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 .
Claims 1-11 are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 4/22/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma et al (US 2006/0057293 and Sharma hereinafter) in view of Ouderkirk et al (US 10,775,616 and Ouderkirk hereinafter).
As to claims 1, 5, and 6: Sharma discloses [claim 1] a display panel manufacturing method (Figs. 5H and 7; [0003], [0077]-[0081], and [0096]-[0103]) comprising: putting a first substrate (Fig. 5H; substrate 60 can be immersed in a bath of fluid 72; [0048]-[0049] and [0097]) into a liquid (72; [0049] and [0097]); putting a plurality of light emitting diodes (Fig. 5H; 80 can be LEDs; [0057]-[0058] and [0098]) into the liquid (72) in which the first substrate (60) is put; performing fluidic self-assembly (Fig. 5H; 80 can be placed into fluid 72 after first substrate 60 and fluidic self-assembly is performed; [0057]) to attach the plurality of light emitting diodes (80) to the first substrate (60); [claim 5] further comprising: withdrawing the first substrate from the liquid after the fluidic self-assembly is completed (Fig. 7; the first substrate 60 and the fluid 72 are separated from each other by moving the first substrate 60, thus “withdrawing” the first substrate from the fluid 72; [0065], [0100], and [0102]).
Sharma fails to expressly disclose [claim 1] transferring the plurality of light emitting diodes attached to the first substrate to a second substrate; and thermally compressing the plurality of light emitting diodes transferred to the second substrate onto the second substrate; [claim 6] wherein the transferring the plurality of light emitting diodes is performed by using a pick and place method.
Sharma discloses in Fig. 7 and [0102] that the first substrate 60 with light emitting diodes 80 therein (also referred to as micro-assembled structure 104) can be subjected to further processing in step 220, including separating the diodes 80 and substrate 60 from each other and then processing the diodes 80.
Ouderkirk discloses a method of moving LEDs from a support carrier substrate to a final substrate by a pick-and-place process and then thermally compressing the LEDs to the final substrate, see col. 11, lines 65-67 and col. 12, lines 1-37.
Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had it within their ordinary capabilities to use the technique of Ouderkirk, specifically using pick-and-place to transfer LEDs from an initial substrate to a final substrate and then thermally compressing the final substrate and the transferred LEDs together, to the method of Sharma, whereby the initial substrate is the first substrate having the self-assembled LEDs thereon and the final substrate is the display substrate, as the technique was well-known in the art of LED devices and the application of which would have resulted in the predictable result of a means to permanently bond working LEDs to a display device for use in a final electronic assembly (col. 12, lines 30-37).
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma in view of Ouderkirk as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gardner et al (US 2014/0306250 and Gardner hereinafter).
As to claims 2 and 3: Although the method disclosed by Sharma in view of Ouderkirk shows substantial features of the claimed invention (discussed in paragraph 9 above), it fails to expressly disclose:
[claim 2] further comprising: before the putting the first substrate and the plurality of light emitting diodes into the liquid, performing hydrophilic surface processing on a portion of the first substrate and portions of the plurality of light emitting diodes; [claim 3] wherein the hydrophilic surface processing comprises: performing hydrophilic surface processing on one of a first electrode pad or a second electrode pad arranged in pairs on the first substrate; and performing hydrophilic surface processing on one of a first electrode terminal or a second electrode terminal of the plurality of light emitting diodes.
Sharma discloses in [0048] that hydrophilic attraction can be used to engage the LEDs 80 to the support 60.
Gardner discloses in [0024], [0099], and [0101] and Fig. 1A that the first substrate that is used in fluidic self-assembly can have the first and second electrode pads thereon treated to be hydrophilic (the claim doesn’t state that only the first or second electrode pads are processed; as the claim states “comprises” as long as at least one is processed, the claimed limitation is met) and the first and second electrode terminals of the LEDs can be treated to be hydrophilic (the claim doesn’t state that only the first or second electrode terminals are processed; as the claim states “comprises” as long as at least one is processed, the claimed limitation is met).
Therefore, given the teachings of Gardner, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Sharma in view of Ouderkirk by employing the well-known or conventional features of self-assembly processing, such as displayed by Gardner, by employing treating electrode surfaces on the LEDs and the first substrate to be hydrophilic in order to assist in coupling the LEDs to the substrate ([0099]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma in view of Ouderkirk as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yuen (US 2018/0076068 and Yuen hereinafter).
Although the method disclosed by Sharma in view of Ouderkirk shows substantial features of the claimed invention (discussed in paragraph 9 above), it fails to expressly disclose:
further comprising: circulating the liquid such that the plurality of light emitting diodes flow in the liquid and are then inserted into a plurality of guide grooves provided on the first substrate.
Yuen discloses in [0018] and [0022] that fluid flow (fluid circulation) can be modified.
Therefore, given the teachings of Yuen, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Sharma in view of Ouderkirk by employing the well-known or conventional features of self-assembly processing, such as displayed by Yuen, by employing a fluid flow control in order to improve the efficiency of the fluidic assembly ([0004]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma in view of Ouderkirk as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Bower et al (US 2016/0093600 and Bower hereinafter).
Although the method disclosed by Sharma in view of Ouderkirk shows substantial features of the claimed invention (discussed in paragraph 9 above), it fails to expressly disclose:
wherein the transferring the plurality of light emitting diodes arranged on the first substrate to the second substrate is performed by using a plurality of adhesion heads of a stamper.
Bower discloses a pick and place process in Figs 2A-2D and [0107] where the devices 220 (the LEDs) are moved from an initial substrate to a final substrate ([0095]) using a stamper 210 with a plurality of adhesion heads 274.
Therefore, given the teachings of Bower, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Sharma in view of Ouderkirk by employing the well-known or conventional features of LED macro-assembly fabrication, such as displayed by Bower, by employing a stamper with a plurality of adhesion heads to transfer the LEDs of Sharma in view of Ouderkirk from the first substrate to the display substrate in order to provide a means to form the macro-assembly using a low-cost but higher yield and reliable process ([0005]).
Claims 8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma in view of Ouderkirk as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Joon (KR 101620469 and Joon hereinafter; a machine translation is used as an English language equivalent).
As to claims 8, 10, and 11: Although the method disclosed by Sharma in view of Ouderkirk shows substantial features of the claimed invention (discussed in paragraph 9 above), it fails to expressly disclose:
[claim 8] wherein the thermally compressing the plurality of light emitting diodes onto the second substrate comprises fixing the plurality of light emitting diodes to the second substrate by an adhesion layer provided on one surface of the second substrate; [claim 10] wherein the adhesion layer is an anisotropic conductive film; [claim 11] wherein the adhesion layer is a non-conductive film.
Joon discloses in Figs. 12a-13d ([0151]-[0177]) processes of thermo-compressing LEDs ([0167]) from an first substrate 2062/3062 to a second substrate 2063/3070 by using an adhesive layer 2030/3080 that can be an anisotropic conductive film 2030 ([0160]) or a non-conductive film 3080 ([0177]).
Therefore, given the teachings of Joon, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Sharma in view of Ouderkirk by employing the well-known or conventional features of LED macro-assembly fabrication, such as displayed by Joon, by employing an adhesive layer comprising either an anisotropic conductive film or a non-conductive film between the LEDs and the second substrate when combined in a thermo-compression bonding step in order to securely attach the LEDs to the final substrate using a low cost method ([0021]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma in view of Ouderkirk in view of Joon as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Honjo et al (US 2019/0244937 and Honjo hereinafter).
Although the method disclosed by Sharma in view of Ouderkirk in view of Joon shows substantial features of the claimed invention (discussed in paragraph 15 above), it fails to expressly disclose:
further comprising: after the fixing the plurality of light emitting diodes to the second substrate by the adhesion layer provided on the one surface of the second substrate, hardening the adhesion layer of the second substrate.
Sharma in view of Ouderkirk in view of Joon discloses using an anisotropic conductive film to adhere the LEDs to the second substrate.
Honjo discloses in [0059] that an anisotropic conductive film for attaching LEDs to a second substrate by forming an anisotropic conductive adhesive that fixes the LEDs to the substrate and then curing (hardening) the anisotropic adhesive through thermocompression bonding.
Therefore, given the teachings of Honjo, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Sharma in view of Ouderkirk in view of Joon by employing the well-known or conventional features of LED macro-assembly fabrication, such as displayed by Joon, by forming the anisotropic conductive film through hardening/curing of an anisotropic conductive paste used to fix the LEDs to the substrate in order to securely attach the LEDs to the final substrate ([0059]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH C NICELY whose telephone number is (571)270-3834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 4 pm, EST.
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, Steven Gauthier can be reached at (571) 270-0373. 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.
JOSEPH C. NICELY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2813
/JOSEPH C. NICELY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights