Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Anticipation
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.
Claims 1, 7–12, 14, 18–21 and 23–25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2017/0280234 (published 28 September 2017) (“Choi”)
Claim 1 is drawn to “an apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed apparatus and the Choi reference.
Claim 1
The Choi Reference
“1. An apparatus, comprising:
The Choi reference describes a corresponding display device, or apparatus. Choi at Abs., ¶¶ 1, 2, 73, FIGs.2A, 2B.
“a display panel configured to display an image;
Choi’s device includes a display panel 100 that display images on its front side. Id. at ¶ 74, FIG.2A.
“a driving circuit at a rear surface of the display panel and including a printed circuit board;
Choi’s device includes a source driving circuit (S-DIC) fixed to a source PCB 700 and acts as a source, or driving circuit, for panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 176–180. Choi arranges and disposes, or fixes, source PCB 700 on the rear of panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 29, 183, 205, FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B.
“a guide frame including an opening, the opening accommodating the display panel and the driving circuit;
Choi’s device includes a middle cabinet 500 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Id. at ¶ 77. FIGs.2B, 11B. Middle cabinet 500 is depicted with an opening that accommodates both panel 100 and source PCB 700. See id. at FIG.2B. See also Figure 1, below.
“a rear cover configured to cover the rear surface of the display panel and the driving circuit, the printed circuit board being between the rear surface of the display panel and the rear cover;
Choi’s device includes cover bottom 300 that covers the rear of panel 100 and PCB 700. Id. at ¶ 77, FIG.2B. PCB 700 is also plainly depicted as being between the rear of panel 100 and rear cover 300. Id. at FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B.
“a support at the opening of the guide frame, the printed circuit board being spaced apart from the rear surface of the display panel by the support; and
Choi describes fixing PCB 700 to the rear of display panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 29, 183, 205, FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B. This direct fixing between PCB 700 and display panel 100 inherently requires some type of support means between display panel 100 and PCB 700 (Choi does not describe the means, but the claim does not require any particular means either).
“one or more sound generators at the rear cover, the one or more sound generators being configured to vibrate the display panel.”
Choi includes a sound generator 200 at rear cover 300 in order to vibrate display 100. Id. at ¶ 74, FIG.2B.
Table 1
PNG
media_image1.png
168
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Marked-up version of Choi at FIG.11B (highlighting location of an opening that accommodates panel 100 and PCB 700).
For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 7 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the rear cover comprises: a first plate at the rear surface of the display panel; and
“one or more forming portions at the first plate, the one or more sound generators being accommodated in the one or more forming portions.”
Choi’s back cover 300 similarly includes a plate at the rear of panel 100 and a support hole 310, or forming portion, that accommodates sound generator 200. Choi at ¶¶ 74–77, 97, FIGs.2B, 3A. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 7, and further requires the following:
“wherein the first support further comprises a side portion bent from a side of the first plate.”
As shown in the indefiniteness rejection of claim 8, incorporated herein, the claimed “first support” will be interpreted as a reference to the claimed “rear cover.” Choi describes an embodiment of cover bottom 300 that includes both a first plate and a side portion 360 bent from a side of the first plate and a side surface support part 362 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Choi at ¶¶ 160–163, FIGs.8 (describing a cover bottom 300 with a step 360). Choi further describes another embodiment where cover bottom 300 includes a smaller step that rises from recessed part 380 to conform to the shape of middle cabinet 500. Id. at ¶¶ 204–205, FIG.12B. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 9 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the support comprises a holder at the guide frame, or
“the support comprises a holder at the guide frame and a buffering member between the rear surface of the display panel and the holder.”
Similarly, Choi’s cover bottom 300 forms part of a holder as it extends behind source PCB 700 and includes a buffer 910 between the rear surface of panel 100 and the holder portion of bottom 300. Choi at ¶ 205, FIG.12B. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 10 depends on claim 9, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the support further comprises an adhesive member between the printed circuit board and the holder, or
“the support further comprises an adhesive member between the printed circuit board and the holder, the adhesive member including an elastic material or a vibration absorbing layer.”
Similarly, Choi’s cover bottom 300 forms part of a holder as it extends behind source PCB 700 and includes a buffer 910 between the rear surface of panel 100 and the holder portion of bottom 300. Choi at ¶ 205, FIG.12B. Further, Choi’s buffer members 910 and 920 include adhesive members, like single-sided or double-sided tape. Id. at ¶ 209. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 11 depends on claim 9, and further requires the following:
“wherein the holder comprises: a second plate at a rear surface of the printed circuit board; and
“a pair of bridges bent from sides of the second plate.”
Choi describes an embodiment of cover bottom 300 that includes both a first plate and a side portion 360 bent from a side of the first plate and a side surface support part 362 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Choi at ¶¶ 160–163, FIGs.8 (describing a cover bottom 300 with a step 360). Choi further describes another embodiment where cover bottom 300 includes a smaller step that rises from recessed part 380 to conform to the shape of middle cabinet 500. Id. at ¶¶ 204–205, FIG.12B. A portion of cover bottom 300 that covers PCB 700, however, can be viewed as a second plate with bent bridges corresponding to the side portions 360 or the steps that rise from recessed part 380 to conform to the shape of middle cabinet 500. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 12 depends on claim 11, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the second plate has a wider size than the printed circuit board, and/or
“the second plate is spaced apart from the rear surface of the display panel.”
Similarly, a portion of cover bottom 300 that covers PCB 700 is wider than PCB 700 as it extends completely across the rear of display 100. See Choi at FIGs.2B. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 14 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the opening has a greater size than the display panel, and/or
“the opening is at a rear surface of the guide frame and is covered by the rear cover.”
Choi’s middle cabinet 500 is similarly configured with an opening that is larger than display panel 100. Choi at FIG.2B. See also Figure 1, above. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 18 is drawn to “an apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed apparatus and the An reference.
Claim 18
The An Reference
“18. An apparatus, comprising:
The Choi reference describes a corresponding display device, or apparatus. Choi at Abs., ¶¶ 1, 2, 73, FIGs.2A, 2B.
“a display panel configured to display an image;
Choi’s device includes a display panel 100 that display images on its front side. Id. at ¶ 74, FIG.2A.
“a printed circuit board at a rear surface of the display panel;
Choi’s device includes a source driving circuit (S-DIC) fixed to a source PCB 700 and acts as a source, or driving circuit, for panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 176–180. Choi arranges and disposes, or fixes, source PCB 700 on the rear of panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 29, 183, 205, FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B.
“a support between the rear surface of the display panel and the printed circuit board;
Choi describes fixing PCB 700 to the rear of display panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 29, 183, 205, FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B. This direct fixing between PCB 700 and display panel 100 inherently requires some type of support means between display panel 100 and PCB 700 (Choi does not describe the means, but the claim does not require any particular means either).
“a guide frame configured to surround a side surface of the display panel and the printed circuit board;
Choi’s device includes a middle cabinet 500 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Id. at ¶ 77. FIGs.2B, 11B. Middle cabinet 500 is depicted with an opening that accommodates both panel 100 and source PCB 700. See id. at FIG.2B. See also Figure 1, above.
“a front member configured to cover a front surface of the display panel, four-surface of the front member being supported by the guide frame;
Panel 100 includes multiple layers, including a front member, or surface that forms a cover over panel 100. Id. at ¶¶ 82, 83, 84 (describing a sealing substrate for an OLED panel). Middle cabinet 500 supports four surfaces of this front member via its support of four peripheral surfaces of panel 100. See id. at ¶¶ 144, 157, 208, FIGs.2B, 7A–8.
“a rear cover configured to cover the rear surface of the display panel and the printed circuit board, four-surface of the rear cover being supported by the guide frame; and
Choi’s device includes cover bottom 300 that covers the rear of panel 100 and PCB 700. Id. at ¶ 77, FIG.2B. PCB 700 is also plainly depicted as being between the rear of panel 100 and rear cover 300. Id. at FIGs.9B, 10B, 11B, 12B.
“one or more sound generators at the rear cover, the one or more sound generators configured to vibrate the display panel.”
Choi includes a sound generator 200 at rear cover 300 in order to vibrate display 100. Id. at ¶ 74, FIG.2B.
Table 2
For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 19 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“further comprising a connection member between a rear periphery portion of the front member and the guide frame.”
Choi similarly includes adhesive part 412 between cabinet 500 and a front portion (e.g., sealing substrate) of panel 100. Choi at ¶ 91, FIG.7A. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 20 depends on claim 19, and further requires the following:
“wherein the guide frame includes an opening, and
“wherein the display panel, the printed circuit board, and the support are configured to be accommodated in the opening of the guide frame.”
Choi’s device includes a middle cabinet 500 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Id. at ¶ 77. FIGs.2B, 11B. Middle cabinet 500 is depicted with an opening that accommodates both panel 100 and source PCB 700 (and any means used to secure PCB 700 to panel 100). See Choi at FIG.2B. See also Figure 1, above. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 21 depends on claim 20, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the opening has a greater size than the display panel, and/or
“the opening is covered by the rear cover.”
Choi’s middle cabinet 500 is similarly configured with an opening that is larger than display panel 100. Choi at FIG.2B. See also Figure 1, above. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 23 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“wherein the support comprises a holder at the guide frame.”
Similarly, Choi’s cover bottom 300 forms part of a holder as it extends behind source PCB 700 and includes a buffer 910 between the rear surface of panel 100 and the holder portion of bottom 300. Choi at ¶ 205, FIG.12B. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 24 depends on claim 23, and further requires the following:
“wherein the holder comprises: a second plate at a rear surface of the printed circuit board; and
“a pair of bridges bent from sides of the second plate.”
Choi describes an embodiment of cover bottom 300 that includes both a first plate and a side portion 360 bent from a side of the first plate and a side surface support part 362 corresponding to the claimed guide frame. Choi at ¶¶ 160–163, FIGs.8 (describing a cover bottom 300 with a step 360). Choi further describes another embodiment where cover bottom 300 includes a smaller step that rises from recessed part 380 to conform to the shape of middle cabinet 500. Id. at ¶¶ 204–205, FIG.12B. A portion of cover bottom 300 that covers PCB 700, however, can be viewed as a second plate with bent bridges corresponding to the side portions 360 or the steps that rise from recessed part 380 to conform to the shape of middle cabinet 500. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 25 depends on claim 24, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the second plate has a wider size than the printed circuit board, and/or
“the second plate is spaced apart from the rear surface of the display panel.”
Similarly, a portion of cover bottom 300 that covers PCB 700 is wider than PCB 700 as it extends completely across the rear of display 100. See Choi at FIGs.2B. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Obviousness
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.
Claims 2, 3 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Choi.
Claims 4–6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2017/0055335 (published 23 February 2017) (“Wang”).
Claims 13 and 26–29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2020/0379709 (published 03 December 2020) (“Kim”).
Claims 15–17, 32 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2020/0296496 (published 17 September 2020) (“Im”).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2019/0037164 (published 31 January 2019) (“Kim II”).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi; Kim II and US Patent Application Publication 2016/0198269 (published 07 July 2016) (“Ando”).
Claims 34–37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2018/0070391 (published 08 March 2018) (“Galeotti”).
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the support includes an elastic material or a vibration absorbing layer.”
Choi fixes source PCB 700 to the underside of display panel 100. Choi at ¶ 183, 205, FIGs.11B, 12B. While Choi does not describe how to fix PCB 700 to display panel 100, Choi describes the use of double-sided tape in multiple instances in order to fix together elements of its display apparatus. Id. at ¶¶ 22, 92, 136, 143, 149, 152, 164, 209. Further, Choi describes buffer members 910 and 920 that include elastic materials like double-sided tape, rubber, plastic or paper in order to reduce vibrations. Id. at ¶ 209. This further suggests the use of double-sided tape to both affix PCB 700 to display panel 100 and to reduce vibrations in PCB 700. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the support includes a double-sided tape or a double-sided foam tape each including a vibration absorbing layer.”
Choi fixes source PCB 700 to the underside of display panel 100. Choi at ¶ 183, 205, FIGs.11B, 12B. While Choi does not describe how to fix PCB 700 to display panel 100, Choi describes the use of double-sided tape in multiple instances in order to fix together elements of its display apparatus. Id. at ¶¶ 22, 92, 136, 143, 149, 152, 164, 209. Further, Choi describes buffer members 910 and 920 that include elastic materials like double-sided tape, rubber, plastic or paper in order to reduce vibrations. Id. at ¶ 209. This further suggests the use of double-sided tape to both affix PCB 700 to display panel 100 and to reduce vibrations in PCB 700. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the printed circuit board includes a ground pattern; and
“the support includes a conductive material and is electrically connected to the ground pattern of the printed circuit board.”
The Choi reference does not describe the claimed ground pattern on PCB 700 and the claimed conductive material being included on buffers 910, 920. The Wang reference teaches and suggests eliminating static electricity build up on a display panel and its associated PCB by adding a ground pattern to the PCB and a metallic back plate to the display panel. Wang at ¶¶ 31–36, FIG.2-1. The metallic back plate and the PCB are electrically connected by a conductive tape in order to discharge static electricity to a ground element (i.e., the back plate). Id. This arrangement would have reasonably suggested forming a rear of Choi’s panel 100 with a metallic plate to conduct electricity. PCB 700 would be electrically connected to panel 100 to create a conductive path between the PCB 700’s ground plane and panel 100. Buffer 920 would be formed from a conductive tape to conduct static electricity away from panel 100 and PCB 700 towards bottom cover 300. See Choi at FIG.12B. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Wang references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 4, and further requires the following:
“wherein the support includes a double-sided conductive tape or a double-sided conductive foam tape.”
Similarly, as shown in the rejection of claim 4, incorporated herein, the combination of Choi and Wang suggests the use of double-sided conductive tape to create a static electricity discharge path. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Wang references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 4, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the display panel includes a back plate including a metal material; and
“the support is electrically connected to the back plate of the display panel.”
Similarly, as shown in the rejection of claim 4, incorporated herein, the combination of Choi and Wang suggests making the rear of Choi’s panel 100 from a conductive metal in order to create a static electricity discharge path between panel 100 and Choi’s back bottom cover 300. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Wang references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 13 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“further comprising one or more piezoelectric devices configured to vibrate a periphery portion of the rear surface of the display panel.”
Choi describes embodying sound generator 200 as a dynamic driver. Choi at ¶¶ 75, 94, FIG.3A. The use of piezoelectric drivers for vibrating display panels, however, is a common feature in the art and would have represented a simple redesign to accommodate a piezoelectric driver mounted against the rear of display panel 100. See Kim, for example, at ¶¶ 75, 98, 135, FIGs.1, 2, 4A, 12 (teaching and suggesting the addition of additional piezoelectrical sound generators to the periphery of a display in addition to a central dynamic driver). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 15 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: a balance member at the rear surface of the display panel, or
“a balance member at the rear surface of the display panel, the balance member including another printed circuit board having a size greater than a size of the printed circuit board.”
Claim 16 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“wherein the rear surface of the display panel comprises: a first region that overlaps the printed circuit board;
“a second region that overlaps the one or more sound generators; and
“a third region that overlaps the balance member.”
Claims 15 and 16 commonly recite features of a balance member and its orientation with respect to other claimed elements.
Choi describes the use of at least one source driver on at least one source PCB. Choi at ¶¶ 179–180. Choi, however, does not describe the arrangement of an additional source PCB. At most, Choi at FIG.9A illustrates locating a first source PCB 700 on a left side of a panel. Id. at FIG.9A. The same figure illustrates a second possible location for a second source PCB just to the right of source PCB 700, but the reference does not expressly indicate using that location for a second source PCB. Id. at FIG.9A. Choi further addresses the possibility of unbalanced display panel vibration when mismatched sound generators are used, but does not discuss the effects of unbalanced PCB distribution. Id. at ¶ 237. Taken together, these findings reasonably suggest locating a second source PCB on the right, rear side of Choi’s panel in order to balance the weight of the panel and prevent split vibrations due to a weight imbalance. See also Im at FIG.2 (teaching and suggesting a display panel with two source circuit boards 140 distributed in a balanced, left-right manner.) The resulting device would include three panel regions: first and third regions would respectively overlay source PCBs and a second region would overlay centrally-located sound generator 200. See Choi at FIG.9A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Im references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 17 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“further comprising a blocking member between the display panel and the one or more sound generators.”
Choi includes a sound generator 200 connected to the rear of panel 100. Choi does not describe a corresponding blocking member. The Im reference, however, describes including a heat radiation film 130 on the rear of a panel, which would correspond to the claimed blocking member. Im at ¶¶ 72, 90–93, 108, FIG.10. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Choi’s device to similarly include a heat radiation film between sound generator 200 and display panel 100. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably expected that the heat radiation film would still allow sound generator 200 to vibrate display panel 100 while adding a beneficial heat radiation effect. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Im references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 22 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“wherein the support includes an elastic material or a vibration absorbing layer.”
Choi fixes source PCB 700 to the underside of display panel 100. Choi at ¶ 183, 205, FIGs.11B, 12B. While Choi does not describe how to fix PCB 700 to display panel 100, Choi describes the use of double-sided tape in multiple instances in order to fix together elements of its display apparatus. Id. at ¶¶ 22, 92, 136, 143, 149, 152, 164, 209. Further, Choi describes buffer members 910 and 920 that include elastic materials like double-sided tape, rubber, plastic or paper in order to reduce vibrations. Id. at ¶ 209. This further suggests the use of double-sided tape to both affix PCB 700 to display panel 100 and to reduce vibrations in PCB 700. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 26 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“further comprising one or more piezoelectric devices configured to vibrate a periphery portion of the rear surface of the display panel.”
Choi describes embodying sound generator 200 as a dynamic driver. Choi at ¶¶ 75, 94, FIG.3A. The use of piezoelectric drivers for vibrating display panels, however, is a common feature in the art and would have represented a simple redesign to accommodate a piezoelectric driver mounted against the rear of display panel 100. See Kim, for example, at ¶¶ 75, 98, 135, FIGs.1, 2, 4A, 12 (teaching and suggesting the addition of additional piezoelectrical sound generators to the periphery of a display in addition to a central dynamic driver). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 27 depends on claim 26, and further requires the following:
“wherein the one or more sound generators are configured to vibrate the display panel and output sound of a first sound band, and wherein the one or more piezoelectric devices are configured to vibrate the display panel and output sound of a second sound band higher than the sound of the first sound band.”
Similarly, Kim suggests tuning the different types of sound generators to different frequency bands, with the piezoelectric devices operating at a higher band than the dynamic sound generator. Kim at ¶ 99. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 28 depends on claim 26, and further requires the following:
“wherein the one or more sound generators comprise: a first sound generator configured to vibrate a first region of the display panel; and
“a second sound generator configured to vibrate a second region of the display panel.”
Similarly, Kim suggests locating a dynamic sound generator and multiple piezoelectric sound generators in different regions of a display. Kim at ¶ 75, FIGs.1, 2. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 29 depends on claim 26, and further requires the following:
“wherein the one or more piezoelectric devices comprise: a first piezoelectric device configured to vibrate a third region of the rear surface of the display panel; and
“a second piezoelectric device configured to vibrate a fourth region of the rear surface of the display panel.”
Similarly, Kim suggests locating a dynamic sound generator and multiple piezoelectric sound generators in different regions of a display. Kim at ¶ 75, FIGs.1, 2. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 30 depends on claim 26, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: one or more protection members disposed at a rear surface of the one or more piezoelectric devices, or
“one or more protection members disposed at a rear surface of the one or more piezoelectric devices and having a greater size than the one or more piezoelectric devices.”
The Choi reference does not describe a corresponding protection member. Kim II, however, describes a cushion pad 370 connected to the rear of a piezoelectric sound generator 300 to protect it. Kim II teaches and suggests forming cushion pad 370 as a foam pad. This would have reasonably suggested adding a cushion pad 370 to the rear of Choi’s sound generators in the case one of ordinary skill includes piezoelectric sound generators. (See the rejection of claim 26, incorporated herein). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to modify Choi’s device to include the claimed protection members on the rear of a piezoelectric device. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Kim II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 31 depends on claim 30, and further requires the following:
“wherein the one or more protection members comprise one of a polyimide (PI) film, a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) insulation tape, and a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) insulation tape.”
Ando further teaches and suggests forming a protective cover for a piezoelectric actuator from PET film, or tape. Ando at ¶ 38. This would have further suggested embodying Kim II’s protection member 370 as a PET film. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi, the Kim II and the Ando references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 32 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: a balance member at the rear surface of the display panel, or a balance member at the rear surface of the display panel, the balance member including another printed circuit board having a size greater than a size of the printed circuit board.”
Claim 33 depends on claim 32, and further requires the following:
“wherein the rear surface of the display panel comprises: a first region that overlaps the printed circuit board; a second region that overlaps the one or more sound generators; and a third region that overlaps the balance member.”
Claims 32 and 33 commonly recite features of a balance member and its orientation with respect to other claimed elements.
Choi describes the use of at least one source driver on at least one source PCB. Choi at ¶¶ 179–180. Choi, however, does not describe the arrangement of an additional source PCB. At most, Choi at FIG.9A illustrates locating a first source PCB 700 on a left side of a panel. Id. at FIG.9A. The same figure illustrates a second possible location for a second source PCB just to the right of source PCB 700, but the reference does not expressly indicate using that location for a second source PCB. Id. at FIG.9A. Choi further addresses the possibility of unbalanced display panel vibration when mismatched sound generators are used, but does not discuss the effects of unbalanced PCB distribution. Id. at ¶ 237. Taken together, these findings reasonably suggest locating a second source PCB on the right, rear side of Choi’s panel in order to balance the weight of the panel and prevent split vibrations due to a weight imbalance. See also Im at FIG.2 (teaching and suggesting a display panel with two source circuit boards 140 distributed in a balanced, left-right manner.) The resulting device would include three panel regions: first and third regions would respectively overlay source PCBs and a second region would overlay centrally-located sound generator 200. See Choi at FIG.9A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Im references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 34 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“A vehicle, comprising:
“a dashboard comprising:
“a first region facing a driver seat;
“a second region facing a passenger seat; and
“a third region between the first region and the second region;
“an instrument panel including a first display in the first region of the dashboard; and
“an infotainment device comprising:
“a second display in the third region of the dashboard;
“a third display in the second region of the dashboard;
“a fourth display at a rear surface of the driver seat; and
“a fifth display at a rear surface of the passenger seat, wherein at least one of the first to fifth displays comprises the apparatus of claim 1.”
Claim 35 depends on claim 34, and further requires the following:
“The vehicle of claim 34, further comprising: a left front door, a right front door, a left rear door, a right rear door, and a rear deco; and
“at least one of a dashboard speaker at the dashboard, a left front door speaker at the left front door, a right front door speaker at the right front door, a left rear door speaker at the left rear door, a right rear door speaker at the right rear door, and a rear deco speaker at the rear deco.”
Claims 34 and 35 commonly recite features of a vehicle that implements displays using the apparatus of claim 1.
The Galeotti reference describes a vehicle embodiment that includes a dashboard with a first region
1
facing a driver seat 108a, a second region
N
facing a passenger seat, a third region
2
through
N
-
1
between the first and second regions, an instrument panel display 104a in the first region
1
, an infotainment device comprising display 104n in second region
N
, a third display 104b in the third region
2
, a fourth display 110a at the rear of the driver’s seat and a fifth display 110n behind the passenger seat. Galeotti at ¶¶ 15–19, FIG.1. Galeotti does not describe all the other claimed features of a vehicle (claim 28), but those are notoriously well known and are worthy of Official notice. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Galeotti’s vehicle with all those well-worn vehicle features.
The Galeotti reference does not describe its displays as including the apparatus of claim 1. However, as shown in the rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, the apparatus of claim 1 is anticipated by Choi. Moreover, Choi teaches and suggests using the described display device for image display and sound reproduction anywhere a display is normally used. See Choi at ¶¶ 3, 11, 80. Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have used the apparatus of claim 1 to implement any and all of Galeotti’s displays, predictably enabling the displays to simultaneously display images and to produce audio. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Galeotti references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 36 depends on claim 18, and further requires the following:
“A vehicle, comprising:
“a dashboard comprising:
“a first region facing a driver seat;
“a second region facing a passenger seat; and
“a third region between the first region and the second region;
“an instrument panel including a first display in the first region of the dashboard; and
“an infotainment device comprising:
“a second display in the third region of the dashboard;
“a third display in the second region of the dashboard;
“a fourth display at a rear surface of the driver seat; and
“a fifth display at a rear surface of the passenger seat,
“wherein at least one of the first to fifth displays comprises the apparatus of claim 18.”
Claim 37 depends on claim 36, and further requires the following:
“The vehicle of claim 36, further comprising: “a left front door, a right front door, a left rear door, a right rear door, and a rear deco; and
“at least one of a dashboard speaker at the dashboard, a left front door speaker at the left front door, a right front door speaker at the right front door, a left rear door speaker at the left rear door, a right rear door speaker at the right rear door, and a rear deco speaker at the rear deco.”
Claims 36 and 37 commonly recite features of a vehicle that implements displays using the apparatus of claim 18.
The Galeotti reference describes a vehicle embodiment that includes a dashboard with a first region
1
facing a driver seat 108a, a second region
N
facing a passenger seat, a third region
2
through
N
-
1
between the first and second regions, an instrument panel display 104a in the first region
1
, an infotainment device comprising display 104n in second region
N
, a third display 104b in the third region
2
, a fourth display 110a at the rear of the driver’s seat and a fifth display 110n behind the passenger seat. Galeotti at ¶¶ 15–19, FIG.1. Galeotti does not describe all the other claimed features of a vehicle (claim 28), but those are notoriously well known and are worthy of Official notice. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to implement Galeotti’s vehicle with all those well-worn vehicle features.
The Galeotti reference does not describe its displays as including the apparatus of claim 18. However, as shown in the rejection of claim 18, incorporated herein, the apparatus of claim 18 is anticipated by Choi. Moreover, Choi teaches and suggests using the described display device for image display and sound reproduction anywhere a display is normally used. See Choi at ¶¶ 3, 11, 80. Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have used the apparatus of claim 18 to implement any and all of Galeotti’s displays, predictably enabling the displays to simultaneously display images and to produce audio. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Galeotti references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Summary
Claims 1–37 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. 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.
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 C.F.R. § 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.
Issues Under 35 U.S.C. § 112
Indefiniteness
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites “the first support” This term lacks antecedent basis in claim 8 as well as claims 1 and 7 from which claim 8 depends. From the context of claim 7 and from Spec. at ¶ 100, the “first support” appears to be a reference to the claimed “rear cover.” For purposes of examination, the “first support” will be interpreted as corresponding to the claimed “rear cover.”
Double Patenting
Legal Basis
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
Rejection
Claims 1–37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 11 and 12 of US Patent 12,014,107 (the ‘107 Patent) and claims 1 and 2 of US Patent 11,256,468 (the ‘468 Patent) in view of the references cited in this Office action. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The following table illustrates the correspondence between claim 1 of this Application and claims 1, 11 and 12 of the ‘107 Patent.
Claim 1
The ‘107 Patent
“1. An apparatus, comprising:
“1. An apparatus, comprising:
“a display panel configured to display an image;
“a display panel configured to display an image;
“a driving circuit at a rear surface of the display panel and including a printed circuit board;
“a driving circuit at a rear surface of the display panel and including a printed circuit board electrically connected to the display panel;
“a guide frame including an opening, the opening accommodating the display panel and the driving circuit;
“a supporting frame configured to surround a side surface of the display panel;
“11. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the supporting frame includes an opening having a greater size than the display panel,
“12. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the driving circuit is configured to be accommodated in the opening of the supporting frame, and wherein the driving circuit is electrically connected to the display panel.
“a rear cover configured to cover the rear surface of the display panel and the driving circuit, the printed circuit board being between the rear surface of the display panel and the rear cover;
“[1.] a first support supported by the supporting frame and covering a rear surface of the display panel;
“wherein the first support comprises: a first portion covering at least a portion of a rear surface of the one or more sound generators; and
“a second portion covering at least a portion of a rear surface of the one or more piezoelectric devices, and wherein the first portion of the first support is spaced farther apart from the rear surface of the display panel than the second portion of the first support is
“[11.] the opening being covered by the first support at a rear surface of the supporting frame, and wherein the one or more piezoelectric devices are configured to be accommodated in the opening of the supporting frame.
“a support at the opening of the guide frame, the printed circuit board being spaced apart from the rear surface of the display panel by the support; and
“[1.] a second support at the rear surface of the display panel and including a holder configured to support the printed circuit board;
“wherein the holder comprises: a second plate supporting the printed circuit board; and
“a pair of bridges bent from both sides of the second plate and connected to the supporting frame,
“one or more sound generators at the rear cover, the one or more sound generators being configured to vibrate the display panel.”
“one or more sound generators supported by the first support, the one or more sound generators configured to vibrate the display panel; and
N/A
“one or more piezoelectric devices connected to a periphery portion of the rear surface of the display panel, the one or more piezoelectric devices configured to vibrate the periphery portion of the rear surface of the display panel,
Table 3
The following table illustrates the correspondence between claim 1 of this Application and claims 1 and 2 of the ‘468 Patent.
Claim 1
The ‘468 Patent
“1. An apparatus, comprising:
“1. A display apparatus, comprising:
“a display panel configured to display an image;
“a display panel configured to display an image;
N/A
“a front member on a front surface of the display panel;
“a driving circuit at a rear surface of the display panel and including a printed circuit board;
“a driving circuit on a rear surface of the display panel and electrically connected to the display panel;
“wherein the driving circuit comprises a printed circuit board facing the rear surface of the display panel, and wherein the driving circuit is configured to be accommodated in the through opening of the supporting frame.
“a guide frame including an opening, the opening accommodating the display panel and the driving circuit;
“a supporting frame configured to surround a side surface of the display panel and a side surface of the driving circuit;
“wherein the supporting frame is connected to a rear surface of the front member and includes a through opening having a size that is greater than that of the display panel, the through opening being covered by the first support at a rear of the supporting frame,
“a rear cover configured to cover the rear surface of the display panel and the driving circuit, the printed circuit board being between the rear surface of the display panel and the rear cover;
“a first support disposed on a rear surface of the supporting frame and supported by the supporting frame, the first support covering the rear surface of the display panel;
“a support at the opening of the guide frame, the printed circuit board being spaced apart from the rear surface of the display panel by the support; and
2. The display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a second support between the rear surface of the display panel and the driving circuit, wherein the driving circuit includes a flexible circuit film electrically connected to the display panel, and wherein the printed circuit board is configured to be: electrically connected to the flexible circuit film at the rear surface of the display panel, and supported by the second support.
“one or more sound generators at the rear cover, the one or more sound generators being configured to vibrate the display panel.”
“[1.] a vibration generating module supported by the first support to vibrate the display panel,
Table 4
As seen in the table, above, the claims of the ‘107 Patent and the ‘468 Patent set forth inventions that are very similar to the one claimed in this Application. The italicized differences are not patentably significant because they would have been obvious if the ‘107 Patent and the ‘468 Patent were available as prior art. For example, as shown in the prior art rejections of claims 1 and 2, incorporated herein, the Choi reference demonstrates the obviousness of covering a circuit board with a back cover and fixing a circuit board to the back of a display with adhesive tape as solutions for building a display apparatus. Furthermore, similar findings and rationale set forth in the prior art rejections of claims 2–37 may also be incorporated and applied mutatis mutandis by substituting Choi as a base reference with claims 1, 11 and 12 of the ‘107 Patent and claims 1 and 2 of the ‘468 Patent. Accordingly, claims 1–37 of this Application are rejected for double patenting.
Summary
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 C.F.R. § 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 C.F.R. § 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Additional Citations
The following references were found during a search related to this Application. This Office action does not rely on the below listed references, but they are relevant to the subject matter disclosed and claimed. The Examiner advises careful consideration of these references in responding to this Office action.
Citation
Relevance
US 2020/0301485
Teaches fixing PCB to metal plate with a conductive adhesive to ground the PCB.
US 2020/0267838
Teaches fixing PCB to metal plate with a conductive adhesive to ground the PCB.
US 2015/0131024
Support rear of PCB with holder.
Table 5
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
1/10/2026