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.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sakamoto et al. (US 2005/0162079 A1).
Re claim 1, Sakamoto et al. discloses a device comprising a substrate (paragraph 0007); a first signal line (31) disposed on the substrate, wherein the first signal line has two portions disposed in the third region and the two portions of the first signal line extends along two regions respectively (Fig. 3); and a second signal line (32) disposed on the substrate, wherein the second signal line has two portions disposed in the third region, the two portions of the second signal line extends along two direction respectively (Fig. 3), and at least one of the first signal line and the second signal line (32) is configured to transmit a gate signal. The claim language does not define the specific area of the third region.
Re claim 6, Sakamoto et al. discloses the deice wherein a first sub-pixel (11R) is arranged in the first region, a second sub-pixel (11B) is arranged in the second region and a first area of the first sub-pixel is larger than a second area of the second sub-pixel (Fig. 3).. The claim language does not define the specific locations of the first and second region. Furthermore, an area of the first sub-pixel may be larger than a second area of the second sub-pixel since the claimed areas are not defined within the sub-pixels.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 2-3 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al. in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0173195 A1).
Re claims 2 and 3, Sakamoto et al. does not disclose the device comprising a sensing module disposed in the first region, wherein the sensing module is a camera module.
Liu et al. discloses a device comprising a sensing module, disposed in a first region, wherein the sensing module is a camera module (paragraph 0037).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device comprising a sensing module disposed in a first region, wherein the sensing module is a camera module since one would be motivated to implement a photographic function to the device within the display area.
Re claim 7, Sakamoto et al. does not disclose the device comprising a sensing module, disposed in the first region, wherein the sensing module is at least partially overlapped with the first sub-pixel.
Liu et al. discloses a device comprising a sensing module (paragraph 0031), disposed in a first region, wherein the sensing module is at least partially overlapped with a first sub-pixel (paragraph 0029).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the rat before the effective filing ate of the invention to employ the device comprising a sensing module, disposed in the first region, wherein the sensing module is at least partially overlapped with the first sub-pixel since one would be motivated to implement a photographic function to the device within the display area.
Re claim 8, Sakamoto et al. discloses the device wherein the first sub-pixel (11R) and the second sub-pixel (11B) are arranged in a direction, and a part of the first signal line (31) is located between the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al. in view of Xu et al. US 2022/0254857 A1).
Sakamoto et al. discloses the device wherein another first signal line (31) has two portions disposed in the third region and the two portions of the another first signal line extends along two directions respectively (Fig. 3), but does not disclose the device comprising another first signal line disposed on the substrate, wherein in the third region, a first length of the first signal line is different from a second length of the another signal line.
Xu et al. discloses a device comprising another first signal line (Data) disposed on the substrate, wherein in a third region, a first length of the first signal line is different from a second length of the another signal line (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device comprising another first signal line disposed on the substrate, wherein in the third region, a first length of the first signal line is different from a second length of the another signal line since one would be motivated to obtain a special-shaped display (paragraph 0003).
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al.
Sakamoto et al. does not disclose the device further comprising a shielding component, wherein the shielding component is at least partially overlapped with the third region, wherein the light shielding component comprises a black matrix or other light-shielding or light-absorbing materials.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ the device further comprising a shielding component, wherein the shielding component is at least partially overlapped with the third region, wherein the light shielding component comprises a black matrix or other light-shielding or light-absorbing materials since employing a black matrix between sub-pixels is well known in the art to prevent light leakage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2294. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10 am-6:30 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 Caley can be reached at 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 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.
/RICHARD H KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights