DETAILED ACTION
Applicant's Submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of a response on 8/6/2026 has been received and fully considered. In the response, claims 1, 5, 6, 13, 17, and 18 have been amended; claim 12 has been canceled; and new claim 21 has been added. Therefore, claims 1-11 and 13-21 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-4 10, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0311570 to Lamb (Fig. 1, annotated to highlight features is shown below for convenience) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0025660 to Shimoshikiryoh and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0033638 to Nakaishi.
PNG
media_image1.png
1187
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 1, Lamb discloses gaming device (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows gaming machine 100; see also paragraph 36 that discusses the gaming machine and major components) comprising:
a cabinet (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a cabinet 102; see also paragraph 36 that discusses that “gaming machine 100 includes a cabinet 102’); and
a display assembly coupled to the cabinet and configured to display a game thereon (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows display devices 118; see also paragraph 38 that discusses that “Gaming machine 100 further a top box that may include one or more display devices 118), wherein the display assembly comprises a display frame (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a display frame, not labeled, surrounding a periphery of the each display panel), and a display panel thereon (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows display devices 118) positioned within the display frame, the display panel comprising:
an outer display surface (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows an outer display surface at the location indicated by element number 118);
a rear panel layer including a plurality of transistors coupled to a substrate and a plurality of pixel electrodes to the substrate (e.g., see at least paragraph that discusses the use of a liquid crystal display, LCD, which inherently includes a substrate with a plurality of transistors); and
a liquid crystal layer positioned between the rear panel layer and the outer display surface (e.g., see at least paragraph 38 that discusses the use of a liquid crystal display that will inherently include a liquid crystal layer positioned between the transistors and the display surface), wherein the outer display surface includes a pair of opposed elongated edges (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a rectangular display, middle location of element 118, that have opposed elongated edges; the opposed elongated edges are highlighted in the annotated image of Fig. 1 shown above) and a first curved edge extending between the elongated edges (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a circular display 118 that is located between the opposed elongated edges, but the curved edge does not appear to be part of the same display panel; the curved edge is highlighted in the annotated image of Fig. 1 shown above); and
wherein the plurality of transistors and the plurality of pixel electrodes are arranged on the substrate to enable cutting the display along a midline to form two operable subassembly display panels from the display panel, the midline extending to each of the elongated edges (e.g., see
[claim 2] wherein the first curved edge is coplanar with the elongated edges (e.g., see Fig. 1 that appears to show the curved edge of circular display 118 coplanar with the opposed elongated edges of the upper rectangular display 118);
[claim 3] wherein the display panel includes a rectangular section at least partially defined by the pair of opposed elongated edges (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a rectangular display, middle location of element 118, that have opposed elongated edges) and a semicircular section at least partially defined by the first curved edge (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a circular display area that includes two semicircular sections, but the circular section and the rectangular section do not appear to be integrated in a single display panel);
[claim 4] wherein the display panel includes a rectangular section at least partially defined by the pair of opposed elongated edges (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a rectangular display, middle location of element 118, that have opposed elongated edges), a first semicircular section at least partially defined by the first curved edge, and a second semicircular section at least partially defined by a second curved edge of the outer display surface (e.g., see Fig. 1 that shows a circular display area that includes two semicircular sections, but the circular section and the rectangular section do not appear to be integrated in a single display panel, and not a stadium shaped profile).
With regard to claims 1-4, Lamb fails to disclose a display panel including a curved edge section with a rectangular section including opposed elongated edges to create a stadium shaped profile with semicircular sections having a diameter the equal to the width between the opposed elongated sides. That is, Lamb fails to disclose a single display panel that includes both a curved edge and opposed elongated edges.
Reasonably pertinent to the problem face, Shimoshikiryoh teaches an LCD display panel that has a stadium shaped profile with a semicircular section at each end of a rectangular section (e.g., see at least Fig. 8B, shown below; see also paragraph 104 that states, “a display apparatus having a displaying region RD of a track-and-field track shape…a shape combining a rectangle with semicircles projecting from both its sides”).
PNG
media_image2.png
408
639
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Lamb with a display panel having a stadium profile shape as taught by Shimoshikiryoh in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, it is widely known to create LCD panels in non-rectangular shapes to achieve various design purposes, including a stadium shaped profile.
With regard to claim 13, Lamb in combination with make Shimoshikiryoh obvious a display panel for use with an electronic gaming machine as discussed above for claim 1, which includes similar in claimed features. Likewise, claims 14-16 are made obvious by Lamb in combination with make Shimoshikiryoh based on the same analysis set forth above for claims 2-5, which are similar in claim scope.
With regard to claim 18, Lamb in combination with make Shimoshikiryoh obvious a method of forming a display panel for use with an electronic gaming machine as discussed above for claim 1, which includes similar in claimed features. Likewise, claims 19 and 20 are made obvious by Lamb in combination with Shimoshikiryoh based on the same analysis set forth above for claims 2 and 3, which are similar in claim scope.
With regard to claims 1 and 10, Lamb fails to expressly disclose/teach a display panel that is modifiable or enables cutting along a midline between transistor and pixel electrodes that are arranged for to enable the cutting.
In the same field of endeavor, Nakaishi shows that LCD panels that are is modifiable or enables cutting (e.g., see at least Fig. 11 that shows a display panel including a cutting line L10; see also paragraphs 70-74 for discussion of modifying/cutting panels to different shapes) along a midline between transistor and pixel electrodes that are arranged for to enable the cutting (e.g., see at least paragraph 49-72 for spacing transistors/electrodes such that a panel may be cut to form two operable panels).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Lamb with display modification/cutting as taught by Nakaishi in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, cutting LCD panels in non-rectangular shapes helps to achieve various design purposes, including curved edges, and from a common mother panel for efficiency.
Absent an explanation of the importance of a specific shape of a display panel, the Examiner notes that Shimoshikiryoh, Xu, Nakaishi and others teach creating various shapes from LCD panels, wherein different shapes would merely be a design choice.
Claims 7-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamb in combination with Shimoshikiryoh in view of Nakaishi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0009464 to Xu.
With regard to claims 7-9, Lamb in combination with Shimoshikiryoh and Nakaishi fail to expressly disclose/teach a display panel with a complex geometry including additional first and second side edges, including first and second offset edges. With regard to claim 11, Lamb in combination with Shimoshikiryoh and Nakaishi fail to expressly disclose/teach a display panel with a rounded corner parallelogram shape.
A general discussion of Xu shows that LCD panels may be designed in nearly any shape by using different shape/size of pixels (e.g., see at least paragraph 67) and include additional side edges (e.g., see Fig. 2 that shows stacked triangles that form additional side edges). With regard to claim 11, it is also noted that Fig. 20 of Xu appears to teach a rounded corner parallelogram shape.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Lamb with additional side edges or a rounded corner parallelogram shape as taught by Xu in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, it is widely known to create LCD panels in non-rectangular shapes to achieve various design purposes, including additional side edges or a rounded corner parallelogram shape.
Absent an explanation of the importance of a specific shape of a display panel, the Examiner notes that Shimoshikiryoh, Xu, Nakaishi and others teach creating various shapes from LCD panels, wherein different shapes would merely be a design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 17, and 21 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive.
On page 8 of the Remarks, Applicant’s amendment to the drawings and claims have overcome the drawing objections and claim objections.
On page 10-13, Applicant argues the Nakaishi’s mother board panel 60 “is not single display panel but is instead a matrix of individualized discrete and common panels.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the claims do no recited that a “single display panel” as argued. Second, to the extend that the current disclosure is directed to a single panel, then Nakaishi is similarly directed to a single panel (e.g., see Nakaishi at paragraphs 49-72 that discuss the assembly and cutting of mother board panel). The Examiner has identified the features of claims 5, 6, 17, and 21 as potential allowable subject matter.
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 JAMES S MCCLELLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM).
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/James S. McClellan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights