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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on January 2, 2025 has been 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 13-18 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.
Regarding claim 13, lines 2-4 recite: a first area adjacent to the pad; a second area facing the first area; and a third area between the first area and the second area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, a first area, a second area, and a third area are unclear because claim 3 from which claim 13 depends also recites a first area, a second area, and a third area making a first area, a second area, and a third area of lines 2-4 of claim 13 redundant. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 2-4 of claim 13 as reciting, “a first data driving circuit area adjacent to the pad; a second data driving circuit area facing the first data driving circuit area; and a third data driving circuit area between the first data driving circuit area and the second data driving circuit area” because of this ambiguity.
Regarding claim 14, lines 1-2 recite: wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the second area and the third area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it is unclear whether the second area and the third area are referring to the second area and third area recited in claim 13 or the second area and third area recited in claim 3 from which claim 14 depends via claim 13. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 1-2 of claim 14 as reciting, “wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the second data driving circuit area and the third data driving circuit area” because of this ambiguity.
Regarding claim 15, lines 1-2 recite: wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the second area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it is unclear whether the second area is referring to the second area recited in claim 13 or the second area recited claim 3 from which claim 15 depends via claim 13. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 1-2 of claim 15 as reciting, “wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the second data driving circuit area” because of this ambiguity.
Regarding claim 16, lines 1-2 recite: wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the third area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it is unclear whether the third area is referring to the third area recited in claim 13 or the third area recited claim 3 from which claim 16 depends via claim 13. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 1-2 of claim 16 as reciting, “wherein the first line overlaps the data driving circuit in the third data driving circuit area” because of this ambiguity.
Regarding claim 17, lines 1-2 recite: wherein the first line is adjacent to the third area and is parallel to a side of the third area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it is unclear whether the third area is referring to the third area recited in claim 13 or the third area recited claim 3 from which claim 17 depends via claim 13. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting lines 1-2 of claim 17 as reciting, “wherein the first line is adjacent to the third data driving circuit area and is parallel to a side of the third data driving circuit area” because of this ambiguity.
Regarding claim 18, line 1 recites: wherein the substrate is bent in the third area. This recited language used to define the invention is ambiguous and clarification and/or correction are/is required to make its meaning clear and precise whereby the metes and bounds of the claimed invention can be ascertained. No new matter may be added. For example, it is unclear whether the third area is referring to the third area recited in claim 13 or the third area recited claim 3 from which claim 18 depends via claim 13. For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting line 1 of claim 18 as reciting, “wherein the substrate is bent in the third pad area” because of this ambiguity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 1-5 and 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0399077 A1 (Eom).
Regarding claim 1, Eom discloses, A display apparatus (display apparatus (10); FIG. 1; [0057]), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
617
655
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a substrate (substrate (SUB1 and/or SUB2); FIGs.9 and 10; [0110]);
PNG
media_image2.png
531
507
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
627
550
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a pad electrode (pad electrode (DPD); FIGs. 9 and 10; [0151]) on the substrate (SUB1 and/or SUB2; FIGs. 9 and 10);
a first line (first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2); FIG. 5; [0072] and [0100])
PNG
media_image4.png
725
603
media_image4.png
Greyscale
on the substrate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2; FIG. 11), the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) including a first metal layer (first metal layer (L11 and/or L21); FIG. 11; [0155]) and a second metal layer (second metal layer (L12 and/or L22); FIG. 11; [0155]);
PNG
media_image5.png
832
876
media_image5.png
Greyscale
an adhesive layer (adhesive layer (600); FIGs. 9 and 10; [0152]) on the pad electrode (DPD); and
a data driving circuit (data driving circuit (200); FIG. 1; [0058]) that is adjacent to the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2; FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 2, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the data driving circuit (200) overlaps a portion of the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2 and FIG. 5 of Eom; [0034] of Applicant’s specification).
Regarding claim 3, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the substrate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2) further comprises:
a pad (pad (MA and SBA); FIG. 3; [0060]) coupled (CPD and CPL; FIG. 3; [0081]) to a printed circuit board (printed circuit board (300); FIG. 1; [0058]), the pad (MA and SBA) including
PNG
media_image6.png
657
750
media_image6.png
Greyscale
a first area (annotated FIG. 3, above) at an outermost portion of the pad (MA and SBA);
a second area (annotated FIG. 3, above) that is adjacent to the first area (annotated FIG. 3, above); and
a third area (annotated FIG. 3, above) electrically connected (FCT1 and/or FCT2; FIG. 5; [0104]) to the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2).
Regarding claim 4, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 3, further comprising:
a second line (second line (DPL—DPL1 and/or DPL2); FIG. 5; [101]-[0102]) electrically connected (FCT1 and/or FCT2; FIG. 5; [0104]) to the pad (MA and SBA) in the first area (annotated FIG. 3, above); and
a gate voltage line (gate voltage line (SL—GWL, GCL and/or GIL; FIG. 3; [0069]) electrically connected (400; FIG. 3; [0072]-[0074]) to the pad (MA and SBA) in the second area (annotated FIG. 3, above).
Regarding claim 5, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 4, wherein the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) is closer (FIG. 3) to the data driving circuit (200) than the gate voltage line (SL—GWL, GCL and/or GIL).
Regarding claim 8, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the first metal layer (L11 and/or L21) is on the substrate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2), and the second metal layer (L12 and/or L22) overlaps ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) a portion of the data driving circuit (200).
Regarding claim 9, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 8, wherein the second metal layer (L12 and/or L22) is on (FIG. 11) the first metal layer (L11 and/or L21).
Regarding claim 10, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the first metal layer (L11 and/or L21) overlaps ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) a portion of the data driving circuit (200), and the second metal layer (L12 and/or L22) is on (FIG. 11) the first metal layer (L11 and/or L21).
Regarding claim 11, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the data driving circuit (200) includes a first bump (first bump (210); FIGs. 9 and 10; [0152]—bumps) overlapping ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2), and a second bump (second bump (210); FIGs. 9 and 10; [0152]—bumps) electrically connected ([0152]—conductive adhesive (600)) to the pad electrode (DPD).
Regarding claim 12, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the second bump (210) is at an outside of the first bump (210) ([0152]).
Regarding claim 13, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 3, wherein the data driving circuit (200) includes:
a first area (annotated FIG. 3, above) adjacent to the pad (MA and SBA);
a second area (annotated FIG. 3, above) facing the first area (annotated FIG. 3, above); and
a third area (annotated FIG. 3, above) between the first area (annotated FIG. 3, above) and the second area (annotated FIG. 3, above).1
Regarding claim 14, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 13, wherein the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) overlaps ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) the data driving circuit (200) in the second area (annotated FIG. 3, above) and the third area (annotated FIG. 3, above).2
Regarding claim 15, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 13, wherein the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) overlaps ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) the data driving circuit (200) in the second area (annotated FIG. 3, above).3
Regarding claim 16, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 13, wherein the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) overlaps ([0034] of Applicant’s specification) the data driving circuit (200) in the third area (annotated FIG. 3, above).4
Regarding claim 17, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 13, wherein the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) is adjacent to the third area (annotated FIG. 3, above) and is parallel to a side of the third area.5
Regarding claim 18, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 13, wherein the substate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2) is bent ([0111]) in the third area (annotated FIG. 3, above).6
Regarding claim 19, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer (600) includes an adhesive ([0152]) and a conductive ball ([0152]—conductive adhesive (600) may be anisotropic conductive film which has conductive particles, one or more of which may be shaped like a ball) in the adhesive (600).
Regarding claim 20, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, further comprising:
a controller ([0063]—The display driving circuit may receive digital video data DATA and timing signals from the circuit board 300) configured to control the data driving circuit (200),
wherein the controller is on the printed circuit board (printed circuit board (300) FIG. 1; [0058] and [0063]—The display driving circuit may receive digital video data DATA and timing signals from the circuit board 300 which indicates that a controller is present to generate such signals), and the data driving circuit (200) is on (e.g., FIGs. 9 and 10) the substrate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of US 2020/0411629 A1 (Kim).
Regarding claim 6, Eom does not appear to explicitly disclose, wherein an area of the first line is larger than an area of the gate voltage line.
However, in analogous art, Kim discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in a display apparatus 1000 the larger the areas of first wiring line 140 and second wiring line 160, the more advantageous for signal transmission ([0123]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having the teachings of Eom and Kim before him/her that an area of the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) of Eom can be predicably fabricated to be larger than an area of the gate voltage line (SL—GWL, GCL and/or GIL) of Eom so that first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) is more advantageous for signal transmission, as taught by Kim.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of US 2013/0127736 A1 (Judson).
Regarding claim 7, Eom does not appear to explicitly disclose, wherein a density of the first line is greater than a density of the gate voltage line.
However, in analogous art, Judson discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in a touchscreen display apparatus the more closely transmission lines are spaced (i.e., the density of the transmission lines) the greater the precision of position determination ([0066]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having the teachings of Eom and Judson before him/her that a density of the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) of Eom can be predicably fabricated to be greater than a density of the gate voltage line (SL—GWL, GCL and/or GIL) of Eom to enhance the precision of position determination of first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2), as taught by Judson.
Claim 19 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of US 2020/0144214 A1 (Akutsu).
Regarding claim 19, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, wherein the adhesive layer (600) includes an adhesive ([0152]) and a conductive ball ([0152]—conductive adhesive (600) may be anisotropic conductive film which has conductive particles, one or more of which may be shaped like a ball) in the adhesive (600).
But, Applicant may argue the Eom does not explicitly disclose, adhesive layer (600) includes a conductive ball.
However, in analogous art, Akutsu discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that anisotropic conductive films include conductive particles (conductive particles (2); FIG. 5; [0044]) dispersed in an insulating resin binder ([0003]). Akutsu also discloses that it was well-known that the conductive particles (2) are conductive balls (e.g., FIG. 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having the teachings of Eom and Akutsu before him/her that the anisotropic conductive film (600) of Eom includes a conductive ball because it was well-known that anisotropic conductive films include particles that can have the shape of a ball, as evidenced by Akutsu.
Claim 20 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of US 2010/0238157 A1 (Choe).
Regarding claim 20, Eom discloses, The display apparatus (10) of claim 1, further comprising:
a controller ([0063]—The display driving circuit may receive digital video data DATA and timing signals from the circuit board 300 which indicates that a controller is present to generate such signals) configured to control the data driving circuit (200),
wherein the controller is on the printed circuit board (printed circuit board (300) FIG. 1; [0058] and [0063]—The display driving circuit may receive digital video data DATA and timing signals from the circuit board 300), and the data driving circuit (200) is on (e.g., FIGs. 9 and 10) the substrate (SUB 1 and/or SUB2).
But, Applicant may argue the Eom does not explicitly disclose, a controller configured to control the data driving circuit,
wherein the controller is on the printed circuit board.
However, in analogous art, Choe discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a data driving circuit can receive control signals from a timing controller disposed on a printed circuit board to drive a display panel ([0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having the teachings of Eom and Choe before him/her that the display apparatus (10) of Eom further comprise a controller configured to control the data driving circuit (200) of Eom, wherein the controller is on the printed circuit board (300) of Eom to drive the display panel (display panel (100); FIG. 1; [0058]) of Eom, as taught by Choe.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom in view of US 2022/0269139 A1 (Chen).
Regarding claim 21, Eom does not appear to explicitly disclose, further comprising: an electrostatic discharge circuit connecting between first lines including the first line.
However, in analogous art, Chen discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a display apparatus may include an electrostatic discharge circuit to discharge static electricity generated on a data line, thereby improving operation stability of the display apparatus ([0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention having the teachings of Eom and Chen before him/her that the display apparatus (10) of Eom further comprise an electrostatic discharge circuit connecting between first lines including the first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) of Eom, as taught by Chen, to discharge static electricity generated in first lines including first line (FL—FL1 and/or FL2) of Eom, as also taught by Chen, thereby improving operation stability of display apparatus (10) of Eom, as additionally taught by Chen.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
US 2022/0180814 A1 (Jung I)—Discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a controller (140) configured to control a data driving circuit (130) can be mounted on a printed circuit board ([0077]).
US 2014/0185169 A1 (Jung II)—Discloses that it was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that a display device may include an electrostatic discharge circuit to prevent static electricity from flowing into a plurality of data lines ([0028]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Erik A. Anderson whose telephone number is (703) 756-1217. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. (Pacific Time Zone).
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, William B. Partridge, can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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.
/ERIK A. ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
1 Please see the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 13 is being interpreted for purpose of examination.
2 Please see the rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 14 is being interpreted for purpose of examination.
3 Please see the rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 15 is being interpreted for purpose of examination.
4 Please see the rejection of claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 16 is being interpreted for purpose of examination.
5 Please see the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 17 is being interpreted for purpose of examination.
6 Please see the rejection of claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), above, for how this recited language of claim 18 is being interpreted for purpose of examination. The Examiner respectfully submits that the recited limitation of “wherein the substate is bent in the third area” is a manner of operating the display apparatus that does not differentiate it from the prior art. Please see, MPEP 2114(II).
Prosecution Insights