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 .
This office action is in response to the application filed on 10/15/2024. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 10-12 and 15-16 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,258,040 B2 in view of Yin et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0117034 A1, herein Yin).
Regarding claims 1, 13-14 and 16, claim 1 of US 11,258,040 B2 says “the display device comprising: a display panel including thin-film transistors for driving light emitting elements; and a polarizing member which is disposed on a first surface of the display panel, wherein a first through hole which penetrates the display panel and the polarizing member in a thickness direction is defined in the display panel and the polarizing member, a hole coating layer is disposed directly on a polarizing member's inner wall that defines the first through hole, the hole coating layer is disposed in a same layer as the thin-film transistors in a cross-sectional view, and the display panel is disposed in a different layer from the polarizing member in the cross-sectional view”.
Claim 1 of US 11,258,040 B2 does not specifically state “wherein an inner wall of the first through hole and an inner wall of the second through hole are aligned to each other in a first direction in which the first through hole and the second through hole extend.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, Yin discloses a display device comprising: a display panel ([0063], Ref. No. 141) including thin-film transistors ([0008], [0078], Ref. No. 406) for driving light emitting elements and a first through hole ([0063], Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 403a forms); a polarizing member ([0078], Ref. No. 402a) disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole (Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 402a forms); a resin layer ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611) on an inner wall of the second through hole; wherein the resin layer is disposed in a same layer as the thin-film transistors in a cross-sectional view, and the display panel is disposed in a different layer from the polarizing member in the cross-sectional view (Figs. 4, 16).
Therefore, given the teachings of Yin, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying US 11,258,040 B2 in view of Yin by having the inner wall of the first through hole and an inner wall of the second through hole aligned to each other in a first direction.
Regarding claims 2 and 18, claim 2 of US 11,258,040 B2 in view of Yin teaches this limitation.
Regarding claims 3, 15 and 17, claim 3 of US 11,258,040 B2 discloses this limitation.
Regarding claim 4, Yin teaches this limitation ([0078], [0063], Figs. 4, 16, The first through hole is the opening or through hole that layer 403a forms, and the second through hole is the opening or through hole that layer 402a forms.).
Regarding claims 5-6 and 19-20, claims 4-5 of US 11,258,040 B2 disclose these limitations respectively.
Regarding claims 7-8, claim 10 of US 11,258,040 B2 discloses this limitation.
Regarding claim 9, claims 11-12 of US 11,258,040 B2 disclose these limitations respectively.
Regarding claim 10, claim 15 of US 11,258,040 B2 discloses this limitation.
Regarding claim 11, claim 16 of US 11,258,040 B2 discloses this limitation.
Regarding claim 12, claim 17 of US 11,258,040 B2 discloses this limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "wherein the transparent bonding layer comprises a second through hole overlapping the first through hole". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 states “polarizing member disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole overlapping the first through hole”. It is not clear if the second through hole of claim 11 is the same or different from the second through hole of claim 1. Claim 12 is included likewise as it depends from claim 11.
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 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)(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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0186688 A1), herein Chen.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a display device comprising: a display panel ([0025], Fig. 5, Ref. No. 10) including a first through hole ([0030], [0047], Fig. 5, Ref. No. 172); a polarizing member (Fig. 5 and [0030]-[0031], Ref. No. 17) disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole ([0027], Ref. No. 212) overlapping the first through hole, wherein an inner wall of the first through hole and an inner wall of the second through hole are aligned to each other in a first direction (See Fig. 5, the first direction is considered to be the vertical direction that extends from the backlight module 20 to the display panel 10) in which the first through hole and the second through hole extend, and a cover layer ([0025], [0037] and Fig. 5, Ref. Nos. 41, 51) covering the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole (See. Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the cover layer is in direct contact with the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole ([0025], [0037] and Fig. 5, Ref. Nos. 41, 51).
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the cover layer has a uniform thickness on the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole ([0025], [0037] and Fig. 5, Ref. No. 41).
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein each of the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole is flat in the first direction ([0025], [0037] and Fig. 5, Ref. No. 41).
Regarding claim 5, Chen discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the cover layer comprises black resin ([0033] and Fig. 5, Ref. No. 41; It is very common to use a black resin composition as a black ink, particularly for forming a light-shielding or black matrix layer in a display device, because the resin provides both the desired black appearance and the film forming properties needed for reliable deposition and pattern formation.).
Regarding claim 6, Chen discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the cover layer comprises clear resin ([0033] and Fig. 5, Ref. No. 41; It is common in the display art to use a resin-based adhesive or glue as a transparent/clear resin layer for covering components of a display panel, while maintaining optical transparency and providing reliable adhesion.).
(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 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0117034 A1, herein Yin).
Regarding claim 1, Yin discloses a display device comprising: a display panel ([0063], Ref. No. 141) including a first through hole ([0063], Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 403a forms); a polarizing member ([0078], Ref. No. 402a) disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole (Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 402a forms) overlapping the first through hole, wherein an inner wall of the first through hole and an inner wall of the second through hole are aligned to each other in a first direction (Figs. 4, 16, the first direction is considered to be the vertical direction that extends from the layer 404 to layer 401) in which the first through hole and the second through hole extend, and a cover layer ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611) covering the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole (See. Figs. 4, 16).
Regarding claim 13, Yin discloses a display device comprising: a display panel ([0063], Ref. No. 141) including thin-film transistors ([0008], [0078], Ref. No. 406) for driving light emitting elements and a first through hole ([0063], Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 403a forms); a polarizing member ([0078], Ref. No. 402a) disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole (Figs. 4, 16, it is the opening or through hole that layer 402a forms); a resin layer ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611) on an inner wall of the second through hole; wherein the resin layer is disposed in a same layer as the thin-film transistors in a cross-sectional view, and the display panel is disposed in a different layer from the polarizing member in the cross-sectional view (Figs. 4, 16).
Regarding claim 14, Yin discloses the display device of claim 13, wherein the resin layer is further disposed on an inner wall of the first through hole ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611).
Regarding claim 15, Yin discloses the display device of claim 14, wherein the resin layer has a uniform thickness on the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611).
Regarding claim 16, Yin discloses the display device of claim 14, wherein the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole are aligned to each other in a first direction (the first direction is considered to be either the vertical direction or the horizontal interface direction) in which the first through hole and the second through hole extend ([0063], Figs. 4, 16).
Regarding claim 17, Yin discloses the display device of claim 14, wherein the resin layer covers whole surfaces of the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole ([0108], Figs. 4, 16, Ref. No. 1611).
Regarding claim 18, Yin discloses the display device of claim 14, wherein the resin layer is in direct contact with the inner wall of the first through hole and the inner wall of the second through hole ([0108], Figs. 4, Ref. No. 1611).
Regarding claim 19, Yin discloses the display device of claim 13, wherein the resin layer comprises black resin ([0015]).
Regarding claim 20, Yin discloses the display device of claim 13, wherein the resin layer comprises clear resin ([0015]).
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 7-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Cheng (Pub. No. US 2019/0306295 A1).
Regarding claims 7-8, Chen does not specifically show further comprising a window member disposed on a surface of the polarizing member, wherein the window member comprises a window base and a print layer which is disposed on the window base, overlaps the first through hole, and at least partially exposes the first through hole.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cheng teaches a display device, comprising a window member ([0113] and Figs. 5-8, Ref. No. 201) which is disposed on a surface of the polarizing member, wherein the window member comprises a window base and a print layer ([0111] and Figs. 5-8, Ref. No. 211) which is disposed on the window base, overlaps the first through hole, and at least partially exposes the first through hole (Figs. 3-8 and paragraphs [0095], [0111]-[0112]) to increase the display area of the display screen when a size of the mobile terminal does not change ([0103]).
Therefore, given the teachings of Cheng, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying Chen in view of Cheng by employing the window member.
Regarding claim 10, Cheng in view of Chen teaches the display device of claim 1, further comprising: a transparent bonding layer ([0111] and Figs. 5-8, Ref. No. 211) which is interposed between the polarizing member and the window member (Cheng: Figs. 3-8 and paragraphs [0095], [0111]-[0112] and Chen: Figs. 3, 5 and paragraphs [0013], [0032]-[0033]).
Regarding claims 11-12, Cheng in view of Chen teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein the transparent bonding layer comprises a second through hole overlapping the first through hole, wherein an inner wall of the second through hole protrudes inward from an inner wall of the first through hole (Cheng: Figs. 3-8 and paragraphs [0095], [0111]-[0112] and Chen: Figs. 3, 5 and paragraphs [0013], [0032]-[0033]).
Prior Art
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. For example:
Kikuchi et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0142242 A1) discloses a display device comprising: a display panel ([0016], Ref No. 11) including a first through hole ([0017], Figs. 2, 4, Ref. No. 14); a polarizing member ([0016], Figs. 2, 4, Ref. No. 12) disposed on a surface of the display panel and including a second through hole ([0033], Figs. 2, 4, Ref. No. 25) overlapping the first through hole, wherein an inner wall of the first through hole and an inner wall of the second through hole are aligned to each other in a first direction (See Figs. 2, 4, the first direction is considered to be the horizontal direction that extends in the interface of panel 11 and polarizing plate 12) in which the first through hole and the second through hole extend.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is rejected under the double patenting rejection described above, but would be allowable if amended, or a timely filed terminal disclaimer may be used to overcome the obviousness-type double patenting rejection over the prior patent.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 9, the prior art of record alone or in combination do not teach or fairly suggest, in combination with other elements of the claim, an inner side surface of the print layer protrudes inward from the first through hole, and the hole coating layer overlaps the print layer.
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 MALIHEH MALEK whose telephone number is (571)270-1874. The examiner can normally be reached M/T/W/R/F, 8:30-5.
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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
September 23, 2026
/MALIHEH MALEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights