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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 27, 2024 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the first stretchable substrate,” on page 1 lines 11-12. This limitation lacks antecedent basis because claim 1 introduces a first substrate as a first substrate and not as a first stretchable substate. For examination purposes, this limitation will be treated as reciting the first substrate.
Claims 2-19 are also rejected for containing the same limitation because claims 2-19 depend from claim 1.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the first wiring or the second wiring when viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface,” on page 2 lines 23-25. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because this limitation makes the structure of the fifth wiring conditional based on view. Therefore, it is unclear whether the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the first wiring or the second wiring when not viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted as the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the first wiring or the second wiring.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the conductive member,” on page 4 line 26. This limitation lacks antecedent basis because a conductive member has not been previously introduced. For examination purposes, claim 15 will be interpreted as depending from claim 6.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “a first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring and overlapping the conductive member when viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface,” on page 4 lines 25-27. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because this limitation makes the structure of the first insulating coating layer conditional based on view. Therefore, it is unclear whether the first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring and overlaps the conductive member when not viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted as a first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring and overlapping the conductive member.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the conductive member,” on page 5 line 3. This limitation lacks antecedent basis because a conductive member has not been previously introduced. For examination purposes, claim 16 will be interpreted as depending from claim 6.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “a second insulating coating layer coating the second wiring and overlapping the conductive member when viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface,” on page 4 lines 25-27. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because this limitation makes the structure of the second insulating coating layer conditional based on view. Therefore, it is unclear whether the second insulating coating layer coating the second wiring and overlaps the conductive member when not viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted as a second insulating coating layer coating the second wiring and overlapping the conductive member.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 6-7, 9, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kitada et al. (US 2007/0197058).
Regarding Claim 1:
Kitada discloses a stretchable device comprising:
a first substrate (flexible printed wiring board, See figs. 12, 14, ref. no. 30 paragraphs 67-69 and 78) having a first main surface (surface of the flexible printed wiring board the wirings are formed on, See figs. 12, 14, ref. no. 30) and a second main surface (surface of flexible printed wiring board opposite the surface the wirings are formed on, See figs. 12, 14, ref. nos. 30) facing each other;
a first wiring (wiring with end portion 32A, See figs. 12, 14, ref. nos. 32, 32A) on the first main surface and extending along the first main surface (the wiring with end portion 32A extends along the surface of the flexible printed wiring board, See figs. 12, 14, ref. no. 32, 32A);
a second wiring (wiring with end portion 32B, See figs. 12, 14, ref. nos. 32, 32B) adjacent to the first wiring;
a second stretchable substrate (flexible printed wiring board, See figs. 13, 14, ref. no. 40, paragraphs 70-71) having a third main surface (surface of the flexible printed wiring board the opposite the surface the wirings are formed on, See figs. 13, 14, ref. no. 30) and a fourth main surface facing each other (surface of the flexible printed wiring board the wirings are formed on, See figs. 13, 14, ref. nos. 40, 42), the second stretchable substrate connected to the first stretchable substrate (the flexible printed wiring boards are connected, See figs. 14, ref. nos. 30, 40 and paragraph 73);
a stretchable third wiring (wiring with end portion 42A, See figs. 13, 14, ref. no. 42, 42A. The examiner notes that wirings on the flexible printed wiring board must be flexible for the flexible printed wiring board to flex and for the flexible printed wiring board to operate as a flexible printed wiring board.) on the fourth main surface and extending along the fourth main surface (wiring with end portion 42A extends along the surface of the flexible printed wiring board, See fig. 13, ref. nos. 42, 42A); and
a stretchable fourth wiring (wiring with end portion 42H, See figs. 13, 14, ref. nos. 42, 42H) adjacent to the third wiring.
a shortest distance between the first wiring and the second wiring is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring (a distance between wiring with end portion 32A and wiring with end portion 32B is shorter than a distance between wiring with end portion 42A and wiring with end portion 42H, See fig. 14, ref. nos. 32A, 32B, 42A, 42B).
Regarding Claim 6:
Kitada discloses a conductive member (Solder, See paragraph 73) electrically connecting the first wiring and the third wiring.
Regarding Claim 7:
Kitada discloses the first substrate and the second substrate are arranged such that the first main surface and the fourth main surface face each other (the surfaces of the two flexible printed wiring boards with the wirings formed thereon face each other, See figs. 14, ref. nos. 30 and 40),
the first wiring and the third wiring are arranged to face each other in the direction orthogonal to the first main surface (the wiring with end portion 32A and the wiring with end portion 42A face each other in a vertical direction, See figs. 14, ref. nos. 32A, 42A), and
the conductive member is arranged between the first wiring and the third wiring (solder is arranged between the wiring with end portion 32A and the wiring with end portion 42A, See fig. 14, ref. nos. 32A, 42A, 51, paragraphs 73 and 75).
Regarding Claim 9:
Kitada discloses in a first section orthogonal to a direction in which the first wiring extends in a region where the conductive member, the first wiring, and the third wiring overlap, a width of the first wiring and a width of the third wiring are different (a width of the wiring with end portion 32A is greater than a width of the wiring with the end portion 42A in the region where the wirings are soldered together, See figs. 12-14, ref. nos. 32, 32A, 42, 42A).
Regarding Claim 17:
Kitada discloses the first substrate is stretchable (flexible printed wiring board, See fig. 12, ref. no. 30 and paragraph 76).
Regarding Claim 18:
Kitada discloses the first wiring and the second wiring are stretchable, (wiring with end portion 32A and wiring with end portion 32B, See fig. 12, ref. nos. 32, 32A, 32B and paragraph 76. The examiner notes that wirings on the flexible printed wiring board must be flexible for the flexible printed wiring board to flex and for the flexible printed wiring board to operate as a flexible printed wiring board.)
Claims 1, 3, 6-7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimura et al. (US 2019/0051593).
Regarding Claim 1:
Kimura discloses a stretchable device comprising:
a first substrate (insulating substrate, See figs. 2-4, ref. no. 10 and paragraph 34) having a first main surface (top surface of insulating substrate, See figs. 2-4, ref. no. 10) and a second main surface (bottom surface of insulating substrate, See figs. 2-4, ref. no. 10) facing each other;
a first wiring (first signal wiring, See figs. 3-4, ref. no. 61 and paragraphs 41-42) on the first main surface and extending along the first main surface (the first signal wiring extends along the top surface of the insulating substate, See figs. 3-4, ref. no. 61);
a second wiring (second signal wiring, See fig. 3, fig 4, ref. no. 62 and paragraphs 45-46) adjacent to the first wiring;
a second stretchable substrate (flexible substrate, See figs. 2-4, ref. no. 30 and paragraph 31) having a third main surface (the surface of the flexible substrate opposite to the surface that the connection wirings are formed on, See figs. 2-4, ref. nos. Cl, 30 and paragraph 35) and a fourth main surface (the surface of the flexible substrate that the connection wirings are formed on, See figs. 2-4, ref. nos. CL, 30 and paragraph 35) facing each other, the second stretchable substrate connected to the first stretchable substrate (the insulating substrate and the flexible substrate are connected by a conductive adhesive, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 10, 30, 71 and paragraph 35-37);
a stretchable third wiring (first connection wiring, See figs. 3-4, ref. no. CL1 and paragraphs 41-42. The examiner notes that the connection wirings are shown flexing in figure 2. See fig. 2, ref. no. CL) on the fourth main surface and extending along the fourth main surface (the first connection wiring extends along the surface of the flexible substrate that the connection wirings are formed on, See fig. 2, ref. no. CL and figs. 3-4, ref. no. CL1); and
a stretchable fourth wiring (second connection wiring, See fig. 3, fig 4, ref. no. CL2 and paragraphs 45-46 The examiner notes that the connection wirings are shown flexing in figure 2. See fig. 2, ref. no. CL) adjacent to the third wiring, wherein
a shortest distance between the first wiring and the second wiring (distance the first signal wiring is spaced apart from the second signal wiring, See figs. 4, ref. nos. 61, 62) is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring (the second distance the first connection wiring and the second connection wiring are spaced apart, See fig. 4, ref. nos. CL1, CL2, D2 and paragraph 46).
Regarding Claim 3:
Kimura a first electronic component (display panel, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. PNL and paragraphs 28-30) only on the first main surface (the display panel is on the top surface of the insulating substrate, See fig. 2, ref. nos. PNL, 20, 30 and paragraph 29) and electrically connected to the first wiring the second wiring (the display panel is connected to the first connection wiring and the second connection wiring through the first signal wiring and the second signal wiring, thus, the display panel is connected to the first signal wiring and the second signal wiring, See fig. 2, ref. nos. CL, PNL, 6, and paragraph 30).
Regarding Claim 6:
Kimura discloses a conductive member electrically connecting the first wiring and the third wiring (conductive adhesive electrically connecting the first signal wiring and the first connection wiring, See figs. 3-4, ref. nos. CL1, 61, 71, and paragraphs 36-37).
Regarding Claim 7:
Kimura the first substrate and the second substrate are arranged such that the first main surface and the fourth main surface face each other (the insulating substrate and flexible substrate are arranged such the top surface of the insulating substrate faces the surface of the flexible substrate that the connection wirings are formed on, See figs. 2-4, ref. nos. 10 and 30),
the first wiring and the third wiring are arranged to face each other in the direction orthogonal to the first main surface (the first signal wiring and the first connection wiring face in a vertical direction, See figs. 3-4, ref. nos. 61, CL), and
the conductive member is arranged between the first wiring and the third wiring (conductive adhesive is between the first signal wiring and the first connection wiring, See fig. 2, ref. nos. CL, 6, 71 and figs. 3-4, ref. nos. CL1, 61, 71).
Regarding Claim 9:
Kimura discloses in a first section orthogonal to a direction in which the first wiring extends in a region where the conductive member, the first wiring, and the third wiring overlap, a width of the first wiring and a width of the third wiring are different (a width of the first signal wiring is greater than a width of the narrow section of the first connection wiring, See figs. 3-4, ref. nos. 61, CL1. The examiner notes that the section of the first connection wiring after the first connection wiring is tapered is the narrow section.).
Regarding Claim 10:
Kimura discloses in a second section orthogonal to a direction in which the first wiring extends in a portion where the first wiring and the third wiring overlap, a width of a narrower one of the first wiring and the third wiring is 500 µm or less (the section of the first connection wiring before the taper and that still overlaps first signal wiring has a width of 10 to 15µm, See figs. 3-4, ref. nos. 61, CL1 and paragraph 41).
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uchiyama (JP 2001318619 A). The examiner notes that the citations to paragraphs of Uchiyama refer to paragraphs of the attached English language translation.
Regarding Claim 1:
Uchiyama discloses a stretchable device comprising:
a first substrate (flexible base substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 11a and paragraph 42) having a first main surface (top surface of flexible base substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 11a) and a second main surface (bottom surface of flexible base substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 11a) facing each other;
a first wiring (rightmost wire in output side wiring pattern on the flexible base substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 11b and paragraphs 42-43) on the first main surface and extending along the first main surface (the rightmost wire in output side wiring pattern extends along the flexible base substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 11b);
a second wiring (second rightmost wire in output side wiring pattern on the flexible base substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 11b and paragraphs 42-43) adjacent to the first wiring;
a second stretchable substrate (plastic substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 6a, paragraphs 5 and 36. The examiner notes Uchiyama discloses the plastic substrate is used as a liquid crystal substrate instead of a conventional glass substrate to obtain flexibility of liquid crystal panel, thus, the plastic substrate is flexible.) having a third main surface (top surface of plastic substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 6a) and a fourth main surface facing each other (bottom surface of plastic substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 6a), the second stretchable substrate connected to the first stretchable substrate (the plastic substrate is connected to the flexible base substrate by anisotropic conductive film, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 6a, 9, 11a, and paragraph 44);
a stretchable third wiring (the rightmost terminal on the bottom surface of the plastic substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 6a, 9, 11b, and paragraph 39) on the fourth main surface and extending along the fourth main surface (the rightmost terminal extends along the bottom surface the plastic substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 6a, and 9); and
a stretchable fourth wiring (the leftmost terminal on the bottom surface of the plastic substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 6a, 9, 11b, and paragraph 39) adjacent to the third wiring, wherein
a shortest distance between the first wiring and the second wiring is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring (a distance between the rightmost wire and the second rightmost wire in the output side wiring pattern at the bumps of the liquid crystal driving IC is shorter than a distance between the rightmost terminal and the leftmost terminal connected to the liquid crystal panel because the right side of the driving IC is smaller than the front side of the liquid crystal panel, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 2, 9, 11b, 11c, and 12).
Regarding Claim 3:
Uchiyama discloses a first electronic component (liquid crystal driving IC, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12 and paragraph 42) only on the first main surface (the liquid crystal driving IC is on the top surface of the flexible base substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12) and electrically connected to the first wiring the second wiring (the liquid crystal driving IC is electrically connected to the wirings in the output side wiring pattern, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 11b, 12, fig. 2, ref.no. 12, 11b, and paragraphs 42-44).
Regarding Claim 4:
Uchiyama discloses a first electronic component (liquid crystal driving IC, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12 and paragraph 42) on the first main surface (the liquid crystal driving IC is on the top surface of the flexible base substrate, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12); and
a second electronic component (a liquid crystal panel includes the plastic substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 4, 6a, and paragraph 36) on the fourth main surface (the plastic substrate is part of the liquid crystal panel, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 4, 6a, and paragraph 36), wherein
the first electronic component (liquid crystal driving IC has bumps electrically connected to the wires in the output side wiring pattern, See fig. 2, ref. nos. 11b, 12, 12a, and paragraphs 42-44) includes a first terminal (a bump of the liquid crystal driving IC electrically connected to the rightmost wire in output wiring pattern, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 11b, 12, fig. 2, ref. no. 11e, 12, 12a, and paragraphs 42-44) electrically connected to the first wiring and a second terminal (a bump of the liquid crystal driving IC electrically connected to the second rightmost wire in output wiring pattern, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 11b, 12, fig. 2, ref. no. 11e, 12, 12a, and paragraphs 42-44) electrically connected to the second wiring,
the second electronic component (the liquid crystal panel has electrodes electrically connected to terminals on the plastic substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 6a, 7a, 9, and paragraphs 36-39) includes a third terminal (rightmost electrode of the liquid crystal panel is electrically connected to the rightmost terminal, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 7a, 9, and paragraphs 36-39) electrically connected to the third wiring and a fourth terminal (leftmost electrode of the liquid crystal panel is electrically connected to the rightmost terminal, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 7a, 9, and paragraphs 36-39) electrically connected to the fourth wiring, and
a shortest distance between the first terminal and the second terminal is shorter than a shortest distance between the third terminal and the fourth terminal (a distance between the bump electrically connected to rightmost wire and the bump electrically connected the second rightmost wire in the output side wiring pattern is shorter than a distance between the rightmost electrode connected to the rightmost terminal and the leftmost electrode connected to the leftmost terminal connected to the liquid crystal panel because the right side of the driving IC is smaller than the front side of the liquid crystal panel, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 2, 9, 11b, 11c, and 12).
Regarding Claim 6:
Uchiyama discloses a conductive member electrically connecting the first wiring and the third wiring (conductive adhesive electrical connecting the right most signal wiring and the rightmost terminal, See figs. 1, ref. nos. 9, 11b, fig. 2, ref. no. 20, and paragraphs 46-47).
Regarding Claim 17:
Uchiyama discloses the first substrate is stretchable (flexible base substrate, See figs. 1-2, ref. no. 11a and paragraph 42).
Regarding Claim 18:
Uchiyama discloses the first wiring and the second wiring are stretchable (the wiring in the wiring pattern on the flexible base substrate must be flexible for the flexible base substrate to flex and for the flexible base substrate to operate as a flexible substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 11a, 11b, 12, 13 and paragraph 42).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Komatsu (JP 2004319703 A). The examiner notes that the citations to paragraphs of Komatsu refer to paragraphs of the attached English language translation.
Regarding Claim 1:
Komatsu discloses a stretchable device comprising:
a first substrate (rigid substrate, See figs. 2, 3, ref. no. 20 and paragraph 20) having a first main surface (surface of the rigid substrate the electrodes are formed on, See figs. 2, 3, ref. nos. 20, 22) and a second main surface (surface of the rigid substrate opposite the surface the electrodes are formed on, See figs. 2, 3, ref. nos. 20) facing each other;
a first wiring (rightmost electrode on the rigid substrate, See figs. 2, 3, ref. no. 22) on the first main surface and extending along the first main surface (the rightmost electrode extends along the surface of the rigid substrate, See figs. 2, 3, ref. no. 20, 22);
a second wiring (second rightmost electrode on the rigid substrate, See fig. 2, 3, ref. no. 22) adjacent to the first wiring;
a second stretchable substrate (flexible substrate, See figs. 1,3, ref. no. 10 and paragraph 18) having a third main surface (surface of the flexible substrate opposite the surface the electrodes are formed on, See figs. 1, 3, ref. nos. 10, 12) and a fourth main surface facing each other (surface of the flexible substrate the electrodes are formed on, See figs. 1, 3, ref. nos. 12), the second stretchable substrate connected to the first stretchable substrate (the flexible substrate is connected to the rigid substrate, See figs. 3a, 3b, ref. nos. 10, 20 and paragraphs 20-23);
a stretchable third wiring (rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate, See figs. 1, 3, ref. no. 12. The examiner notes that electrodes on the flexible substrate must be flexible for the flexible substrate to flex and for the flexible substrate to operate.) on the fourth main surface and extending along the fourth main surface (the rightmost electrode extends along the surface of the flexible substrate, See fig. 1, 3, ref. nos. 10, 12); and
a stretchable fourth wiring (third rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate, See fig. 1, 3, ref. no. 12) adjacent to the third wiring,
a shortest distance between the first wiring and the second wiring is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring (a distance between the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode on the rigid substrate is shorter than a distance between the rightmost electrode and the third rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate, See fig. 3, ref. nos. 10, 12, 20, 22)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Komatsu (JP 2004319703 A) in view of Ristedt et al. (US 4,815,990).
Regarding Claim 2:
Komatsu discloses the above stated stretchable device. Komatsu further discloses the shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring is 250 µm or more (The examiner first notes that the fourth thin wires in the comb-like pattern at the end of the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode have a pitch = 0.1mm and a width = 0.05mm, thus, the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode have a width = 0.35mm. See paragraph 18. The examiner next notes that the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate are shown in figures 1 and 3 being separated by a distance equal to one the electrodes, thus, the distance between the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode is 350 µm. The examiner now notes that the third rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate is located further from the rightmost electrode than second rightmost electrode, therefore, the third rightmost electrode is separated from the rightmost electrode by a distance greater than 350 µm).
The above stated combination of Komatsu and Ristedt does not disclose the shortest distance between the first wiring and the second wiring is less than 250 µm.
Ristedt discloses a distance between conductive traces can be reduced so that the conductive traces can be mating with electrical connectors (See fig. 14, ref. nos. 100, 112, 114 and col. 7 lines 20-33).
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 stretchable device of Komatsu to include reducing the distance between electrodes to less than 250 µm as taught by Ristedt so that the rigid circuit board can be mated with electrical components requiring a distance between conductive traces of less than 250 µm.
The examiner also notes that it has been held where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP 2001318619 A) in view of Tomoda (WO 2020/137078 A1). The examiner notes that the citations to paragraphs of Tomoda refer to paragraphs of the attached English language translation.
Regarding Claim 5:
Uchiyama discloses the above stated stretchable device.
Uchiyama does not disclose a fifth wiring on the first main surface, wherein the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the first wiring or the second wiring when view from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface.
Tomoda a fifth wiring (second wiring line on stretchable substrate, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 10, 30, and paragraph 15) on the first main surface, wherein the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the first wiring or the second wiring when view from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface (the second wiring line overlaps a first wiring line in plan view, See fig. 1, ref. nos. 20, 30 and paragraph 15).
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 stretchable device of Uchiyama to include a fifth wiring on the first main surface, wherein the fifth wiring has a region overlapping the second wiring when view from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface as taught by Tomoda so that output terminals of the liquid crystal driving IC can be connected to terminals on the plastic substrate that are not aligned with each other.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP 2001318619 A) in view of Chu et al. (US 2021/0298181).
Regarding Claim 8:
Uchiyama discloses the above stated stretchable device. Uchiyama further discloses a conductive particles in the anisotropic conductive film are pressed between the wires in the output wiring pattern on the flexible base substate and the terminals on the plastic substrate during the process for attaching the flexible base substrate and the plastic substrate (See figs. 5a-5a, ref. nos. 9, 11c, 22 and paragraphs 51-52). Uchiyama is silent as to the structure of the conductive particle in the anisotropic conductive film.
Uchiyama does not disclose particle size of the conductive particle is larger than a distance between the first wiring and the third wiring.
Chu discloses a conductive adhesive having deformable gold conductive particles that are deformed when pressed between conductive pads such that a diameter of the particles in the conductive adhesive that are not pressed between the conductive pads have a larger diameter than the distance between the conductive pads (See fig. 2 and paragraphs 32-34).
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 stretchable device of Uchiyama to include the deformable gold conductive particles in anisotropic conductive film as taught by Chu in order to provide a larger surface area for electrical contact between the conductive particles and the wires in the output wiring pattern on the flexible base substate and the conductive particles and the terminals on the plastic substrate.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 2019/0051593) in view of Komatsu (JP 2004319703 A).
Regarding Claim 11:
Kimura discloses the above stated stretchable device.
Kimura does not disclose wherein an end portion of at least one of the first wiring and the third wiring has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in width direction.
Komatsu discloses an end portion of at least one of the first wiring and the third wiring (end of an electrode on a flexible substrate, See fig. 1 ref. nos. 10, 12 and paragraphs 18-19) has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in a width direction (comb-like pattern, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12 and paragraphs 18-19).
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 stretchable device of Komatsu to include an end portion of the third wiring has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in a width direction as taught by Komatsu in order to provide a highly reliable connection. (See Komatsu paragraph 29.)
Regarding Claim 12:
The combination of Kimura and Komatsu discloses wherein a distance between two adjacent tooth portions of the plurality of tooth portions is 700 µm or less (Kimura discloses the first signal wiring has a width of 10 to 15µm, See figs. 3-4, ref. nos. 61, CL1 and paragraph 41. The examiner notes that a distance between two adjacent tooth portions in the plurality tooth portion is less than 700 µm because the width of the first signal wiring is less than 700um).
Regarding Claim 13:
Komatsu discloses wherein distances between two adjacent tooth portions of the plurality of tooth portions are all the same (the pitch and the width of the four thin wires are the same, See fig. 1, ref. no. 12a and paragraph 11).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Kitada et al. (US 2007/0197058) in view of Fukui (JP 2001035880A). The examiner notes that the citations to paragraphs of Fukui refer to paragraphs of the attached English language translation.
Regarding Claim 11:
Kitada discloses the above stated stretchable device.
Kitada does not disclose an end portion of at least one of the first wiring and the third wiring has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in width direction.
Fukui discloses an end portion of at least one of the first wiring (comb-shaped electrode, See fig. 5, ref. nos. 6 and paragraph 34) and the third wiring has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in a width direction (comb-shaped electrode has four tooth portions in parallel, See fig. 5, ref. no. 6).
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 stretchable device of Kitada to include an end portion of the first wiring has a plurality of tooth portions in parallel and separated in a width direction as taught by Fukui in order to ensure that all of the solder between the wirings is does not flow out when the flexible printed wiring boards are pressed together.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Kitada et al. (US 2007/0197058) and Fukui (JP 2001035880A) in view of Ristedt et al. (US 4,815,990).
Regarding Claim 14:
The above stated combination of Kitada and Fukui discloses the above stated stretchable device.
The above stated combination of Kitada and Fukui does not disclose wherein a distance between two adjacent tooth portions of the plurality of tooth portions is 200 um or more.
Ristedt discloses dimensions of fingers at the ends of conductive traces of a flexible circuit can be adjusted to ensure the fingers properly connect with a mating component (See fig. 3A, ref. no. 14, fig. 4A, ref. no. 14A and col. 6 lines 2-9)
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 stretchable device of Kitada and Fukui to adjust the dimensions of the comb-shape electrode to have a distance between two adjacent tooth portions of the plurality of tooth portions is 200 um or more as taught by Ristedt so the that comb-shaped electrode properly connects with mating wiring of this scale.
The examiner also notes that it has been held where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchiyama (JP 2001318619 A) in view of Kobayashi et al. (US 2006/0012745).
Regarding Claim 15:
Uchiyama discloses the above stated stretchable device. Uchiyama further disclosed the anisotropic conductive film extends between the region where the wiring in the output wiring pattern and the terminals on the plastic substrate overlap. See fig. 2, ref. no. 20.
Uchiyama does not disclose a first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring and overlapping the conductive member when viewed from a direction orthogonal to the first main surface.
Kobayashi discloses a first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring (protective layer covering lines up to region where the line overlap with lines on the array substrate, See fig. 4, ref. no. 42b, 43, fig. 7, ref. no. 25, 42b, 43, paragraphs 66 and 71).
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 stretchable device of Uchiyama to include a first insulating coating layer coating the first wiring as taught by Kobayashi in order to prevent short circuits between wire in the output side wiring pattern.
The examiner notes the first insulating coating will overlap the anisotropic conductive film because the anisotropic conductive film extends between the region where the wiring in the output wiring pattern and the terminals on the plastic substrate overlap.
Regarding Claim 16:
Uchiyama discloses the above stated stretchable device. Uchiyama further disclosed the anisotropic conductive film extends between the region where the wiring in the output wiring pattern and the terminals on the plastic substrate overlap. See fig. 2, ref. no. 20.
Uchiyama does not disclose a second insulating coating layer coating the second wiring and overlapping the conductive member when viewed from a direction orthogonal to the fourth main surface.
Kobayashi discloses a second insulating coating layer coating the coating wiring (protective layer covering lines up to region where the line overlap with lines on the array substrate, See fig. 4, ref. no. 42b, 43, fig. 7, ref. no. 25, 42b, 43, paragraphs 66 and 71).
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 stretchable device of Uchiyama to include a second insulating coating layer coating the second wiring as taught by Kobayashi in order to prevent short circuits between the terminal on the plastic substrate.
The examiner notes the second insulating coating will overlap the anisotropic conductive film because the anisotropic conductive film extends between the region where the wiring in the output wiring pattern and the terminals on the plastic substrate overlap.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 2019/0051593) in view of Seo et al. (US 2022/0006041).
Regarding Claim 17:
Kimura discloses the above stated stretchable device. Kimura further discloses the insulating substrate can be made from resin (See paragraph 34).
Kimura is silent as to whether the insulating substrate made from resin is flexible.
Seo discloses a flexible substrate made from a flexible resin such as a polymer resin (See fig. 6A, ref. no. 100 and paragraph 110).
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 stretchable device of Kimura to include a flexible substrate as taught by Seo in order to increase the flexibility of the insulating substrate.
The examiner also notes that selection of a polymer resin for the insulating substrate would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since it has been held that the selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for its intended use is a matter of obvious design choice. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Komatsu (JP 2004319703 A).
Regarding Claim 19:
Komatsu discloses the above stated stretchable device.
Komatsu in figures 1-3b does not disclose a third substrate having a fifth main surface and a sixth main surface facing each other; and
a sixth wiring and a seventh wiring on the fifth main surface and extending along the fifth main surface, wherein
the second substrate and the third substrate are connected, and
a shortest distance between the sixth wiring and the seventh wiring is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring.
Komatsu further discloses a third substrate (main substrate, See fig. 4 and paragraph 29) having a fifth main surface (surface connected to the flexible substate, See fig. 4, ref. no. 10 and paragraph 29) and a sixth main surface facing each other (surface opposite the surface connected to the flexible substrate, See fig. 4, ref. no. 10 and paragraph 29) and the second substrate and the third substrate are connected (the main substrate is connected to the flexible substrate, See fig. 4, ref. nos. 10, 20, and paragraph 29).
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 stretchable device of Komatsu to include a third substrate having a fifth main surface and a sixth main surface facing each other and the second substrate and the third substrate are connected as taught by Komatsu to increase the functionality of the stretchable device by increasing the number of components connected together.
Komatsu does not disclose a sixth wiring and a seventh wiring on the fifth main surface and extending along the fifth main surface and a shortest distance between the sixth wiring and the seventh wiring is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring.
Komatsu discloses a wiring pattern on the rigid substrate the is electrically connected to the flexible substrate (See fig. 2, 3, ref. nos. 10, 12, 20, 22. The examiner notes that in wiring pattern of the rigid substrate included on the main substate the right most electrode is read on a sixth wiring and the second rightmost electrode a seventh wiring on the fifth main surface and extending along the fifth main surface. The examiner also notes a shortest distance between the sixth wiring and the seventh wiring (a distance between the rightmost electrode and the second rightmost electrode on the main substrate is shorter than a distance between the rightmost electrode and the third rightmost electrode on the flexible substrate, See fig. 3, ref. nos. 10, 12, 20, 22) is shorter than a shortest distance between the third wiring and the fourth wiring.)
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 stretchable device of Komatsu to include on the main substrate the same the wiring pattern from the rigid substrate as taught by Komatsu in to easily electrically connect to the main substrate to the flexible substrate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRETT SQUIRES whose telephone number is (571)272-8214. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:30pm.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/CALEEN O SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/B.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights