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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3 and 5-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Shin et al. (US Patent No. 11245089 B2 and Shin hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 1, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) a display device, comprising: a display panel (100); a window member (including 200 and 110) overlapping an upper portion of the display panel and including a main window (110), a weak adhesive layer (210), and a protective window (220) in sequence; and a bottom case (300) having a space that houses the display panel and the window member, wherein the weak adhesive layer is a removable adhesive member (detachably attached), the main window is a display device disposed in the space.
PNG
media_image1.png
412
900
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein a bottom surface of the protective window is disposed in the space, and a top surface of the protective window protrudes from a top of the space (see annotated fig above).
Regarding Claim 3, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the protective window has a thickness equal to or thinner than a thickness of the main window (see annotated fig above).
Regarding Claim 5, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the window member further comprises a light blocking portion (BM) on a bottom surface of the main window including a material that blocks light.
Regarding Claim 6, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 5, wherein the display panel includes a display area and a non-display area, and the light blocking portion overlaps the non-display area and does not overlap the display area (fig.3).
Regarding Claim 7, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the main window and the protective window are formed of a transparent material, and the main window and the protective window are made of at least one of glass, tempered glass, and plastic (col 6, lines 30-35).
Regarding Claim 8, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the main window is made of resin (col 7, lines 20-22).
Regarding Claim 9, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the weak adhesive layer is made of a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA), and the protective window is removable by hand (col 6, lines 55-60).
Regarding Claim 10, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, further comprising: an adhesive layer (not labeled) between the display panel and the main window, wherein the adhesive layer has an adhesion that is stronger (attached) than an adhesion of the weak adhesive layer (col 6 lines 10-15).
Regarding Claim 11, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the window member has a width wider than a width of the display panel (fig.5).
Regarding Claim 12, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the window member further comprises a removable auxiliary layer (140 and 112) between the weak adhesive layer and the main window, and which increases slipability by reducing friction.
Regarding Claim 13, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 12, wherein the removable auxiliary layer is coated with at least one of a fluorine-based resin and a silicon-based resin (col 7, lines 20-22).
Regarding Claim 14, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 1, wherein the display panel sequentially includes a substrate, a circuit driving layer, a light emitting layer, and an encapsulation layer (col 5, lines 60-65)
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al in view of Ahn et al (US Pub No. 2021/0360809 A1 and Ahn hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 4, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 3, wherein the thickness of the main window is in a range of about 0.2 mm to about 0.4 mm, and the thickness of the protective window is in a range of about 0.1 mm to about 0.4 mm. Shin further teaches the thickness of the main window is in a range of about 300 μm (micrometer) or less, which is range within the claimed limitation the range between about 0.2 mm to about 0.4 mm. Shin does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the protective window is in a range of about 0.1 mm to about 0.4 mm. However, Ahn teaches (figs. 1-4) the thickness (T3) of the protective window (PF) is in a range of about equal to or greater than about 10 micrometers and equal to or smaller than about 80 micrometers [0076], which is range within the claimed limitation 0.1 mm to about 0.4 mm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching the thickness of Ahn with Shin to achieve the claimed range of main/protective window in order to prevent the glass substrate from being damaged due to the external impacts. (Ahn, [0086])
MPEP §2144.05-I states a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%).
Referring to MPEP § 2144.05, “…the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results over the prior art range.” (See also MPEP § 716.02 for a discussion of criticality and unexpected results.)
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al in view of Jeong et al (US Patent No. 9661114 B2 and Jeong hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 15, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) the display device of claim 14, but fails to disclose wherein the display panel further comprises a touch layer and an optical layer on the encapsulation layer. However, Jeong teaches wherein the display panel further comprises a touch layer (200) and an optical layer (300) on the encapsulation layer (100b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a touch layer and an optical layer of Kim to device of Shin in order to encapsulate the organic light-emitting diode (Jeong, col 2 and lines 15-20)
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al in view of Kim et al (US Patent No. 10470319 B2 and Kim hereinafter)
Regarding Claim 16, Shin discloses (figs. 1-6) a display device, comprising: a display panel (100); a window member (including 200 and 110) overlapping an upper portion of the display panel and including a main window (110), a weak adhesive layer (210), and a protective window (220) in sequence; and a bottom case (300) having a space that houses the display panel and the window member, the weak adhesive layer is a removable adhesive member (detachably attached). Shin does not explicitly disclose wherein the bottom case includes: a middle frame coupled to the window member; a bottom frame facing a rear side of the middle frame and including a compartment; and a bonding layer between the middle frame and the bottom frame; and the bonding layer has an adhesion stronger than an adhesion of the weak adhesive layer. However, Kim teaches (figs. 1-7) wherein the bottom case includes: a middle frame (305) coupled to the window member (100-1); a bottom frame (301) facing a rear side of the middle frame and including a compartment ; and a bonding layer (AM) between the middle frame and the bottom frame; and the bonding layer (AM is fixedly attached adhesive) has an adhesion stronger than an adhesion of the weak adhesive layer (130 is detachable adhesive tape, fig.4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a bonding layer that has an adhesion stronger than an adhesion of the weak adhesive layer of Kim to device of Shin in order to fixedly couple the protective member to the bottom frame member to absorb an external impact (Kim, col 7 and lines 1-5)
Regarding Claim 17, Shin/Kim discloses the display device of claim 16. Shin further teaches (see annotated fig above) wherein the main window is disposed in the space, a bottom surface of the protective window is disposed in the space, and a top surface of the protective window protrudes from a top of the space.
Regarding Claim 18, Shin/Kim discloses the display device of claim 16. Kim further teaches an adhesive layer (AM) between the main window and the middle frame, wherein the adhesive layer has an adhesion stronger than an adhesion of the weak adhesive layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adhesive layer between the main window and the middle frame of Kim to device of Shin in order to couple the protective member to the middle frame member to absorb an external impact (Kim, col 7 and lines 1-5)
Regarding Claim 19, Shin/Kim discloses the display device of claim 16. Shin teaches (figs. 1-6) wherein the window member further comprises a light blocking portion (BM) on a bottom surface of the main window including a material that blocks light.
Regarding Claim 20, Shin/Kim discloses the display device of claim 16. Shin teaches (figs. 1-6) wherein the weak adhesive layer is made of a pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA), and the protective window is removable by hand.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 AM - 4:30 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ROCKSHANA D CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841