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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2-21 have been considered but are moot on grounds of new rejection. Examine notes that the Application might be in condition for allowance if the proper documents (terminal disclaimer) are submitted and necessary amendments are filed.
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, 9, and 13-21 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 8 recites “wherein the thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as the thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode”. Claim 13 recites “wherein the thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode”. Claim 14 recites “wherein a thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode”.
The TERM, ‘Substantially’
The term "substantially" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite; it is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially” is defined as "being largely but not wholly that which is specified” (see Merriam Webster online dictionary). This language is indefinite as the specification does not describe how much the value can deviate from the thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode. The term “substantially” modifies a target, and implicitly requires boundaries at some maximum value above the target and at some minimum value below the target beyond which one is not “substantially” the target anymore. Neither the claims, nor the specification, defines these boundaries. Thus, it is unclear whether one must be within some small percentage of deviation of
the target (such as 0.01 %, 0.1 %, 1 %, 2 %, 5 %, 10 %, or some other percentage) or within a certain number of units of the target (in this case, the thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode), and specifically which of these possible values defines the boundaries. If one were to poll 100 people having ordinary skill in the art, there would be many different responses for the boundaries. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim is unclear. Therefore, the claim is rejected as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 9 and 15-21 inherit these deficiencies due to their dependency. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will take the recitation to be “wherein a thickness of the second portion is the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode”.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,052,902 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
In regards to claim 2, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses an organic light-emitting diode display device comprising: a substrate; a plurality of thin film transistors on the substrate; a plurality of pixels on the plurality of thin film transistors; an encapsulation layer on the plurality of pixels; a touch sensor on the substrate including a plurality of touch sensor electrodes, a plurality of touch sensor wirings for connecting the plurality of touch sensor electrodes and an external device, and a plurality of connection wirings connecting adjacent two touch sensor electrodes, wherein at least one of the plurality of touch sensor wirings comprises a first portion and a second portion, and wherein a thickness of the first portion is less than a thickness of the second portion.
In regards to claim 3, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses further comprising: a pixel defining layer disposed on the substrate; wherein at least one of the plurality of touch sensor wirings is disposed on the pixel defining layer to overlap the pixel defining layer in a plan view, wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, and
In regards to claim 4, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, wherein at least one of the plurality of thin film transistors comprises an active layer, a gate electrode, a source electrode, and a drain electrode, wherein at least one of the plurality of pixels includes a light emitting layer, a lower electrode, and an upper electrode, wherein the light emitting layer is between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of touch sensor wirings include same materials, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of connection wirings include same materials, and wherein the source electrode or the drain electrode includes aluminum and titanium.
In regards to claim 5, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the thickness of the first portion is less than a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode.
In regards to claim 6, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses further comprising: a pixel defining layer disposed on the substrate, wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, wherein at least one of the plurality of touch sensor wirings is disposed on the pixel defining layer to overlap the pixel defining layer in a plan view, wherein at least one of the plurality of thin film transistors comprises an active layer, a gate electrode, a source electrode, and a drain electrode, wherein at least one of the plurality of pixels includes a light emitting layer, a lower electrode, and an upper electrode, wherein the light emitting layer is between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of touch sensor wirings include same materials, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of connection wirings include same materials, and wherein the plurality of touch sensor wirings include aluminum and titanium.
In regards to claim 7, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, and wherein each of the plurality of touch sensor electrodes is disposed across at least nine pixel areas.
In regards to claim 8, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of thin film transistors comprises an active layer, a gate electrode, a source electrode, and a drain electrode, wherein the thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode, and wherein the plurality of touch sensor wirings include aluminum and titanium.
In regards to claim 9, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the second portion and the source or drain electrode are simultaneously formed using same materials, and
In regards to claim 13, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode, and wherein the plurality of touch sensor wirings include aluminum and titanium.
In regards to claim 14, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses an organic light-emitting diode display device comprising: a substrate; a plurality of thin film transistors on the substrate, at least one of the plurality of thin film transistors comprising an active layer, a gate electrode, a source electrode, and a drain electrode; a plurality of pixels on the plurality of thin film transistors; an encapsulation layer on the plurality of pixels; a touch sensor on the substrate including a plurality of touch sensor electrodes, a plurality of touch sensor wirings for connecting the plurality of touch sensor electrodes and an external device, and a plurality of connection wirings connecting adjacent two touch sensor electrodes, wherein at least one of the plurality of touch sensor wirings comprises a first portion and a second portion, and wherein a thickness of the second portion is substantially the same as a thickness of the source electrode or the drain electrode.
In regards to claim 15, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the plurality of touch sensor wirings and the source or drain electrode include aluminum and titanium.
In regards to claim 16, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses further comprising: a pixel defining layer disposed on the substrate, wherein the first portion is disposed on the pixel defining layer to overlap the pixel defining layer in a plan view, and wherein the thickness of the first portion is less than the thickness of the second portion.
In regards to claim 18, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of pixels includes a light emitting layer, a lower electrode, and an upper electrode, wherein the light emitting layer is between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of touch sensor wirings include same materials, wherein the source electrode, the drain electrode, and the plurality of connection wirings include same materials, wherein the source electrode or the drain electrode includes aluminum and titanium, and wherein the thickness of the first portion is less than the thickness of the second portion.
In regards to claim 19, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) discloses wherein the second portion and the source or drain electrode are simultaneously formed using same materials.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 5, 6 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,052,902 B2 in view of claims 3-6, 8-11, 13-19 and 23-29 of U.S. Patent No. 11,594,581 B2.
In regards to claim 11, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) as modified by 11,594,581 B2 (claims 3-6, 8-11, 13-19 and 23-29) discloses further comprising: a pixel defining layer disposed on the substrate; and a light blocking member on the pixel defining layer, wherein at least one of the plurality of touch sensor wirings is disposed on the pixel defining layer to overlap the pixel defining layer in a plan view, wherein the encapsulation layer includes at least one inorganic layer and at least one organic layer, wherein the plurality of touch sensor wirings include aluminum and titanium, and wherein the first portion is under the light blocking member.
In regards to claim 17, 12,052,902 B2 (claims 1, 4, 5, 6, 9) as modified by 11,594,581 B2 (claims 3-6, 8-11, 13-19 and 23-29) discloses further comprising: a light blocking member on the pixel defining layer, and wherein the first portion of the touch sensor wiring is under the light blocking member.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TELLY D GREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3204. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at 571-272-2339. 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.
TELLY D. GREEN
Examiner
Art Unit 2898
/TELLY D GREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898 September 23, 2026
