crack blocking unit 720/210 arranged on the peripheral area NDA and including a slit (areas between 720/210), wherein the organic insulating layer 260 covers at least one of the crack blocking unit 210 and the slit (area between 210) (Figures 1, 6-7 and 18, pages 10-34).
In regard to claim 10, Jeong et al. teach a bending protection layer 600 overlapping a portion of the substrate 100 and partially overlapping the organic insulating layer 260, wherein the organic insulating layer 260 is positioned between the bending protection layer 600 and the bent area BA (Figures 1 and 6-7, pages 10-34).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regard to claim 11, The prior art of record (Jeong et al. (EP 3460622 A2)) does not disclose, make obvious, or otherwise suggest the structure of the applicant's claimed invention together with the other limitations of the dependent claims 12-20, such as the configuration of the substrate, first through fifth sides, curved section, display element, edge protection unit, organic insulating layer and straight section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regard to claim 1, looking at Figure 6 of Jeong et al. (EP 3460622 A2), the edge protection unit (in 2A) extends from a portion of the substrate 100 (the portion of the substrate in 2A) to an outermost side (the outermost side is the right side in 2A where the elements terminate) of the substrate 100.
In regard to claim 8, looking at Figure 6 of Jeong et al. (EP 3460622 A2), the organic insulating layer 260 comprises a face (at 170a) disposed at an outermost side (the outermost side is the right side in 2A where the elements terminate) of the substrate 100 and the face (at 170a) of the organic insulating layer 260 is coplanar with the edge of the substrate 100.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to display devices:
Choi et al. (US2017/0352717 A1) Hangug-Eo et al. (KR 102132697 B1)
Ki et al. (US 9,349,758 B2) Kim et al. (US 2020/0035775 A1)
Lee et al. (US 10,170,505 B2) Namkung (US 2017/0294609 A1)
Yamazaki et al. (US 2003/0094615 A1).
Applicant's 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 IDA M SOWARD whose telephone number is (571)272-1845. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 7am to 5:30pm.
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, Leonard Chang can be reached at 571-270-3691. 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.
IMS
October 7, 2026
/IDA M SOWARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
