Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Detailed Action
Specification Objection
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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-AlA 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.
Claims 1, 6-8, 10, 11, 15 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Higano (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2017/0294621).
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses a display apparatus comprising: a display panel (100); a cover window (200) covering one surface of the display panel; and a first adhesive member (201) between the display panel and the cover window, wherein a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees (Claim 2).
Regarding Claim 6
FIG. 7 of Higano discloses the first adhesive member is in a display area and a peripheral area of the display panel, the peripheral area being around the display area.
Regarding Claim 7
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses the first adhesive member comprises an inclined portion inclined with respect to the display panel in the peripheral area, and a width of the inclined portion of the first adhesive member is about 1.19 times to about 3.73 times greater than a thickness of the first adhesive member (determined by incline angle).
Regarding Claim 8
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses a second adhesive member (10) on a periphery of the first adhesive member [0031].
Regarding Claim 10
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses the second adhesive member comprises a different material from the first adhesive member.
Regarding Claim 11
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses a surface inclination angle of the second adhesive member is greater than the surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member.
Regarding Claim 15
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus comprising: preparing a display panel (100); arranging a first adhesive member (201) in a display area and a peripheral area of the display panel; and attaching, by arranging a cover window (200) on the first adhesive member, the cover window to the display panel, wherein a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees (Claim 2).
Regarding Claim 19
FIG. 8 of Higano discloses a second adhesive member (10) on a periphery of the first adhesive member [0031].
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 8, 9 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0067630), in view of Kim (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0162985).
Regarding Claim 1
FIG. 7 of Hwang discloses a display apparatus comprising: a display panel (110); a cover window (210) covering one surface of the display panel; and a first adhesive member (SM) between the display panel and the cover window.
Hwang is silent with respect to “a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees”.
FIG. 13 of Kim discloses a similar display apparatus, wherein a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees [0133].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hwang, as taught by Kim. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Hwang in the above manner for purpose of preventing damage to circuit element ([0135] of Kim).
Regarding Claim 8
FIG. 13 of Kim discloses a second adhesive member (F1) on a periphery of the first adhesive member (F2).
Regarding Claim 9
FIG. 13 of Kim discloses the second adhesive member comprises the same material as a material of the first adhesive member.
Regarding Claim 15
FIG. 7 of Hwang discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus, the method comprising: preparing a display panel (110); arranging a first adhesive member (SM) in a display area and a peripheral area of the display panel; and attaching, by arranging a cover window (210) on the first adhesive member, the cover window to the display panel.
Hwang is silent with respect to “a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees”.
FIG. 13 of Kim discloses a similar display apparatus, wherein a surface inclination angle of the first adhesive member is at least about 15 degrees and at most about 40 degrees [0133].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Hwang, as taught by Kim. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Hwang in the above manner for purpose of preventing damage to circuit element ([0135] of Kim).
Claims 2-4, 12, 16 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higano, in view of Xu (CN 116376477, machine-translation provided).
Regarding Claim 2
Higano discloses Claim 1.
Higano is silent with respect to “the first adhesive member comprises a hydrophobic material”.
FIG. 1 of Xu discloses a similar display apparatus, comprising an adhesive member (30), wherein the first adhesive member comprises a hydrophobic material [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Higano, as taught by Xu. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Higano in the above manner for purpose of improving the interface bonding force ([0035] of Xu).
Regarding Claim 3
FIG. 1 of Xu discloses the first adhesive member comprises at least one of butyl acrylate or perfluoroethyl acrylate [0035].
Regarding Claim 4
FIG. 1 of Xu discloses the first adhesive member comprises butyl acrylate and an amount of the butyl acrylate is about 20 wt % to about 65 wt % based on a total wt % of the first adhesive member [0074].
Regarding Claim 12
The recitation “the first adhesive member and the second adhesive member each comprise butyl acrylate, wherein an amount of the butyl acrylate in the second adhesive member is less than an amount of the butyl acrylate in the first adhesive member” is related to the wetting effect and adhesive force ([0008] of Xu). Therefore, said amount is considered to be a result effective variable (service life), therefore, constitutes an optimization of ranges. In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the parameters as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 16
FIG. 1 of Xu discloses the first adhesive member comprises at least one of butyl acrylate or perfluoroethyl acrylate [0035].
Regarding Claim 17
FIG. 1 of Xu discloses the first adhesive member comprises butyl acrylate and an amount of the butyl acrylate is about 20 wt % to about 65 wt % based on a total wt % of the first adhesive member [0074].
Claims 2, 3, 5, 13 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higano, in view of Xu5 (CN 106684325, machine-translation provided).
Regarding Claim 2
Higano discloses Claim 1.
Higano is silent with respect to “the first adhesive member comprises a hydrophobic material”.
Xu5 discloses a similar adhesive member comprising a hydrophobic material [0005].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Higano, as taught by Xu5. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Higano in the above manner for purpose of improving adhesive property and waterproof ([0005] of Xu5).
Regarding Claim 3
Xu5 discloses the first adhesive member comprises at least one of butyl acrylate or perfluoroethyl acrylate [0028].
Regarding Claim 5
Xu5 discloses the first adhesive member comprises perfluoroethyl acrylate and an amount of the perfluoroethyl acrylate is about 5 wt % to about 35 wt % based on a total wt % of the first adhesive member [0028].
Regarding Claim 13
The recitation “the first adhesive member and the second adhesive member each comprise perfluoroethyl acrylate, wherein an amount of the perfluoroethyl acrylate in the second adhesive member is greater than an amount of the perfluoroethyl acrylate in the first adhesive member” is related to the film formation, waterproof effect and adhesive force ([0026] of Xu5). Therefore, said amount is considered to be a result effective variable (service life), therefore, constitutes an optimization of ranges. In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 1996). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the parameters as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 18
Xu5 discloses the first adhesive member comprises perfluoroethyl acrylate and an amount of the perfluoroethyl acrylate is about 5 wt % to about 35 wt % based on a total wt % of the first adhesive member [0028].
Claims 14 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higano, in view of Wang (CN 113764496, machine-translation provided).
Regarding Claim 14
Higano discloses Claim 8.
Higano is silent with respect to “a hydrophobic coating layer between the first adhesive member and the second adhesive member”.
FIG. 6 of Wang discloses a similar display apparatus, comprising a hydrophobic coating layer (0212) between the first adhesive member (0211) and the second adhesive member (0213).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Higano, as taught by Wang. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Higano in the above manner for purpose of blocking invasion of water vapor (Abstract of Wang).
Regarding Claim 20
Higano discloses Claim 19.
Higano is silent with respect to “a hydrophobic coating layer between the first adhesive member and the second adhesive member”.
FIG. 6 of Wang discloses a similar display apparatus, comprising a hydrophobic coating layer (0212) between the first adhesive member (0211) and the second adhesive member (0213).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Higano, as taught by Wang. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Higano in the above manner for purpose of blocking invasion of water vapor (Abstract of Wang).
Pertinent Art
Claims 1-4 are substantially identical with Claims 1-4 of CN 119789722. U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2020/0152909; Nakagawa (JP 2015013391) and KR 20140096596.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG-BAI ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-3904. The examiner can normally be reached on 11am – 7pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chad Dicke can be reached on (571)270-7996. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHENG-BAI ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights