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
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, 2, 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tamaki (US 2022/0342249 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tamaki discloses a reflective display panel, comprising: a first substrate (SUB1) and a second substrate (SUB2), overlappingly disposed along a stacking direction; a plurality of pixel structures, disposed on the first substrate and each having a reflective electrode (RE1); a plurality of spacers (SP), disposed between the first substrate and the second substrate; a first alignment layer (AL1), disposed on the first substrate and having a first alignment direction; a second alignment layer (AL2), disposed on the second substrate and having a second alignment direction; a liquid crystal layer (LC), disposed between the first alignment layer and the second alignment layer; and a plurality of light shielding patterns (SH), respectively overlapping with the spacers along the stacking direction, wherein each of the spacers (SP) has a first side edge and a second side edge facing away from each other and sequentially arranged along the first alignment direction or the second alignment direction, and in the stacking direction, each of the light shielding patterns (SH) overlaps with the second side edge of one of the spacers, but does not overlap with the first side edge of the one of the spacers (Fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 2, Tamaki discloses a reflective display panel wherein an orthographic projection of the second side edge of each of the spacers (SP) on a substrate surface of the first substrate or the second substrate is located within an orthographic projection of one of the light shielding patterns (SH) on the substrate surface (Fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 8, Tamaki discloses a reflective display panel wherein the spacers (SP) are disposed overlapping with the reflective electrodes (RE1) of the pixel structures.
Regarding claim 11, Tamaki discloses a reflective display panel wherein the spacers (SP) are disposed on the first substrate and are located between the first alignment layer (AL1) and the first substrate (SUB1), and the first side edge and the second side edge of each of the spacers are sequentially arranged along the first alignment direction (Fig. 7A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 9-10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim(s) 3, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 3, and specifically comprising the limitation of the spacers are disposed on the second substrate and are located between the second alignment layer and the second substrate, and the first side edge and the second side edge of each of the spacers are sequentially arranged along the second alignment direction.
Regarding claim(s) 4, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 4, and specifically comprising the limitation of the light shielding patterns are disposed on the second substrate and are located between the spacers and the second substrate.
Regarding claim(s) 5, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 5, and specifically comprising the limitation of an orthographic projection outline of each of the spacers on a substrate surface of the first substrate or the second substrate is circular, and an orthographic projection outline of each of the light shielding patterns on the substrate surface is crescent.
Regarding claim(s) 6, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 6, and specifically comprising the limitation of each of the light shielding patterns has a first pattern side edge and a second pattern side edge facing away from each other and sequentially arranged along the first alignment direction or the second alignment direction, and in the stacking direction, each of the spacers overlaps with the first pattern side edge of one of the light shielding patterns, but does not overlap with the second pattern side edge of the one of the light shielding patterns.
Regarding claim(s) 7, claims(s) 7 is/are allowable for the reasons given in claim(s) 6 because of its/their dependency status from claim(s) 6.
Regarding claim(s) 9, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 9, and specifically comprising the limitation of there is a micro slit between the reflective electrodes of the pixel structures, and the micro slit is overlappingly provided with a light shielding layer along the stacking direction, and the light shielding layer and the light shielding patterns are a same film layer.
Regarding claim(s) 10, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 10, and specifically comprising the limitation of each of the pixel structures further comprises: an active element; and an insulating layer, disposed between the active element and the reflective electrode, and having an opening, wherein the reflective electrode is disposed on the insulating layer and extends into the opening to be electrically connected to the active element, the opening is overlappingly provided with a light shielding layer along the stacking direction, and the light shielding layer and the light shielding patterns are a same film layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 2007/0002263 A1) discloses a liquid crystal display panel including a color filter array substrate having a first column spacer and a second column spacer, the first column spacer being partially inserted in a first hole, and a thin film transistor (TFT) array substrate facing the color filter array substrate having a protective passivation film.
Kaneko et al. (US 2006/0038937 A1) discloses an electro-optical device including a substrate; electrodes formed on the substrate; switching elements connected to the electrodes, respectively; an electro-optical material layer disposed on the electrodes and the switching elements; photospacers that regulate the thickness of the electro-optical material layer; and spacer light-shielding films, each being provided between a corresponding photospacer and the substrate.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 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, James R. Greece, can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Prosecution Insights