Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/697,995

COMPOSITE FOAM STRUCTURE AND DISPLAY MODULE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Apr 02, 2024
Examiner
GOLDEN, CHINESSA T
Art Unit
1788
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
57%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
61%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 57% of resolved cases
57%
Career Allow Rate
385 granted / 679 resolved
-8.3% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
711
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
63.5%
+23.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 679 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 8 and 20 recite the term “Embo-type adhesive layer ” in line 2. It is unclear what the term “Embo-type adhesive” means. It is unclear as to if the adhesive is an “Embo” adhesive or if it is an adhesive similar to an “Embo” adhesive. The claim is being treated as if the adhesive is an Embo adhesive. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-6, 9, 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 113528043, see machine translated version) in view of Ying et al. (CN 108878682, see machine translated version). Regarding claim 1, Guo et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0004], [0013]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0014]), a metal layer (paragraph [0015]) and a first adhesive layer (paragraph [0013]), the first adhesive layer being disposed between the foam layer and the metal layer and configured to bond the foam layer to the metal layer (paragraphs [0013]-[0015]). Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the composite foam structure further comprises a fiber structure, wherein the fiber structure is disposed in at least one of the foam layer or the first adhesive layer and configured to increase a tensile strength of at least one of the foam layer or the first adhesive layer. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0045], [0051]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 2, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 3, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein each of the carbon fibers has a diameter ranging from greater than or equal to 5 µm to less than or equal to 7 µm. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). Ying et al. do not disclose wherein each of the carbon fibers has a diameter ranging from greater than or equal to 5 µm to less than or equal to 7 µm. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in diameter involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the diameter of the carbon fibers of Ying et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 4, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the designated plane is parallel to at least one of a plane in which the foam layer is located or a plane in which the first adhesive layer is located. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]), wherein the designated plane is parallel to at least one of a plane in which the foam layer (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claims 5 and 6, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein an angle between two intersectant carbon fibers is great than or equal to 30° and less than or equal to 90°. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). Ying et al. do not disclose wherein an angle between two intersectant carbon fibers is great than or equal to 30° and less than or equal to 90°. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in angle involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the angle between two intersectant carbon fibers in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 9, Guo et al. teach wherein the structure further comprises a second adhesive layer and a substrate layer (paragraphs [0004], [0011]), wherein the second adhesive layer is disposed between the metal layer and the substrate layer (paragraphs [0004], [0011], [0014], [0015]), wherein the substrate layer is configured to protect the second adhesive layer (paragraphs [0004], [0011]). Regarding claim 13, Guo et al. teach a display module comprising a display panel and a backpane (paragraphs [0016], [0017]) and a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0004], [0013], [0016], [0017]), wherein the composite foam structure (paragraphs [0004], [0013]) comprises a foam layer (paragraph [0014]), a metal layer (paragraph [0015]) and a first adhesive layer (paragraph [0013]), the first adhesive layer being disposed between the foam layer and the metal layer and configured to bond the foam layer to the metal layer (paragraphs [0013]-[0015]). Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the composite foam structure further comprises a fiber structure, wherein the fiber structure is disposed in at least one of the foam layer or the first adhesive layer and configured to increase a tensile strength of at least one of the foam layer or the first adhesive layer. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0045], [0051]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 14, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 15, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein each of the carbon fibers has a diameter ranging from greater than or equal to 5 µm to less than or equal to 7 µm. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). Ying et al. do not disclose wherein each of the carbon fibers has a diameter ranging from greater than or equal to 5 µm to less than or equal to 7 µm. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in diameter involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the diameter of the carbon fibers of Ying et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claim 16, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the designated plane is parallel to at least one of a plane in which the foam layer is located or a plane in which the first adhesive layer is located. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]), wherein the designated plane is parallel to at least one of a plane in which the foam layer (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Regarding claims 17 and 18, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein an angle between two intersectant carbon fibers is great than or equal to 30° and less than or equal to 90°. However, Ying et al. teach a composite foam structure (paragraphs [0008], [0009]) comprising a foam layer (paragraph [0009]), wherein the composite foam structure further comprising a fiber structure (paragraphs [0010], [0044]), wherein the fiber structure is disposed in the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044]) and configured to increase a tensile strength of the foam layer (paragraphs [0010], [0044], [0051]), wherein the fiber structure comprises at least one layer of a carbon fiber network formed by a plurality of carbon fibers staggered in a designated plane (paragraphs [0044]-[0046]). Ying et al. do not disclose wherein an angle between two intersectant carbon fibers is great than or equal to 30° and less than or equal to 90°. However, where in the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges in angle involve only routine skill in the art, absence a showing of criticality. MPEP 2144.05 II. One would have been motivated to modify the angle between two intersectant carbon fibers in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fiber structure of Ying et al. in the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to improve the heat dissipation capacity and impact resistance of the structure (Ying et al., paragraphs [0017], [0045]). Claims 7, 8, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 113528043, see machine translated version) in view of Ying et al. (CN 108878682, see machine translated version), in further view of Xie et al. (US Patent Application No. 2021/0368657). Guo et al. and Ying et al. are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claims 7 and 8, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the structure further comprises a light shielding tape layer, wherein the light shielding tape layer is disposed on a side, distal from the metal layer of the foam layer. However, Xie et al. teach a composite foam structure (page 1, paragraph [0005], page 3, paragraph [0046]) comprising a foam layer (page 3, paragraph [0046]) and a light shielding tape layer (page 1, paragraphs [0005], [0012]), wherein the light shielding tape layer comprises an EMBO adhesive layer (page 3, paragraph [0042]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the light shielding tape layer of Xie et al. on a side distal from the metal layer of the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to provide a good light shielding effect (Xie et al., page 3, paragraph [0042]). Regarding claims 19 and 20, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein the composite foam structure further comprises a light shielding tape layer, wherein the light shielding tape layer is disposed on a side, distal from the metal layer of the foam layer. However, Xie et al. teach a composite foam structure (page 1, paragraph [0005], page 3, paragraph [0046]) comprising a foam layer (page 3, paragraph [0046]) and a light shielding tape layer (page 1, paragraphs [0005], [0012]), wherein the light shielding tape layer comprises an EMBO adhesive layer (page 3, paragraph [0042]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the light shielding tape layer of Xie et al. on a side distal from the metal layer of the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to provide a good light shielding effect (Xie et al., page 3, paragraph [0042]). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 113528043, see machine translated version) in view of Ying et al. (CN 108878682, see machine translated version), in further view of Li et al. (US Patent Application No. 2012/0050114). Guo et al. and Ying et al. are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claim 10, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein a material of the second adhesive layer comprises an ultraviolet curing adhesive. However, Li et al. teach a composite foam structure comprising a foam layer (page 1, paragraph [0009]) and ultraviolet curing adhesive layer (page 5, paragraph [0066]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ultraviolet curing adhesive of Li et al. as the second adhesive layer of Guo et al. in order to mount surfaces of structures (Li et al., page 5, paragraph [0066]). Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 113528043, see machine translated version) in view of Ying et al. (CN 108878682, see machine translated version), in further view of Myeong et al. (US Patent Application No. 2021/0109566). Guo et al. and Ying et al. are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claim 11, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein a material of the first adhesive layer comprises a pressure sensitive adhesive. However, Myeong et al. teach a composite foam structure comprising a foam layer (page 5, paragraph [0072]) and a pressure sensitive adhesive layer (page 4, paragraph [0064]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the pressure sensitive adhesive of Myeong et al. as the first adhesive layer of Guo et al. in order to adequately adhere the layers together (Myeong et al., page 4, paragraph [0064]). Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 113528043, see machine translated version) in view of Ying et al. (CN 108878682, see machine translated version), in further view of Rao (US Patent Application No. 2022/0011820). Guo et al. and Ying et al. are relied upon as disclosed above. Regarding claim 12, Guo et al. fail to teach wherein a material of the foam layer comprises a super clean foam. However, Rao teaches a composite foam structure comprising a foam layer (page 4, paragraph [0051]) and an adhesive layer (page 4, paragraph [0052]), wherein the foam layer comprises a super clean foam (page 4, paragraph [0051]). It would have been obvious to a person of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use super clean foam of Rao as the foam layer of Guo et al. in order to achieve buffering, shading and heat dissipation (Rao, page 4, paragraph [0051]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHINESSA GOLDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5543. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday; 8:00 - 4:00 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached on 571-272-1490. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /Chinessa T. Golden/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 3/6/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 02, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600880
STEERING WHEEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595400
COMPOSITIONS AND ADHESIVE ARTICLES INCLUDING POROUS POLYMERIC PARTICLES AND METHODS OF COATING SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595625
HEAT SEALABLE BARRIER PAPERBOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12577361
BIODEGRADABLE FOAMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576551
MODIFIED WOOD AND TRANSPARENT WOOD COMPOSITES, AND SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR FORMING AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
57%
Grant Probability
61%
With Interview (+4.1%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 679 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month