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 .
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.
(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.
Claims 1-4, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bae et al. (KR 20110026901 A, citations made hereinafter to the English machine translation filed by Applicant on 8/17/2026), cited by Applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 8/17/2026.
Regarding claim 1, Bae teaches, in Fig. 8, a light-emitting display device (200; pg. 5, last 10 lines) comprising:
a base material (211) having a light source (212) mounted thereon (pg. 7, lines 1-5 of para. 2); and
a foam layer (230) that transmits and diffuses light from the light source (212) (pg. 10, last 3 lines) and has at least a portion of the light source (212) embedded therein (see Fig. 9; wherein the Instant Application defines the foam layer as a resin layer (para. 0041)).
Regarding claim 2, Bae further teaches, in Fig. 8, a skin layer (250; pg. 13, last 5 lines of para. 1) that transmits light from the light source (212), wherein the foam layer (230) is provided between the skin layer (250) and the base material (211) (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Bae further teaches, in Fig. 8, at least one layer of a printed layer (layer of 231; pg. 12, first 5 lines of para. 2) and a printed film layer (light blocking sheet 271 with printed light shielding pattern 271a; pg. 20, lines 5-15), provided between the skin layer (250) and the foam layer (230) (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 4, Bae further teaches, in Fig. 8, that the printed layer (231) is formed by printing the surface of at least one layer of the foam layer and the skin layer (pg. 12, first 5 lines of para. 2; 231 is formed by printing the foam layer 230).
Regarding claim 6, Bae further teaches, in Fig. 8, a light control layer (271/271a; pg. 10 and first two lines of pg. 11; under broadest reasonable interpretation, 271/271a is a light control layer because it controls which part of the light incident from light source 212 is transmitted or reflected downwards, and thus controls the brightness of the display device) provided between the skin layer (250) and the base material (211) (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Bae further teaches the base material (211) and the foam layer (230) are formed into a three-dimensional shape (see Figs. 1 and 4).
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 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (KR 20110026901 A, citations made hereinafter to the English machine translation filed by Applicant on 8/17/2026), cited by Applicant in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 8/17/2026, in view of Yueh et al. (US 20220186912).
Regarding claim 5, Bae teaches the limitations of claim 2. Bae does not teach a transparent conductive layer provided between the skin layer and the base material.
In a similar field of endeavor, Yueh teaches, in Fig. 2, a transparent conductive layer (E2, provided between the skin layer (140, [0037]) and the base material (110, [0028]), in order to control the state of light control layer 130 while allowing light to transmit through ([0037]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the light-emitting display device of Bae with the transparent conductive layer of Yueh, in order to control the state of a light control layer while allowing light to transmit through ([0037]).
Regarding claim 7, Bae teaches the limitations of claim 1. Bae does not explicitly teach that the base material is a flexible substrate.
In a similar field of endeavor, Yueh teaches that the base material (110, [0028]) is a flexible substrate ([0028]), in order to provide a display device that “can provide more convenient information transmission or image display” ([0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the light-emitting display device of Bae with the flexible substrate of Yueh, in order to provide a display device that “can provide more convenient information transmission or image display” ([0003]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIKA HEERA SON whose telephone number is 703-756-4644. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12:30-9:30 PM ET.
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, Yara Green can be reached on 571-270-3035. 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.
/ERIKA H SON/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights