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
Applicant’s amendment to the specification, specifically the title of the invention, has overcome the previous objection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2023/0004257 to Kong et al. (Kong) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0384179 to Bok et al. (Bok).
As to claim 1, Kong discloses an electronic device comprising:
a display panel including pixels (Fig. 1, 4; Para. 0064, display panel, 110; Para. 0068, sub-pixels) and an encapsulation layer covering the pixels (Fig. 4; Para. 0081, 0107, encapsulation portion, 440) and comprising a first inorganic layer (Fig. 4, Para. 0109, first encapsulation layer, 441, inorganic materials), a second inorganic layer (Fig. 4, Para. 0111, third encapsulation layer, 443, inorganic materials), and an organic layer disposed between the first inorganic layer and second inorganic layer (Fig. 4, Para. 0110, second encapsulation layer, 442, organic materials); and
an input sensor on the display panel (Fig. 1-4; Para. 0042, 0078, 0080, touch panel, 120),
wherein the input sensor includes:
a first sensing insulation layer (Fig. 4; Para. 0114-0116, first insulating layer, 451);
a first conductive pattern layer on the first sensing insulation layer (Fig. 4; Para. 0062, 0114-0016, first touch electrode, 260);
a second sensing insulation layer on the first sensing insulation layer and covering the first conductive pattern layer (Fig. 4; Para. 0114, 0116-0118, second insulating layer, 452);
a second conductive pattern layer on the second sensing insulation layer (Fig. 4; Para. 0062, 0117-0119, second touch electrode, 270);
a third sensing insulation layer on the second sensing insulation layer and covering the second conductive pattern layer (Fig. 10; Para. 0195-0200, 0265, fifth insulating layer, 755);
a third conductive pattern layer on the third sensing insulation layer (Fig. 10; Para. 0262, third touch pad electrode, 1090); and
a fourth sensing insulation layer on the third sensing insulation layer and covering the third conductive pattern layer (Fig. 4; Para. 0113, 0118, third insulating layer, 453), and
wherein the first conductive pattern layer and the second conductive pattern layer receive a same voltage (Para. 0048, self-capacitance based touch sensing method).
Kong does not disclose a first sensing insulation layer directly on and in contact with the second inorganic layer.
Bok discloses a first sensing insulation layer directly on and in contact with the second inorganic layer (Fig. 9, 12; Para. 0167, first sensor insulating film TINS1 may be disposed on the encapsulation layer TFE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic device of Kong to include the structure of Bok because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the electronic device of Kong as modified by the structure of Bok can yield a predictable result of a display device which can prevent or substantially prevent light incident on an optical device from being reduced even when the optical device is disposed to overlap a display panel is provided. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the electronic device of Kong the ability to use the structure of Bok since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 2, Kong and Bok disclose the electronic device of claim 1. Kong discloses wherein the first sensing insulation layer and the second sensing insulation layer include a silicon-based inorganic material (Para. 0109, inorganic insulating material), and
wherein the third sensing insulation layer and the fourth sensing insulation layer include an organic material (Para. 0200, organic insulating material).
As to claim 3, Kong and Bok disclose the electronic device of claim 1. Kong discloses wherein the second conductive pattern layer is connected with the first conductive pattern layer through contact holes defined in the second sensing insulation layer (Fig. 10; Para. 0253, first hole, H1).
As to claim 8, Kong discloses the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the input sensor is configured to sense an external input using a capacitance method (Para. 0048, self-capacitance based touch sensing method).
As to claim 19, Kong and Bok disclose the electronic device of claim 1. Kong discloses wherein each of the first conductive pattern layer, the second conductive pattern layer, and the third conductive pattern layer includes a first layer, a second layer, and a third layer sequentially stacked one above another (Fig. 10; Para. 0163, 0170, 0268), and
wherein the first layer and the third layer include titanium, and the second layer includes aluminum (Para. 0163, 0170, 0268, titanium, aluminum).
As to claim 20, Kong and Bok disclose the electronic device of claim 1. Kong discloses wherein a first connecting opening is defined in the second sensing insulation layer to expose a portion of the first conductive pattern layer (Fig. 10; Para. 0253, first hole, H1), and a second connecting opening is defined in the third sensing insulation layer to expose a portion of the second conductive pattern layer and the portion of the first conductive pattern layer and overlap the first connecting opening (Fig. 10; Para. 0254, second hole, H2),
wherein the input sensor further includes a connecting pattern, and within the second connecting opening, the connecting pattern makes contact with the portion of the second conductive pattern layer and the portion of the first conductive pattern layer (Fig. 10), and
wherein the connecting pattern includes a same material as the third conductive pattern layer (Fig. 10; Para. 0163, 0170, 0268).
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong and Bok in view of U.S. Publication No. 2015/0227254 to Kim et al. (Kim).
As to claim 9, Kong and Bok disclose the electronic device of claim 1. Kong discloses wherein the input sensor includes a first group of electrodes configured to sense an external input using a capacitance method (Para. 0048, self-capacitance based touch sensing method). Kong does not expressly disclose a second group of electrodes configured to sense an external input using an electromagnetic induction method.
Kim teaches a second group of electrodes configured to sense an external input using an electromagnetic induction method (Fig. 1, 2; Para. 0051-0052, first touch sensor part TS1 senses a touch in an electromagnetic induction mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic device of Kong and Bok to include the electromagnetic induction detection of Kim because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the electronic device of Kong and Bok as modified by the electromagnetic induction detection of Kim can yield a predictable result of a thin device since a plurality of touch sensors which senses in modes different from each other may be formed on a same base substrate. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the electronic device of Kong and Bok the ability to use the electromagnetic induction detection of Kim since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claim 10, Kong, Bok and Kim disclose the electronic device of claim 9. Kong does not expressly disclose wherein the first group of electrodes includes: a first-first detection electrode including a first-first sensing electrode and a first-second sensing electrode spaced apart from each other with a first space therebetween in a first direction; and a first-second detection electrode insulated from the first-first detection electrode, the first-second detection electrode including a second-first sensing electrode and a second-second sensing electrode spaced apart from each other with a second space therebetween in a second direction crossing the first direction.
Kim discloses a first-first detection electrode including a first-first sensing electrode and a first-second sensing electrode spaced apart from each other with a first space therebetween in a first direction (Fig. 2; Para. 0052, second touch sensor part TS2 includes a plurality of sensing electrodes SE); and
a first-second detection electrode insulated from the first-first detection electrode, the first-second detection electrode including a second-first sensing electrode and a second-second sensing electrode spaced apart from each other with a second space therebetween in a second direction crossing the first direction (Fig. 2; Para. 0052, second touch sensor part TS2 includes a plurality of sensing electrodes SE). This combination is obvious to one skilled in the art for at least the reasons set forth in claim 9.
As to claim 11, Kong, Bok and Kim disclose the electronic device of claim 10. Kong does not expressly disclose wherein the second group of electrodes includes: a second-first detection electrode in the first space and extending in the second; and a second-second detection electrode in the second space and extending in the first direction.
Kim discloses a second-first detection electrode in the first space and extending in the second direction (Fig. 2; Para. 0051, first sensing circuits SC1 extend in a first direction D1 and are arranged in a second direction D2 crossing the first direction D1); and
a second-second detection electrode in the second space and extending in the first direction (Fig. 2; Para. 0051, second sensing circuits SC2 extend in the second direction D2 and are arranged in the first direction D1). This combination is obvious to one skilled in the art for at least the reasons set forth in claim
Claim(s) 21-23, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong and Bok in view of U.S. Publication No. 2017/0031504 to Hwang et al. (Hwang).
As to claim 21, Kong discloses it is similar in scope to claim 1 and is therefore similarly analyzed. Kong additionally discloses an electronic device comprising: a display module including a display panel (Fig. 1, 4; Para. 0064, display panel, 110) and an input sensor on the display panel (Fig. 1-4; Para. 0042, 0078, 0080, touch panel, 120), wherein the display panel includes pixels (Para. 0068, sub-pixels) and an encapsulation layer covering the pixels (Fig. 4; Para. 0081, 0107, encapsulation portion, 440); a window on the display module (Fig. 4; Para. 0113, 0118, third insulating layer, 453).
Kong does not expressly disclose an electronic module under the display module; and a housing coupled with the window, wherein the display module and the electronic module are accommodated in the housing.
Hwang teaches an electronic module under the display module (Fig. 12, 13; Para. 0093-0096, driving system circuit unit, 700); and a housing coupled with the window (Fig. 12, 13; Para. 0093-0096, 0120, cover window, 600 and housing 300 and rear cover, 350), wherein the display module and the electronic module are accommodated in the housing (Fig. 12, 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electronic device of Kong and Bok to include the housing configuration of Hwang because such a modification is the result of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. More specifically, the electronic device of Kong and Bok as modified by the housing configuration of Hwang can yield a predictable result of preventing an image quality error from occurring due to heat which occurs in the light source unit as the heat may be transferred through the touch panel to the housing. Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated including in the electronic device of Kong and Bok the ability to use the housing configuration of Hwang since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As to claims 22, 23, and 28 are similar in scope and are therefore similarly analyzed as claims 2, 3, and 8.
Claim(s) 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong and Bok in view of Hwang as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Kim.
Claims 29 and 30 are similar in scope to claims 9, 10 and 11 and is therefore similarly analyzed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 12-18 and 24-27 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 Lisa S Landis whose telephone number is (571)270-1061. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at (571)272-3017. 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.
/LISA S LANDIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights