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 .
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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of election of species in the reply filed on 7/8/26 is acknowledged. Therefore, Examiner will exam elected species A and G (figs 1, 12) and claims 1, 3-8.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and dependent claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, “a second bracket which extends from the first bracket, toward the window, and covers the first window portion; and a third bracket which extends from the first bracket, toward the window, spaced apart from the second bracket along the first direction and covers the second window portion” are not supported by SPEC/drawing. The limitation lacks antecedent basis and/or is not supported by SPEC/drawings. Further clarification is required.
The Examiner respectfully requests that the Applicant(s) review all claims for any such similar issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, and/or discussed in the above claim objections (See above) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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 of this title, 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 1, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Igor (US 20220330438 ) in view of AN (US 20220164002)
Regarding claim 1, Igor disclosed A display device (abstract, see also fig 1-13) comprising: a display panel foldable about a folding axis (at least fig 2, 11, 13; any folding axis), the display panel including a first panel portion in which the folding axis is defined (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; first panel portion in which the folding axis is defined; more than one panel portions can read the claim), a bending panel portion at which the display panel is bent (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; more than one bending panels can read the claim), and a second panel portion arranged in a first direction (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; more than one panel portion can read the claim), the folding axis of the display panel extended in a second direction crossing the first direction (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13); a bracket in which the display panel and the window are received (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the housing portion in which the display panel are received; Examiner consider as a bracket), the bracket including: a first bracket (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; at least the bracket on one side and corresponding to the first panel portion, the bending panel portion and the second panel portion) corresponding to the first panel portion, the bending panel portion and the second panel portion; a second bracket (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the bracket on the other side which extends from the first bracket) which extends from the first bracket, toward the window, and covers the first window portion; and a third bracket (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the bracket which extends from the first bracket, spaced apart from the second bracket along the first direction) which extends from the first bracket, toward the window, spaced apart from the second bracket along the first direction and covers the second window portion, wherein folding and unfolding of the display panel about the folding axis includes movement of the second window portion along the first direction, within the bracket (at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13;).
Igor lacks teaching: a window disposed on the display panel, the window including a first window portion adjacent to the bending panel portion and a second window portion which is spaced apart from the first window portion along the first direction.
Examiner’s note: the primary didn’t disclose the detail layers of the display panel.
An teaches a display device (abstract, see also fig 1-11) comprising: a window disposed on the display panel ( at least fig 7-11, the structure on top of the display panel is a window; paragraph [79-86]-[89-93]), the window including a first window portion adjacent to the bending panel portion (at least fig 7-11) and a second window portion which is spaced apart from the first window portion along the first direction (at least fig 7-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, or at the time of the invention was made, to include this feature (window layer on top of the display panel and cover it) and modify to previous discussed structure (modified to the primary art’s display panel structure) so as to have: (Igor in view of An): a bracket in which the display panel and the window are received (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the housing portion in which the display panel are received; Examiner consider as a bracket), the bracket including: a first bracket (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; at least the bracket on one side and corresponding to the first panel portion, the bending panel portion and the second panel portion) corresponding to the first panel portion, the bending panel portion and the second panel portion; a second bracket (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the bracket on the other side which extends from the first bracket) which extends from the first bracket, toward the window (modified by An), and covers the first window portion (modified by An); and a third bracket (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the bracket which extends from the first bracket, spaced apart from the second bracket along the first direction) which extends from the first bracket, toward the window (modified by An), spaced apart from the second bracket along the first direction and covers the second window portion (modified by An), wherein folding and unfolding of the display panel about the folding axis includes movement of the second window portion (modified by An) along the first direction, within the bracket (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13;).
The motivation to modify the previous discussed structure with the current feature is to further support/protect the modified structure.
Examiner’s note: Both cited arts have a bracket structure including first, second, and 3rd bracket.
Regarding claim 3, Igor further disclosed within the bracket: a first receiving groove is defined by the first bracket with the second bracket (at least fig 2-3), a second receiving groove is defined by the first bracket with the third bracket (at least fig 2-3, the 2nd receiving groove on the other sides), the first window portion extends along the second bracket and into the first receiving groove (at least Primary art’s fig 2-3, the second bracket and into the first receiving groove), along the first direction, and the second window portion extends along the third bracket and into the second receiving groove (at least Primary art’s fig 2-3, the other bracket and into the first receiving groove), and the folding and unfolding of the display panel moves the second window portion along the third bracket, within the second receiving groove (compare fig 3).
Regarding claim 4, Igor further disclosed within the bracket: a protrusion which is connected to the bracket at an upper surface of the first bracket (at least fig 3, a protrusion which is connected to the bracket at an upper surface of the first bracket and also connected to the modified window of the display), the first receiving groove extended between the protrusion and the second bracket (at least fig 3).
The primary art lacks teaching: a first adhesive member which bonds the first window portion to the first bracket, at the protrusion.
Ann further teaching using adhesive member which bonds the display structure (paragraph [69-71]-[79-86], [92-100]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, or at the time of the invention was made, to include this feature (adhesive to connect two parts in the display structure design) and modify to previous discussed structure (modified to bond the window portion, bracket, at the protrusion) so as to further secure the display structure of the modified structure and or reduce the cost by using the known materials..
Regarding claim 5, Igor further disclosed the first panel portion of the display panel includes a first display region and a second display region at opposing sides of the folding axis (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13).
Regarding claim 6, Igor further disclosed comprising within the bracket, a guide which is between the window and the first bracket and along which the movement of the window is guided along the first direction (Igor: at least fig 2-3, 6, 9 11, 12, 13; the structure between the window and the bracket, Examiner consider as a guide).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to claim 7-8, the allowability resides in the overall structure of the device as recited in this independent claim and at least in part because the prior art does not teach or suggest a structure comprising: the guide includes: a wheel between the window and the first bracket, and a track which is engaged with the wheel and moveable along the wheel, the track including: a first track portion between the wheel and the first bracket, a second track portion between the wheel and the window, and a bent track portion which connects the first track portion and the second track portion to each other; and the display panel which is unfolded includes: the first track portion having a length extended along the first bracket, the second track portion having a length extended along the window, and within the second receiving groove, the second window portion having a length extended along the third bracket, as set forth in the combination of the independent claims.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of independent claim are believed to render said independent claims and all claims dependent therefrom patentable over the art of record.
The closest prior art, Igor (US 20220330438 ) in view of AN (US 20220164002), discloses a similar structure but does not configure to have the above limitations. The above prior art thus fails to anticipate or render the above portions obvious, either singularly or in combination with other references.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5420. The examiner can normally be reached on PHP: M-Th: 8:30-12:30; 2:30-8:30pm.
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, Imani Hayman can be reached on 571.270.5528. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JERRY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights