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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-6 are currently pending in the present application. Claim 1 is currently amended; claims 2-6 are original; and claims 7-8 are canceled. The amendment dated September 10, 2026 has been entered into the record.
Claims 1-8 were previously rejected for nonstatutory double patenting over U.S. Patent No. 11156878 B2. The rejection is now withdrawn as the applicant has filed a terminal disclaimer with respect to the U.S. Patent.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the feature of “in plan view, the first conductive layer overlaps the second conductive layer in the seal region, and the second conductive layer is larger in an outer shape than the fourth layer in plan view, and in a cross-sectional view taken along the first direction, the second conductive layer is larger in an outer shape than the first conductive layer” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) (see Figure 4 of the applicant, annotated by the examiner below). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
<Figure 4 in the present specification>
PNG
media_image1.png
412
566
media_image1.png
Greyscale
20: a second substrate
52: a seal member
71`: a first conductive layer
11`: a second conductive layer
71: a third layer or a fourth layer
11: a fourth layer or a third layer
Note that Figure 4 does not illustrate 11 is larger in an outer shape than 71` or 11`.
Response to Arguments
(1) The applicant argues that “In Aoki (e.g., Fig. 11 and par. [0049]), the "scanning signal lead-out line 4" is located outside the "display area 2" (which corresponds to the claimed pixel area). In contrast, the claimed fourth layer (as compared to the "scanning signal line 3" of Aoki) is explicitly required to be "disposed in the pixel area" (Remarks, Pages 7-8).
Regarding the arguments, “"scanning signal lead-out line 4" is located outside the "display area 2", not in the pixel area”, the examiner respectively disagrees because 4 further extends and is disposed in the display area 2. See Fig. 11 below, annotated by the examiner.
<Figure 11 of Aoki annotated by the examiner>
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox ((1) Line 4 of Aoki further extends and is disposed in the display area 2.)]
PNG
media_image2.png
430
450
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(2) The applicant further argues that “Even if the "scanning signal lead-out line 4" and the "scanning signal line 3" of Aoki are formed from the same layer of material, their pattern widths (i.e., their outer shapes) are not necessarily the same” (Remarks, Page 8).
The examiner respectively disagrees, because Figs. 11 and 12 of Aoki illustrate a plan view and a cross-sectional view thereof, respectively, and teach widths of layers. Regarding the widths of 3, 4, 7a and/or 7b, see Figs. 11-12 below, annotated by the examiner.
<Figures 11-12 of Aoki, annotated by the examiner>
[AltContent: textbox ((2) Paras. [0038]-[0039] teach that Fig. 11 is a plan view and Fig. 12 is a side view taken along the line G-G′ of FIG. 11.
The widths of layers shown in Figs. 11-12 (i.e., a plan view and a side view thereof) teach the width of 7a is larger than that of 4 or 3, where Para. [0049] further teaches 3 are 4 are formed using the same conductive layer.)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (widths of lines 3 and 4 of Aoki in the display area 2 in a plan view.)]
PNG
media_image3.png
774
416
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aoki (US 2007/0030409), of record.
Regarding claim 1, Aoki discloses an electro-optical device (Figs. 1-3 and 11-12; see Paras. [0038]-[0039] and [0064] identifying the embodiment shown in Figs. 1-3 and 11-12) comprising:
a first substrate (1) having transmissivity (Para. [0045]);
a second substrate (20);
a seal member (8) disposed between the first substrate and the second substrate so as to bond the first substrate and the second substrate together (Para. [0054]), the seal member being disposed in a seal region (22) defined around a pixel area (2) in which pixels included in a plurality of pixels are aligned (Para. [0046]), the seal member extending in a first direction (see “ x-direction” denoted by the examiner in Fig. 11 above; Paras. [0038], [0054]);
a first conductive layer (7b) disposed between the first substrate and the seal member, the first conductive layer extending in a second direction (“y-direction”; Para. [0085]) which intersects with the first direction;
a second conductive layer (7a) disposed between the first substrate and the first conductive layer (Fig. 12), the second conductive layer extending in the second direction (Fig. 11);
a third layer (5) disposed in the pixel area, the third layer formed of the first conductive layer (Para. [0050] “the common signal line 7 b is formed using a material for the display signal line 5”); and
a fourth layer (3) disposed in the pixel area, the fourth layer formed of the second conductive layer (Para. [0050] “the common signal line 7 a is formed using a material for the scanning signal line 3”),
wherein:
in plan view, the first conductive layer overlaps the second conductive layer in the seal region (Fig. 12), and the second conductive layer is larger in an outer shape than the fourth layer in plan view (see Figs. 11-12; the examiner considers Fig. 11 is a plan view and Fig. 12 is a side view taken along the line G-G′ of FIG. 11), and
in a cross-sectional view taken along the first direction, the second conductive layer is larger in an outer shape than the first conductive layer (Fig. 12; Para. [0085]).
Regarding claim 4, Aoki discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer are metal layers (Para. [0086]).
Regarding claim 5, Aoki discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the first conductive layer provides a corresponding pattern with the second conductive layer pattern (see the pattern created by 7, comprising 7a and 7b).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aoki as evidenced by Toda (US 6654083), of record..
Regarding claim 3, Aoki discloses the limitations of claim 1 above, and further discloses wherein the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer are light-shielding layers (Para. [0086] “The lines of the first to fifth embodiments are formed using metal thin films such as Al”), where a metal film such as Al is a light-shielding layer as evidenced by Toda (column 6 line 67 - column 7 line 2, "light-shielding film ... such as Al").
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki in view of Jeong (US 20080143945), of record.
Regarding claim 6, Aoki discloses the limitations of claim 1 above.
However, Aoki does not disclose the seal member includes a photo curable material.
Jeong discloses a seal member includes a photo curable material (Para. [0049] “the seal line 400 includes photo-curable resin”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the Aoki seal member with the teachings of Jeong, wherein the seal member includes a photo curable material as disclosed by Jeong. One would have been motivated to use photo-curable resin for a seal member so that the photo-curable resin can be cured by an external light such as UV light (Para. Jeong: [0049]).
Regarding the finality of the rejection, the examiner considers the rejection set forth in the Office action is an existing ground of rejection of record, rather than a new ground, wherein the substance of the rejection was already of record.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 JONATHAN Y JUNG whose telephone number is (469)295-9076. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached on (571)272-2286. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN Y JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights