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 .
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 Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The Examiner suggests the following amendments to improve the clarity of claims 1 and 12:
“… wherein the stopper includes a material configured to cure the epoxy resin in response to contact between the epoxy resin and the stopper.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2021/0126224 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Lee teaches a teaches a display device (¶ 0042, fig. 5), comprising:
a substrate (¶ 0080: 100) having a display area and a non-display area (¶ 0072: DA, PA);
a plurality of pixels in the display area (¶ 0067 & fig. 2: plurality of pixels P in DA);
a bank layer on the substrate (¶ 0106 & fig. 5: 209 arranged on 100);
a stopper in the non-display area (¶ 0092: fig. 5: partition 215P and/or 217P disposed in PA); and
an encapsulation layer (¶ 0076: 300) on the plurality of pixels (¶ 0076: 300 disposed on DA, including pixels P),
wherein the stopper is a ridge surrounding the encapsulation layer (¶ 0092 & fig. 5: 215P/217P has a ridge shaped structure surrounding DA, which is covered by 300) to prevent overflow of the encapsulation layer (¶ 0092) during curing (intended use limitations not given patentable weight in a claim drawn to structure; 215P/217P meets the structural requirements as claimed).
Regarding claim 18, Lee teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein the encapsulation layer is a first encapsulation layer, the display device further comprising:
a second encapsulation layer (¶ 0108: 211) disposed on the bank (fig. 5: 211 disposed on 209), wherein the stopper is disposed on the second encapsulation layer (fig. 5: 215P/217P disposed on 211) to prevent overflow of the first encapsulation layer (¶ 0092: 215P/217P prevents overflow of 300).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Yamagata et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2018/0047933 A1).
Regarding claims 19-20, Lee teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein the stopper includes an organic material (¶ 0111: at least 215 includes organic insulating material).
Lee does not teach the organic material includes a curing agent, wherein the curing agent includes a compound including an active hydrogen.
Yamagata teaches a display device (¶ 0001, figs. 9A-9B) including cured organic material which includes a hydrogen compound (¶ 0140).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the organic material of Lee with the curing agent of Yamagata, as a means to provide a level surface and/or reduced parasitic capacitance (¶ 0088).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations stating:
“a stopper in the non-display area…wherein the stopper includes a material configured to cure the epoxy resin in response to contact of the epoxy resin and the stopper” as recited in claims 1 and 12.
Claims 2-11 and 13-14 are allowed for depend on claims 1 and 12.
Claims 16-17 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.
Claims 2-11 and 13-14 are allowed for depend on claims 1 and 12.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations stating:
“the ridge of the stopper is a material configured to cure an epoxy resin of the encapsulation layer” as recited in claim 16.
Claim 17 depends on claim 16 and is allowable for including the subject matter above.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/BRIAN TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
