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 Arguments
Amendments filed 18 December 2025 have been fully considered. The previous 112 rejections have been withdrawn. Claims 16 and 18-20 are now allowed. Arguments and amendments with respect to independent claim 1 and 13 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive as claims 1-15 have been re-interpreted under Zhang with regard to the amended claims, which are detailed in the rejection below.
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) 1-3 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang (US 2021.0333942).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang disclose:
An electronic device comprising: a display panel comprising a display area, and a non-display area adjacent to the display area; and an input detection layer on the display panel, and comprising: first electrodes arranged spaced apart along a first direction and extending in a second direction crossing the first direction; and first trace lines electrically connected one-to-one to the first electrodes at ends of the first electrodes in the second direction, and comprising first mesh portions overlapping the display area and extending in the first direction along a boundary of the display area and the non-display area, wherein one of the first trace lines is electrically connected to one of the first electrodes, and wherein the first mesh portions are between the first electrodes and the boundary of the display area and the non-display area in the second direction (see Fig. 1-5; annotated Fig. 1 below; [0012, 0038-0047]; display panel 60 with a display area TA/DA and non display area PA; first electrode 10 arranged spaced apart along a first direction (vertical); trace lines connected one to one (in second, horizontal direction) at the ends (40) to first electrodes 10 comprising first mesh portions overlapping display area TA/DA and extend along the boundary of TA/PA, where mesh line is electrically connected to the first electrode 10; where mesh portion is between first electrodes 10 and the boundary of the display area in a second (horizontal) direction).
PNG
media_image1.png
664
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the first electrodes, the first mesh portions, and the boundary are arranged sequentially along the second direction (see annotated Fig. 1 above; Fig. 1-3; 5).
Regarding claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the first mesh portions are arranged spaced apart along a second direction intersecting the first direction (see annotated Fig. 1 above; Fig. 1-3; 5).
Regarding claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the first mesh portions comprise a first mesh line extending in a first diagonal direction, which is between the first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction, and a second mesh line extending from the first mesh line in a second diagonal direction intersecting the first diagonal direction (see Fig. 3; mesh at first and second angles).
Regarding claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the first electrodes extend along a second direction intersecting the first direction (see Fig. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the input detection layer further comprises second electrodes spaced apart along a second direction intersecting the first direction, and second trace lines electrically connected one-to-one to the second electrodes and comprising second mesh portions overlapping the display area and extending along the second direction (see Fig. 1-5; [0012]; second electrodes 20 second trace lines 50 of same material known to also be mesh).
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.
Claim(s) 4-7, 13-14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang.
Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. While Zhang disclose at [0040] a plurality of bonding pads for the signal lines, it is not explicit as to the placement of the pads along a firs direction. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the bonding pads arranged along the firs direction, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involved only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Furthermore, such recitation has not been claimed as essential to the design of the display.
Regarding claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein. Zhang further disclose:
the pads overlap with the non- display area (see Fig. 1; [0040] pads in PA).
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated herein. Zhang further disclose:
the first trace lines further comprise line portions extending from the boundary of the display area and the non- display area toward the pads (see Fig. 1; [0040] pads in PA).
Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated herein. Zhang further disclose:
shapes of the line portions are different from shapes of the first mesh portions (see Fig. 1, 3; different sized rectangles between the line and mesh portions).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale as claims 1 and 4.
Regarding claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Zhang further disclose:
the first trace lines further comprise line portions extending from the first mesh portions toward the pads (see Fig. 1; [0040] pads in PA).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Yudin (US 11/449.183).
Regarding claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Zhang disclose:
the display panel further comprises light-emitting areas in the display area, (see Fig. 10 ; [0055, 0058]; in cell touch display).
Zhang is not explicit as to, but Yudin disclose:
wherein some of the light-emitting areas are between one of the first mesh portions and another of the first mesh portions (see Fig. 4; col. 6, ln. 49-67; where light emitting areas 38 are between mesh portions).
Therefore, prior to the effective filing date of applicant’s invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the known techniques of Yudin to that of Zhang to predictably provide electrode placement to not interfere with the image being displayed (col. 6, ln. 64-67)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 18-20 are allowed.
Claims 8 and 15 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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KENNETH BUKOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7913. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday // 0730-1530.
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, Amr Awad can be reached at 571.272.7764. 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.
/kenneth bukowski/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621