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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 13-19 and 21-41 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/26/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (CN116030714; “Zhou” hereinafter) in view of Zhu (US 20230254961; “Zhu” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou discloses a display device, comprising: a display component comprising a cover plate (cover plate 201) (fig. 10), a display module (display module comprising of optical adhesive 202, polarizer 203, display panel 204, substrate 205, composite film layer 206, cable 207, and tape 209), and an encapsulating layer (glue 40) (fig. 10), wherein: the cover plate has a light emitting side (upper side of the cover plate 201) and a backlight side (lower side of the cover plate 201, fig. 10), the display module and at least a part of the encapsulating layer is disposed at the backlight side of the cover plate (fig. 10); the encapsulating layer covers at least a part of a periphery of the display module (glue portion 40 at least partially covers the periphery portion of the bent portion of the display panel 204, edges of the polarizer 203, fig. 10); the display module comprises a display panel (204), a supporting layer (205), and a composite layer (206) that are stacked (fig. 10); and the display panel comprises a bending portion (bent portion of the display panel 204, fig. 10) at a side of the display panel along a first direction, and the first direction is parallel with a plane along which the cover plate extends (fig. 10); and a middle frame bezel (30), wherein: a supporting platform (bottom 301) is disposed on at least a part of a periphery of the middle frame bezel (fig. 10) and is configured to support the display module (bottom 301of the middle frame 30 is configured to support the display module, fig. 10); the supporting platform (301) is located at a side of the display module away from the cover plate (201) (fig. 10); and the supporting platform (301) and the display module overlap in a first overlapping region when viewed along a thickness direction of the cover plate (fig. 10).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the composite layer comprises a plurality of functional layers.
Zhu teaches a display device comprising a composite layer (12) that is disposed below a display panel (10); the composite layer comprises a plurality of functional layers (“The composite functional layer 12 includes the adhesive layer 1213, the foam 1212, the first buffer layer 1214, and the metal layer 1211 adjacent to the backplate 11 in sequence”, par. [0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou to have the composite layer comprises a plurality of functional layers as taught by Zhu because with such modification the composite layer helps in heat dissipation and stress buffering (par. [0045]).
Regarding claim 2, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein the supporting platform (301, Zhou, fig. 10) and at least one functional layer among the plurality of functional layers (206, Zhou; 12 of Zhu, figs 4-6) overlap in a second overlapping region when viewed along the thickness direction (the combination of Zhou and Zhu teaches this limitation).
Regarding claim 3, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein the supporting platform (301, Zhou, fig. 10) and at least two functional layers (206, Zhou; 12 of Zhu, figs 4-6) among the plurality of functional layers overlap partially when viewed along the thickness direction (the combination of Zhou and Zhu teaches this limitation).
Regarding claim 4, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein along the first direction, the bending portion is located between the middle frame bezel (30, Zhou) and a terminal of the supporting platform (301, Zhou) away from the middle frame bezel (Zhou, fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein along the first direction, the bending portion comprises an arc top (fig. 10, Zhou), and a distance between the arc top and a side surface of the middle frame bezel facing the bending portion is smaller than a distance between the arc top and the terminal (fig. 10, Zhou).
Regarding claim 6, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein along the first direction, the bending portion comprises an arc top Zhou, fig. 10).
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly disclose a distance between the arc top and a side surface of the middle frame bezel facing the bending portion is greater than a distance between the arc top and the terminal.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the size of the middle bezel or supporting platform such that a distance between the arc top and a side surface of the middle frame bezel facing the bending portion is greater than a distance between the arc top and the terminal, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 7, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein the composite layer comprises at least one of: a metal layer, an adhesive layer, a copper foil, a foam layer, or a graphite layer (“The composite functional layer 12 includes the adhesive layer 1213, the foam 1212, the first buffer layer 1214, and the metal layer 1211 adjacent to the backplate 11 in sequence”, par. [0047], Zhu).
Regarding claim 8, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1.
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly disclose wherein along the first direction, a length of the first overlapping region is not less than 0.5mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the size/shape of the overlapping region such that a length of the first overlapping region is not less than 0.5mm along the first direction, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 9, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1.
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly disclose wherein along the first direction, a length of the supporting platform is not less than 0.8mm (Note: “The width of the third part is usually 0.8mm to 0.9mm” par. [0060] of the translated document).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the length of the supporting platform such that a length of the supporting platform is not less than 0.8mm along the first direction, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 10, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1.
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly disclose wherein along the first direction, a ratio of a length of the first overlapping region to a length of the supporting platform ranges from 0.15 to 0.3.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the size/shape of the overlapping region and length of the supporting platform such that a ratio of a length of the first overlapping region to a length of the supporting platform ranges from 0.15 to 0.3 along the first direction, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape/size of components. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 11, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein the bending portion comprises an arc top (fig. 10, Zhou), the arc top and the middle frame bezel (301, Zhou, fig. 10) are spaced apart by a first distance along the first direction (fig. 10, Zhou).
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly disclose the first distance ranges from 0.3mm to 0.6mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the first distance between the arc top and the middle frame bezel such that the first distance ranges from 0.3mm to 0.6mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 12, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein a side surface of the encapsulating layer (40, Zhou, fig. 10) facing away from the bending portion is attached to a side surface of the middle frame bezel (30 or 302, Zhou, fig. 10) facing the bending portion (Zhou, fig. 10).
Regarding claim 20, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses wherein: the display panel further comprises a first panel portion (upper flat portion of the display panel 203 before the bent portion, fig. 10, Zhou) and a second panel portion (lower flat portion of the display panel 203 after the bent portion, fig. 10, Zhou); the bending portion extends along a curving direction (fig. 10, Zhou), and two terminals of the bending portion along the curving direction are connected to the first panel portion and the second panel portion, respectively (Zhou, fig. 10); and the first panel portion is closer to the cover plate (201, Zhou) than the second panel portion (fig. 10, Zhou), and the supporting layer (205, Zhou) is located between the first panel portion and the second panel portion (Zhou, fig. 10).
Claim(s) 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et in view of Zhu as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Zhang (CN 11342190; “Zhang” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 42, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1.
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly discloses wherein the display panel comprises a sensing region, and an encapsulating layer has at least one indent at a position corresponding to the sensing region.
Zhang teaches a display device comprising a display panel (130) that includes a sensing region (region where the photosensitive element 210 is disposed, fig 3), and the encapsulating layer (161, 151) has at least one indent at a position corresponding to the sensing region (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou in view of Zhu to have an encapsulating layer having at least one indent at a position corresponding to the sensing region as taught by Zhang because such modification ensures the proper functioning of the sensing module and the display device.
Claim(s) 46 and 52-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et in view of Zhu as applied to claim 1, and in further view of Hsu (US 20120242926; “Hsu” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 46, Zhou in view of Zhu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 1, and Zhou teaches wherein: the middle frame bezel (30) comprises a lateral bezel (302) (fig. 10); the lateral bezel is disposed at a side of the encapsulating layer (40) away from the bending portion (fig. 10); and at least a part of the supporting platform is located at a side of the lateral bezel close to the display panel (fig. 10).
Zhou in view of Zhu does not explicitly discloses the middle frame bezel comprises a bottom bezel, and the bottom bezel is disposed at a side of the supporting platform away from the cover plate.
Hsu teaches a display device comprising a middle frame bezel (1) comprising a lateral bezel (12), and a bottom bezel (11); the bottom bezel is disposed at a side of a supporting platform (121, figs. 9, 25, supporting platform as depicted in annotated fig. 25) away from a control panel (8) (annotated fig. 25) or a cover plate (7) (fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Zhou in view of Zhu to have the middle frame bezel comprises a bottom bezel, and the bottom bezel is disposed at a side of the supporting platform away from the cover plate as taught by Hsu because such modification provides accommodating space for other components to be disposed in the frame bezel.
PNG
media_image1.png
432
771
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 52, Zhou in view of Zhu and Hsu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 46, and Hsu further teaches wherein a surface of the supporting platform (supporting platform, annotated fig. 25) facing away from the cover plate (cover plate 7, fig. 9, or control panel 8, fig. 25) is spaced apart from the bottom bezel (11, fig. 25) by a fifth distance (supporting platform is spaced apart from the bottom bezel 11 by a certain distance, annotated fig. 25).
Regarding claim 53, Zhou in view of Zhu and Hsu (relied on Zhou) discloses the device further comprising: one or both of a battery and a mainboard (par. [n0046]).
Zhou in view of Zhu and Hsu does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a part of the one or both of the battery and the mainboard is disposed between the supporting platform and the bottom bezel.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to relocate the battery and the mainboard to disposed between the supporting platform and the bottom bezel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Regarding claim 54, Zhou in view of Zhu and Hsu discloses the display device as claimed in claim 46, and Hsu further teaches wherein a surface of the supporting platform (121) facing away from the cover plate (cover plate 7, fig. 9; panel 8, fig. 25) is in contact with the bottom bezel (11) (fig. 9, 25).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 43-45 and 47-51 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 claim 43, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in claim 1 and claim 42, a combination of limitations that wherein: the composite layer is disposed at a side of the supporting layer away from the cover plate; there is one or both of a first opening and a second opening, wherein the first opening runs at least partially through the display panel and the supporting layer, the second opening runs through at least a part of the plurality of functional layers, and the first opening and the second opening each is in the sensing region; at least a part of the encapsulating layer is disposed at a side of the composite layer away from the cover plate; the at least one indent is spaced apart from the one or both of the first opening and the second opening by a fourth distance. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding claim 47, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations recited in claim 1 and claim 46, a combination of limitations that wherein: the display panel comprises a display region and a border region, and the border region comprises a non-step region and a step region; the bending portion is disposed in the step region; the non-step region comprises at least one molding injection region and a molding ejection region corresponding to the at least one molding injection region; and the supporting platform is disposed in one or both of at least one molding injection region and the molding ejection region. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Claims 44 and 45 are objected as being dependent on claim 43.
Claims 48-51 are objected as being dependent on claim 47.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are listed in the form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAGAR SHRESTHA whose telephone number is (571)270-1236. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am-6:30 pm, Monday-Friday.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/SAGAR SHRESTHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights