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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 12-13 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 recites “after irradiating the laser beam” in Line L9 but should read – after the irradiating the laser beam --.
Claim 12 recites “before irradiating the laser beam” in Line L24 but should read – before the irradiating the laser beam --.
Claim 13 recites “after irradiating the laser beam” in Line L24 but should read – after the irradiating the laser beam --.
The balance of claims are objected to for being dependent upon an already objected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation "the substrate side" in Line L14, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the substrate side” (L14) refers to a new substrate or the “transparent substrate” previously cited in Claim 1 Lines L6, and there is no antecedent basis for side. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the substrate side” has been interpretated as a transparent substrate side.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation "identification information" in Line L21, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for "identification information" in Line L21. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “identification information” has been interpretated as an identification information.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation " in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage." in Lines L24-25, renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “a state” is defined as "a mode or condition of being or a condition or stage in the physical being of something” (see Merriam-webster.com). Thus, the limitation “in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage" is unclear because defining in which state the protective film is in contact with a stage, is not clearly defined. Thus,
determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim is unclear.
Under the principles of compact prosecution, the claim “in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage” limitation is being interpretated as – when the protective film is in contact with a stage.--.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation " at the laser beam irradiation position" in Line L30, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for the laser beam irradiation position.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation "a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" in Lines L2-3, renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed” could mean that there is no hole or there is a hole which is not one of the plurality of holes, but it is not penetrating the protective film. Thus, the limitation “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" is unclear because defining in there is a hole or not, and which hole, is not clearly defined. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim has not been treated on the merits. Consequently, claim 5 has not been treated on the merits due to its dependency to claim 4.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation " dust" in Line L2, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for the laser beam irradiation position.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation "the substrate " in Line L15, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the substrate” (L15) refers to a new substrate or the “transparent substrate” previously cited in Claim 1 Lines L6. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the substrate” has been interpretated as the transparent substrate.
Regarding claim 11, the limitation "the substrate side" in Line L13, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the substrate side” (L13) refers to a new substrate or the “transparent substrate” previously cited in Claim 1 Lines L6, and there is no antecedent basis for side. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the substrate side” has been interpretated as a transparent substrate side.
Regarding claim 11, the limitation "identification information" in Line L20, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for "identification information" in Line L21. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “identification information” has been interpretated as an identification information.
Regarding claim 11, the limitation " the panel portions" in Line L7, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the panel portions” (L7) refers to new panel portions or the “plurality of panel portions” previously cited in Claim 11 Lines L4. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the panel portions” has been interpretated as the plurality of panel portions.
Regarding claim 12, the limitation " the panel portions" in Line L4, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the panel portions” (L4) refers to new panel portions or the “plurality of panel portions” previously cited in Claim 11 Lines L4. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the panel portions” has been interpretated as the plurality of panel portions.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation " the panel portions" in Line L33, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the panel portions” (L33) refers to new panel portions or the “plurality of panel portions” previously cited in Claim 11 Lines L4. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the panel portions” has been interpretated as the plurality of panel portions.
Regarding claim 14, the limitation " in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage." in Lines L31-33, renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “a state” is defined as "a mode or condition of being or a condition or stage in the physical being of something” (see Merriam-webster.com). Thus, the limitation “in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage" is unclear because defining in which state the protective film is in contact with a stage, is not clearly defined. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim is unclear.
Under the principles of compact prosecution, the claim “in a state in which the protective film is in contact with a stage” limitation is being interpretated as – when the protective film is in contact with a stage.--.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation "a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" in Lines L3-4, renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed” could mean that there is no hole or there is a hole which is not one of the plurality of holes, but it is not penetrating the protective film. Thus, the limitation “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" is unclear because defining in there is a hole or not, and which hole, is not clearly defined. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim has not been treated on the merits.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation " dust" in Line L4, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for the laser beam irradiation position.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation "the substrate " in Line L14, renders the claim indefinite because the antecedent basis is unclear as to whether “the substrate” (L14) refers to a new substrate or the “transparent substrate” previously cited in Claim 11 Line L4. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the substrate” has been interpretated as the transparent substrate.
Regarding claim 17, the limitation "the substrate side" in Line L14, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for side. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “the substrate side” has been interpretated as a substrate side.
Regarding claim 17, the limitation "identification information" in Line L27, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for "identification information" in Line L27. In the purpose of compact prosecution, “identification information” has been interpretated as an identification information.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation "a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" in Line L3-4, renders the claim indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed” could mean that there is no hole or there is a hole which is not one of the plurality of holes, but it is not penetrating the protective film. Thus, the limitation “a hole penetrating the protective film is not formed" is unclear because defining in there is a hole or not, and which hole, is not clearly defined. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim has not been treated on the merits. Consequently, claim 20 has not been treated on the merits due to its dependency to claim 19.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation " dust" in Line L4, renders the claim indefinite because there is no antecedent basis for the laser beam irradiation position.
The balance of claims are rejected for being dependent upon an already rejected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9, 11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36) in view of Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57), and further in view of Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43).
Regarding claim 1, Gang36 discloses a display device manufacturing method (Title) comprising:
forming a transparent inorganic layer (SiO2 or SiNx so transparent inorganic layer 1140-Fig 8, [0073], [0091], Fig 9) over a display area (Over display area PA-Fig 5) and a surrounding area which surrounds the display area (surrounding area PIA-Fig 5, Fig 3) on a transparent substrate (Glass so transparent substrate 110-Fig 8, [0040]);
forming a metal layer on the inorganic layer in the surrounding area (forming metal layer 1120 over inorganic layer 1140-Fig9, Fig 8) ;
forming an organic layer on the inorganic layer and the metal layer (Forming organic layer 1160 over inorganic layer 1140 and metal layer 1120-Fig 8, Fig 9); and
forming a plurality of holes penetrating the metal layer and the organic layer, during the irradiating the laser beam(forming hole H1 corresponding to an engraved pattern so plurality of holes penetrating metal layer 1120 and organic layer 1160 as the layer is not extending on H1 during the irradiating the laser beam, as the holes are formed by laser-Fig 8, [0084]),
wherein the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information (hole H1 may correspond to an engraved pattern that is formed on the panel ID layer 1120 using a laser, for forming a panel ID PID so the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information-[0084]).
Gang36 does not disclose a display device manufacturing method comprising
preparing a processed substrate on which a protective film is attached, on at least the organic layer located directly above the metal layer; and
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Higano57 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
preparing a processed substrate on which a protective film is attached, on at least the organic layer located directly above the metal layer (preparing a processed substrate GL/10/PT/16 on which protective film 16 is attached to organic layer ORG1/2/3-Fig 7, Fig 3, [0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38, as taught by Higano57 for the purpose of removing dust (Higano57: [0093]).
Higano57 does not teach a display device manufacturing method comprising
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Lee43 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer (irradiating a laser thought the preliminary mask film which has been interpretated as the substrate so from the substrate toward the metal layer-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, as taught by Lee43 for the purpose of defining a plurality of holes (Lee43: [0023]).
Regarding claim 7, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 1, as noted above.
Gang36 further discloses a display device manufacturing method
wherein the substrate is a glass substrate (Substrate 110 being glass substrate-[0040]), and
the inorganic layer is formed of silicon nitride (SiNx), silicon oxide (SiOx) or silicon oxynitride (SiON) (Inorganic 1140 being SiO2 so silicon oxide or SiNx - [0073], [0091], Fig 9).
Regarding claim 8, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 1, as noted above.
Gang36 further discloses a display device manufacturing method
wherein the metal layer is formed of at least one material of titanium, molybdenum, tungsten, and aluminum (metal layer 1120 being one of molybdenum (Mo), titanium (Ti), aluminum (Al), copper (Cu), and chromium (Cr), or an alloy thereof-[0072]).
Regarding claim 9, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 1, as noted above.
Gang36 further discloses a display device manufacturing method
forming an electrode on the inorganic layer in the display area (forming electrode 1131 in display area PA-Fig 10F, [0071]) ,
wherein the electrode and the metal layer are formed in a same process (electrode 1131and metal layer 1120 formed of the same material on the same layer, and a separate metal layer may not be formed for forming metal layer 1120 so during the same process-[0071]).
Regarding claim 11, Gang36 discloses a display device manufacturing method (Title) comprising:
forming a transparent inorganic layer (SiO2 or SiNx so transparent inorganic layer 1140-Fig 8, [0073], [0091], Fig 9) over a display area (Over display area PA-Fig 5) and a surrounding area which surrounds the display area (surrounding area PIA-Fig 5, Fig 3) on a transparent substrate (Glass so transparent substrate 110-Fig 8, [0040]);
forming a metal layer on the inorganic layer in the surrounding area (forming metal layer 1120 over inorganic layer 1140-Fig9, Fig 8) ;
forming an organic layer on the inorganic layer and the metal layer (Forming organic layer 1160 over inorganic layer 1140 and metal layer 1120-Fig 8, Fig 9); and
forming a plurality of holes penetrating the metal layer and the organic layer, during the irradiating the laser beam(forming hole H1 corresponding to an engraved pattern so plurality of holes penetrating metal layer 1120 and organic layer 1160 as the layer is not extending on H1 during the irradiating the laser beam, as the holes are formed by laser-Fig 8, [0084]),
wherein the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information (hole H1 may correspond to an engraved pattern that is formed on the panel ID layer 1120 using a laser, for forming a panel ID PID so the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information-[0084]).
Gang36 does not disclose a display device manufacturing method comprising
forming a layer over a plurality of panel portions;
preparing a processed substrate on which a protective film is attached, on at least the organic layer located directly above the metal layer; and
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Higano57 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
preparing a processed substrate on which a protective film is attached, on at least the organic layer located directly above the metal layer (preparing a processed substrate GL/10/PT/16 on which protective film 16 is attached to organic layer ORG1/2/3-Fig 7, Fig 3, [0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38, as taught by Higano57 for the purpose of removing dust (Higano57: [0093]).
Higano57 does not teach a display device manufacturing method comprising
forming a transparent inorganic layer over a plurality of panel portions;
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Lee43 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
forming a layer over a plurality of panel portions (Step S61 Fig 6, Fig 7A, Fig 8A, [0122]);
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer (irradiating a laser thought the preliminary mask film which has been interpretated as the substrate so from the substrate toward the metal layer-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, as taught by Lee43 for the purpose of defining a plurality of holes (Lee43: [0023]).
Regarding claim 17, Gang36 discloses a display device manufacturing method (Title) comprising:
forming a metal layer above a substrate (forming metal layer 1120 above substrate 110-Fig9, Fig 8) ;
forming a plurality of holes aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information (hole H1 may correspond to an engraved pattern that is formed on the panel ID layer 1120 using a laser, for forming a panel ID PID so the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information-[0084]), in the metal layer, during the irradiating the laser beam (forming hole H1 corresponding to an engraved pattern so plurality of holes penetrating metal layer 1120 and organic layer 1160 as the layer is not extending on H1 during the irradiating the laser beam, as the holes are formed by laser-Fig 8, [0084]).
Gang36 does not disclose a display device manufacturing method comprising
arranging a protective film directly above the metal layer; and
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Higano57 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
arranging a protective film directly above the metal layer (arranging protective film 16 directly above the metal layer CE- Fig 3, [0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38, as taught by Higano57 for the purpose of removing dust (Higano57: [0093]).
Higano57 does not teach a display device manufacturing method comprising
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer.
Lee43 teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising
irradiating a laser beam from the substrate side toward the metal layer (irradiating a laser thought the preliminary mask film which has been interpretated as the substrate so from the substrate toward the metal layer-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, as taught by Lee43 for the purpose of defining a plurality of holes (Lee43: [0023]).
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36) in view of Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57), in view of Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43), and further in view of Lei et al. (US 20220375787 A1-Lei87).
Regarding claim 6, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 1, as noted above.
Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination does not teach a display device manufacturing method
wherein the laser beam is a laser beam of a UV wavelength.
Lei87 teaches a display device manufacturing method
wherein the laser beam is a laser beam of a UV wavelength (laser beam being UV wavelength-[0004], [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, and further in view of Lee43, as taught by Lei87 for the purpose of drilling vias of precise shape (Lei87: [0034]).
Regarding claim 16, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 11, as noted above.
Gang36 further discloses a display device manufacturing method
Wherein the substrate is a glass substrate (Substrate 110 being glass substrate-[0040]),
the inorganic layer is formed of silicon nitride (SiNx), silicon oxide (SiOx) or silicon oxynitride (SiON) (SiOx) or silicon oxynitride (SiON) (Inorganic 1140 being SiO2 so silicon oxide or SiNx - [0073], [0091], Fig 9), and
the metal layer is formed of at least one material of titanium, molybdenum, tungsten, and aluminum (metal layer 1120 being one of molybdenum (Mo), titanium (Ti), aluminum (Al), copper (Cu), and chromium (Cr), or an alloy thereof-[0072]).
Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination does not teach a display device manufacturing method
wherein the laser beam is a laser beam of a UV wavelength.
Lei87 teaches a display device manufacturing method
wherein the laser beam is a laser beam of a UV wavelength (laser beam being UV wavelength-[0004], [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, and further in view of Lee43, as taught by Lei87 for the purpose of drilling vias of precise shape (Lei87: [0034]).
Claim(s) 10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36) in view of Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57), in view of Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43), and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20240074258 A1-Kim58).
Regarding claim 10, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 9, as noted above.
Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination does not teach a display device manufacturing method
wherein the metal layer is formed as a multilayer body of a titanium layer and an aluminum layer or a multilayer body of a molybdenum layer and an aluminum layer.
Kim58 teaches a display device manufacturing method
wherein the metal layer is formed as a multilayer body of a titanium layer and an aluminum layer or a multilayer body of a molybdenum layer and an aluminum layer (metal layer TG being multiple layers made of any one or more selected from among molybdenum (Mo), aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), gold (Au), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), neodymium (Nd), and copper (Cu) so multilayer body of a titanium layer and an aluminum layer or a multilayer body of a molybdenum layer and an aluminum layer-[0246]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, and further in view of Lee43, as taught by Kim58 for the purpose of forming the plurality of display cells DPC (Kim58: [0539]).
Regarding claim 13, Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination teaches all the elements of claim 11, as noted above.
Gang 36, Higano57, and Lee43 combination does not teach a display device manufacturing method
wherein the processed substrate is cut for each of the panel portions after irradiating the laser beam.
Kim58 teaches a display device manufacturing method
wherein the processed substrate is cut for each of the panel portions after irradiating the laser beam (irradiating laser beam in step S230 being before cutting Processed substrate MSUB in step S250 so cutting after irradiating the laser beam-Fig 58).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device manufacturing method of Gang38 in view of Higano57, and further in view of Lee43, as taught by Kim58 for the purpose of forming the plurality of display cells DPC (Kim58: [0539]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 12, 14, 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”.
References such as Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36), Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57) and Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43) combination, teaches a display device manufacturing method, but does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”, in combination with other claimed elements.
Regarding claim 12, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “wherein the processed substrate is cut for each of the panel portions before irradiating the laser beam”.
References such as Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36), Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57) and Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43) combination, teaches a display device manufacturing method, but does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “wherein the processed substrate is cut for each of the panel portions before irradiating the laser beam”, in combination with other claimed elements.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”.
References such as Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36), Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57) and Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43) combination, teaches a display device manufacturing method, but does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”, in combination with other claimed elements.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”.
References such as Gang (US20190189636A1-Gang36), Higano et al. (US20180138257A1-Higano57) and Lee et al. (US20220049343A1-Lee43) combination, teaches a display device manufacturing method, but does not teach or suggest a display device manufacturing method, namely “the protective film is in contact with a stage”, in combination with other claimed elements.
The balance of the claims are allowable for at least the above-stated reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tasaki et al. (US 20020154254 A1-Tasaki54) teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising using an adhesive tape to remove dust ([0039]) to reduce an occurrence of defect ([0039]).
Watanabe (US 20110037147 A1-Watanabe47) teaches a display device manufacturing method comprising forming a plurality of holes penetrating the layer, during the irradiating the laser beam, wherein the plurality of holes formed in the metal layer are aligned in a pattern corresponding to identification information (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHALIE R FAYETTE whose telephone number is (571)272-1220. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am-6pm ET.
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, Christine Kim can be reached at (571) 272-8458. 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.
NATHALIE R. FAYETTE
Examiner
Art Unit 2812
/NATHALIE R FAYETTE/Examiner, Art Unit 2812 06/10/2026
/CHRISTINE S. KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights