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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: regarding claim 1, the phrase “thielmess” in line 1 should apparently be “thickness”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (Chinese Pub. No. CN110310577A).
Regarding claim 1, with respect to Figures 1-5, Li teaches a display panel 100 in Fig.4/Fig.5 [i.e., display device], comprising a middle frame 101 in Fig.4/Fig.5 and a display module disposed in the middle frame, wherein the display module comprises:
a display panel 100 in fig.4/Fig.5, comprising a display area 110 in Fig4/Fig.5 [i.e., display portion], a binding area 130 in Fig4/Fig.5 [i.e. binding portion] disposed opposite to the display portion, a first bending area 120 in Fig4/Fig.5 [i.e. bending portion] connected between the display portion and the binding portion (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 1-11, 30-35, page 5, lines 1-32); and
a support layer 102 in Fig.4/Fig.5 [i.e., support member] disposed between the display portion and the binding portion (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 1-11, 30-35, page 5, lines 1-32); and
wherein one side of the support member away from the display portion is directly and fixedly connected to the middle frame 101 in fig.4/fig.5 (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 1-11, 30-35, page 5, lines 1-32).
However, Li does not specifically teach that the support member is metal and a display device. Examiner takes an official notice that the support member is being metal and a display device are well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of that the support member is being metal and a display device in Li’s invention in order to provide metal support such that the user will benefit of the metal support and a display device.
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li teaches wherein the support member has a single-layer structure, the support member comprises a first side and a second side that are disposed opposite to each other, the first side of the support member is directly attached to a rear surface of the display portion, and the second side of the support member is directly and fixedly connected to the middle frame (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 3-4, page 5, lines 11-32).
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li teaches wherein the support member comprises a first frame portion and a second frame portion, an orthographic projection of the first frame portion on the middle frame 101 in fig.4/fig.5 does not overlap with an orthographic projection of the binding area 130 in Fig4/Fig.5 [i.e. binding portion] on the middle frame, and wherein the display module further comprises a connector disposed between the support member and the middle frame, and the first frame portion of the support member is directly and fixedly connected to the middle frame through the connector (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 3-4, page 5, lines 11-32).
However, Li does not specifically teach wherein an orthographic projection of the second frame portion on the middle frame overlaps with an orthographic projection of the binding portion on the middle frame. Examiner takes an official notice that an orthographic projection of the second frame portion on the middle frame overlaps with an orthographic projection of the binding portion on the middle frame is a matter of design choice. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of an orthographic projection of the second frame portion on the middle frame overlaps with an orthographic projection of the binding portion on the middle frame in Li’s invention in order to provide benefit out of having an orthographic projection of the second frame portion on the middle frame to overlap with an orthographic projection of the binding portion on the middle frame.
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Li does not specifically teach wherein a material of the metal support member is one of an aluminum alloy, a stainless steel, an injection-molded copper sheet, a 18 copper column, or a thermoplastic polymer structural material. Examiner takes an official notice wherein a material of the metal support member is one of an aluminum alloy, a stainless steel, an injection-molded copper sheet, a 18 copper column, or a thermoplastic polymer structural material is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of wherein a material of the metal support member is one of an aluminum alloy, a stainless steel, an injection-molded copper sheet, a 18 copper column, or a thermoplastic polymer structural material in Li’s invention in order to provide benefit out of having support member/layer of different materials.
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Li does not specifically teach wherein a thickness of the metal support member is greater than or equal to 0.2 mm and less than or equal to 2 mm. Examiner takes an official notice wherein a thickness of the metal support member is greater than or equal to 0.2 mm and less than or equal to 2 mm is a matter of design choice. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of wherein a thickness of the metal support member is greater than or equal to 0.2 mm and less than or equal to 2 mm in Li’s invention in order to provide benefit out of having support member/layer of different thickness of materials.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li teaches wherein the display module comprises a connecting component disposed between the support member and the binding portion and wherein a first side of the support member is in direct contact with the display portion, and a second side of the support member is connected to the binding portion through the connecting component (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 3-4, page 5, lines 11-32).
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li teaches wherein a glass substrate 131 in Fig.4/fig.5 [i.e., groove] is provided on the second side of the support layer 102 in Fig.4/Fig.5 [i.e., support member], and the groove is provided at one end of the support member close to the first bending portion and wherein the connecting component is disposed in the groove (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 1-11, 30-35, page 5, lines 1-32).
Claim 12 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li does not specifically teach mobile terminal, wherein the mobile terminal comprises a terminal body and a display device, the terminal body and the display device are integrated into one body. Examiner takes an official notice that mobile terminal, wherein the mobile terminal comprises a terminal body and a display device, the terminal body and the display device are integrated into one body is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate a mobile terminal, wherein the mobile terminal comprises a terminal body and a display device, the terminal body and the display device are integrated into one body in Li’s invention in order to provide benefit out of using better display panel of a mobile terminal.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (Chinese Pub. No. CN110310577A) in view of LIU et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0315115).
Claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Li teaches wherein the display module comprises a display area and a non-display area surrounding the display area, and the display module comprises: a touch layer disposed in the display area, and the touch layer is disposed on one side of the display portion away from the support member (fig.4,5; page 4, lines 4-7, page 5, lines 11-32).
However, Li does not specifically teach a color filter layer disposed in the display area, the color filter layer is disposed on one side of the touch layer away from the display portion, and the color filter layer comprises a plurality of color resists disposed at intervals and a black matrix disposed between adjacent color resists, wherein at least part of the black matrix is disposed on one side of the display area close to the non-display area. LIU teaches a color filter layer disposed in the display area, the color filter layer is disposed on one side of the touch layer away from the display portion, and the color filter layer comprises a plurality of color resists disposed at intervals and a black matrix disposed between adjacent color resists, wherein at least part of the black matrix is disposed on one side of the display area close to the non-display area (fig.3-7; paragraphs 0011, 0013, 0023, 0074, 0092). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of a color filter layer disposed in the display area, the color filter layer is disposed on one side of the touch layer away from the display portion, and the color filter layer comprises a plurality of color resists disposed at intervals and a black matrix disposed between adjacent color resists, wherein at least part of the black matrix is disposed on one side of the display area close to the non-display area in Li’s invention as taught by LIU. The motivation for the modification is to do so in order to improve the display effect of the display substrate by filtering light emitted from the light-emitting device layer to avoid stray light emission.
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches wherein the non-display area comprises an extension area adjacent to the display area and the cover plate comprises a body portion disposed in the display area and wherein the non-display area comprises a bending area in Fig.4/Fig.5 [i.e., an extension area] adjacent to the display area and an extension portion disposed in the extension area (abstract; first paragraph-third paragraph under “Contents of the Invention”).
However, Li in view of LIU does not specifically teach the display module comprises: a cover plate disposed on one side of the color filter layer away from the display portion, and a shielding layer disposed in the extension area, and an orthographic projection of the shielding layer on the cover plate covers the extension portion, wherein the shielding layer is in contact with the black matrix. LIU also teaches wherein the non-display area comprises a binding region 102 in Fig.4 [i.e., an extension area] adjacent to the display area and an extension portion disposed in the extension area (fig.11; paragraphs 0074, 0081, 0082, 0092, 0107, 0108) whereas examiner takes an official notice that wherein the display module comprises: a cover plate disposed on one side of the color filter layer away from the display portion, and a shielding layer disposed in the extension area, and an orthographic projection of the shielding layer on the cover plate covers the extension portion, wherein the shielding layer is in contact with the black matrix are well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li to incorporate the feature of wherein the display module comprises: a cover plate disposed on one side of the color filter layer away from the display portion, and a shielding layer disposed in the extension area, and an orthographic projection of the shielding layer on the cover plate covers the extension portion, wherein the shielding layer is in contact with the black matrix in Li’s invention in view of Liu’s invention in order to protect the display as well as extension area conveniently.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 19 and 20 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD S ELAHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30AM to 5:00PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn R. Edwards can be reached on 571-272-7547136. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MD S ELAHEE/
MD SHAFIUL ALAM ELAHEE
Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2694
October 3, 2026
