NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
Acknowledgements
1. This non-final Office Action addresses broadening reissue U.S. Application No. 18/777,098 (“instant application”). Examiners find the actual filing date of the instant application is July 18, 2024.
2. The instant application is a broadening reissue application of U.S. Patent No. 11,476,445, (“‘445 Patent”) issued Oct. 18, 2022. The ‘445 Patent was filed on Jul. 22, 2020 as U.S. Application No. 16/935,733 (“733 Application”), titled “DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING A CONTACT UNIT”.
3. Examiners do not find any certificates of correction, ongoing/previous proceedings before the Office, or current ongoing litigation involving the ‘445 Patent.
4. The ‘445 Patent issued with claims 1-15 (“Patented Claims”). In the preliminary amendment filed July 18, 2024 ("JULY 2024 CLAIM AMENDMENTS"), claims 16-33 are added.
5. Claims 1-33 are pending and examined and are grouped as follows:
claims 1-9;
claims 10-23; and
claims 24-33;
Priority Claims
6. Examiners find the instant application is claiming foreign priority to KR 10-2019-0094998 filed Aug. 5, 2019.
7. The presumed effective U.S. filing date of the instant application is July. 22, 2020, which is the filing date of the ‘733 Application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. Claims 1, 10, 22-26, 28, 30, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2015/0263308 to Park et al. published Sep. 17, 2015. (“Park”).
Examiner Annotated Park figure 3 is presented below.
PNG
media_image1.png
523
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 1, Park discloses a display device comprising (figure 3)
a substrate (#100) which includes a display area (DA) and a non-display area (NDA) adjacent to the display area;
a plurality of LEDs (#134) which are disposed in the display area (DA) and include an anode (#126) and a cathode (#136);
a plurality of driving elements (¶[0046]) to drive the plurality of LEDs;
a 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) which is at least partially disposed in the display area (DA);
a 2nd planarization layer (as Annotated) which is disposed in the non-display area (NDA) and is spaced apart from the 1st planarization layer (see figure 3); and
a contact unit (#120-#122) disposed between the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer in the non-display area,
wherein the cathode (#136) extends from the display area to the non-display area to be electrically connected to the contact unit,
wherein the contact unit includes:
one or more metal layers (#120-#122) disposed below the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer in the non-display area (see figure 3); and
a transparent conductive layer (#110) which is disposed on the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer in the non-display area and is electrically connected to the one or more metal layers (#120-#122),
wherein a metal layer in the one or more metal layers is formed of a same material as a part of the plurality of driving elements (¶¶[0052], [0069]) and
wherein the transparent conductive layer (#110) is formed of a same material as the anode of the plurality of LEDs (¶[0055], [0083]).
As to claim 10, Park discloses a display device comprising (figure 3)
a substrate (#100) including a display area (DA),
a plurality of routing areas (R) outside the display area (DA), and
a plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2) outside the display area (DA) and disposed between the plurality of routing areas (R);
a plurality of flexible films (#114) electrically connected to the plurality of routing areas (R), respectively, at one end of the substrate (#100);
a 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) disposed in the display and the plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2);
a 2nd planarization layer (as Annotated) disposed in the plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2) and spaced apart from the 1st planarization layer (as Annotated);
a cathode ((¶¶[0097]-[0099]) disposed in the display area (DA) and the plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2); and
a contact unit (#120-#122) disposed in the plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2) and electrically connected to the cathode (¶¶[0097]-[0098]) in the plurality of contact areas (CN1, CN2).
As to claim 22, the annotated figure 3 of Park discloses “an edge of the 1st planarization layer is parallel to an edge of the display area; and an edge of the 2nd planarization layer facing toward the display area is parallel to the edge of the display area,” as claimed.
As to claim 23, the annotated figure 3 of Park, as annotated above shows that the “2nd planarization layer has an island shape.”
As to claim 24, Park discloses a display device comprising (figure 3):
a substrate (#100) including a display area (DA) and a non-display area (NDA) adjacent to the display area;
a buffer layer (#102) on the substrate (#100);
a metal layer (#120) on the buffer layer (#102) in the non-display area (NDA);
a 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) on the metal layer (#122) in the non-display area (NDA),
the 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) being disposed in the display area (DA) and the non-display area (NDA);
a 2nd planarization layer (as Annotated) on the metal layer (#120) non-display area (NDA) and spaced apart from the 1st planarization layer (as Annotated);
a transparent conductive layer (#110) on the 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) and the 2nd planarization layer (as Annotated) in the non-display area (NDA),
the transparent conductive layer being (#110) electrically connected to the metal layer (#122);
a plurality of LEDs (#134) in the display area (DA) and including an anode (#126) and a cathode (#136); and
a plurality of thin film transistors (¶[0007]) in the display area (DA) to drive the plurality of LEDs (#134),
the plurality of thin film transistors (¶[0007]) including a gate electrode, an active layer, a source electrode, and a drain electrode (these are inherent in TFTs)
wherein the metal layer (#120) and the transparent conductive layer (#110) are disposed between the 1st planarization layer (as Annotated) and the 2nd planarization layer (as Annotated) in the non-display area (NDA),
wherein the cathode (#136) extends from the display area (DA) to the non-display area (NDA) to be electrically connected to the transparent conductive layer (#110),
wherein the metal layer (#120) is formed of a same material as one of the gate electrode, the source electrode, and the drain electrode (¶¶[0069], [0052]), and
wherein the transparent conductive layer (#110) is formed of a same material as the anode (#126, ¶[0083]).
As to claim 25, the annotated figure 3 of Park discloses “a plurality of flexible films (#114) connected to the substrate in the non-display area (NDA), wherein the metal layer (#120) extends farther toward the plurality of flexible films (#114) than the transparent conductive layer (#110) does, the metal layer (#120) being electrically connected to the plurality of flexible films (#114)” as claimed.
As to claim 26, the annotated figure 3 of Park discloses “an insulating layer (#106) disposed on the metal layer (#114) and under the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer,” as claimed.
As to claim 28, Park discloses the insulating layer (#106) is “a passivation layer” because gate insulating layer (#106) may include hafnium oxide (HfOx), aluminum oxide (AlOx), zirconium oxide (ZrOx), titanium oxide (TiOx), and tantalum oxide (TaOx). See ¶[0054].
As to claim 30, Park discloses “an edge of the transparent conductive layer is disposed on the 1st planarization layer and has a reverse tapered shape” because transparent conductive layer (#110) has a reverse taper shape (figure 3).
As to claim 33, the annotated figure 3 of Park, as annotated above shows that the “2nd planarization layer has an island shape.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
9. Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, neither the claimed “at least one of the plurality of routing areas has an increasing width toward the display area” (claim 20) nor the claimed “at least one of the plurality of contact areas has a decreasing width toward the display area” (claim 21) is described because the specification is silent on the width of the routing areas.
35 USC §251 - Original Patent Requirement
10. Claims 10-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 for not being the same invention as that disclosed as being the invention in the original patent. See MPEP 1412.01; United States Industrial Chemicals, Inc. v. Carbide & Carbon Chemicals Corp., 315 U.S. 668, 53 USPQ6 (1942); Antares Pharma Inc., v. Medac Pharma Inc. and Medac GMBH. 771 F.3dl354, 112 USPQ2d 1865 (Fed. Cir. 2014); and Forum US, Inc. v. Flow Valve, LLC, 926 F.3d 1346. 1352, 2019 USPQ2d 221227 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
Under MPEP 1412.01, Examiners review the reissue application to determine whether the original patent requirement is satisfied, by considering the following factors:
A. the claims presented in the reissue application are described in the original patent specification and enabled by the original patent specification such that 35 U.S.C. §112(a) is satisfied;
B. nothing in the original patent specification indicates an intent not to claim the subject matter of the claims presented in the reissue application; and
C. the newly claimed invention is clearly and unequivocally disclosed in the specification as a separate invention with the claimed combination of features.
As to (A), claims 10-20 and 23, these claims are described in the original patent specification and enabled by the original patent specification such that 35 U.S.C. §112(a) is satisfied. Note that claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(a). See rejection above.
As to (B), nothing in the original patent specification indicates an intent not to claim the subject matter of the claims presented in the reissue application.
As to (C), the newly claimed invention is NOT clearly and unequivocally disclosed in the specification as a separate invention with the claimed combination of features. As is discussed extensively in the MPEP, perhaps the leading case on the issue of the original patent requirement is Antares Pharma Inc., V. Medac Pharma Inc, and Medac GMBH, 771 F.3d 1354, 112 USPQ2d 1865 (Fed. Cir. 2014). To satisfy the original patent requirement where a new invention is sought by reissue, “…the specification must clearly and unequivocally disclose the newly claimed invention as a separate invention" Antares Pharma, Inc., 771 F.3d at 1363, 112USPQ2d at 1871. Here, Antares's original patent (U.S. Patent 7,776,015) claimed jet injection devices. On reissue, Antares broadened its claims to cover any “injection device.”
The C.A.F.C. commented as follows:
“‘[I]t is not enough that an invention might have been claimed in the original patent because it was suggested or indicated in the specification’ . . . [when] it was nonetheless clear that the invention disclosed in the original patent required the presence [of the element omitted in the reissue claims].” (Emphasis added.)
In other words, all embodiments disclosed by the original Antares patent were directed to jet injection devices; there was no express disclosure of an injection device that was not a jet injection device.
Also, prominently discussed in the M.P.E.P. is Forum US, Inc, v. Flow Valve, LLC. 926 F.3d 1346, 1352, 2019 USPQ2d 221227 (Fed. Cir. 2019). Here, unlike its original claims, Forum’s reissue claims did not include “arbors”. The C.A.F.C. concluded that ‘‘nowhere do the written description or drawings disclose that arbors are an optional feature of the invention”. Thus, like Antares, the original patent requirement was not met because Forum was attempting to claim subject matter for which there was no express disclosure in the original patent specification.
The M.P.E.P. also discusses Ex parte Sandwick. Appeal No. 2018-008369, (PTAB July 23, 2019). Here, the original patent described fabrication methods that all included casting. Nowhere was casting mentioned as optional. Once again, the Applicant was rebuffed by the original patent requirement since there was no disclosure of a fabrication method that did not include casting. This was the holding despite the fact that one skilled in the art would understand that techniques other than casting were readily available.
Antares, Forum, and Sandwick are all commonly characterized by a failure of the original patent specification to expressly describe the broadened versions of embodiments represented by the reissue claims. In Antares, there was no express description of a non-jet injection device. In Forum, there was no express description of an embodiment without arbors. In Sandwick, there was no express description of fabrication without casting. While the written description requirement may have been satisfied in each case, the original patent requirement was not.
In this case, the claims of the present reissue application are like those of Antares, Forum, and Sandwick in that the claims of the present reissue application do not find express support in the original patent disclosure of an embodiment “wherein the plurality of routing areas are radially disposed with respect to the plurality of flexible films and the plurality of contact areas are radially disposed with respect to the display area.”
Irrespective of whether one skilled in the art would understand that this limitation is an optional limitation of the described embodiments, nowhere in the ‘445 Patent do the written description or drawings disclose that “the plurality of routing areas are radially disposed with respect to the plurality of flexible films and the plurality of contact areas are radially disposed with respect to the display area” is an optional limitation of the invention. In other words, the 35 U.S.C. §251 requires more than a skilled artisan’s ability to infer that the embodiment claimed on reissue was described in the specification of the original patent. There must be an “express disclosure” of the “exact embodiment claimed on reissue.” Antares, 771 F.3d at 1363. Thus, the original patent requirement is not met because reissue claims 10-23 are directed to an embodiment for which there was no express disclosure in the original patent specification.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 2-9, 27, 29, 31, and 32 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.
As to claims 2-3, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “the transparent conductive layer is disposed so as to cover an entire 2nd planarization layer” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claims 4-6, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “an edge of the transparent conductive layer is disposed on the 1st planarization layer” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claims 7-8, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “a plurality of flexible films which are connected to the substrate in the non-display area, wherein the one or more metal layers extend to outside of the 2nd planarization layer to be electrically connected to the plurality of flexible films” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claim 9, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “one or more insulating layers which are disposed between a metal layer in the one or more metal layers and the transparent conductive layer and have a contact hole formed to expose the metal layer, wherein the metal layer which is exposed through the contact hole in the non-display area between the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer is in contact with the transparent conductive layer” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claims 27, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “the insulating layer includes a contact hole between the 1st planarization layer and the 2nd planarization layer in the non-display area; and the transparent conductive layer is electrically connected to the metal layer through the contact hole” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claim 29, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “a plurality of flexible films connected to the substrate in the non-display area, wherein the non-display area includes a plurality of routing areas adjacent to the display area, wherein the plurality of flexible films are electrically connected to the plurality of routing areas, respectively, and wherein the insulating layer includes a contact hole between the plurality of routing areas” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claim 31, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “a bank on the transparent conductive layer on the 1st planarization layer, wherein the transparent conductive layer includes an edge disposed on the 1st planarization layer and covered by the bank” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
As to claim 32, the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “an edge of the 1st planarization layer is parallel to an edge of the display area; and an edge of the 2nd planarization layer facing toward the display area is parallel to the edge of the display area” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEANDRA M HUGHES whose telephone number is (571)272-6982. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-Th 8AM-6PM.
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, Hetul Patel can be reached at 571-272-4184. 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.
Signed:
/DEANDRA M HUGHES/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/CHRISTINA Y. LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3991
/H.B.P/
Hetul PatelSupervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992