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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 1/17/2025 and 08/05/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the extra spaces at before the word “Provided” in line 1, should be deleted. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6-9 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grosse-Puppendahl (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0285828 A1) in view of Atkinson (US Patent Publication Number 20190114947 A1).
Grosse-Puppendahl teaches, as claimed in independent claim 1, an electro-optic display (Fig. 1) comprising, in this order1: a first electrode (102); an electrophoretic medium layer (104); a piezoelectric material layer (108); a second electrode (110), Grosse-Puppendahl fails to teach at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode comprises one or more images, and wherein the one or more images are printed onto a white background and laminated onto the at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode. In a related art, Atkinson teaches a first electrode (705) comprising one or more images (¶0144 “ fixed-image may also be printed or placed directly onto the front side (not shown) of an optionally opaque back electrode 705”), and wherein the one or more images (1607) are printed onto a white background2 and laminated onto the at least one of the first electrode3 (¶0144 “ fixed-image may also be printed or placed directly onto the front side (not shown) of an optionally opaque back electrode 705;).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl, with the first electrode comprising one or more images, as taught by Atkinson, for the purpose of providing an indicator with two pixels large enough to each contain a legible image (¶0143).
Grosse-Puppendahl teaches, as claimed in claim 2, a first electrode (102) and the second electrode (110) are positioned to sandwich the electrophoretic medium layer (104) and the piezoelectric material layer (108).
Grosse-Puppendahl discloses, as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first electrode (102) overlaps with substantially all of the electrophoretic medium layer (104).
Grosse-Puppendahl discloses, as claimed in claim 7, wherein the second electrode (110) overlaps with substantially all of the piezoelectric material layer (108).
Grosse-Puppendahl discloses, as claimed in claim 8, electro-optic display comprising, in this order: a first electrode (102); an electrophoretic medium layer (104); a piezoelectric material layer (108); and a second electrode (110), Grosse-Puppendahl fails to teach wherein at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode comprises one or more images, and wherein the one or more images comprise dark colored images printed onto the at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode. In a related art, Atkinson teaches wherein at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode comprises one or more images (¶0144 “The back electrode 705 of this embodiment shown in FIG. 12A is transparent such that a fixed-image located on the back-side of the back electrode may be seen from the viewing side”), and wherein the one or more images comprise dark colored images printed onto the at least one of the first electrode ((¶0144 “the fixed-images may also be printed in full color”; Fig. 11 legend shows dark blue; and 1607 shows the image as a dark image).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl, with the first electrode comprising one or more images, as taught by Atkinson, for the purpose of providing an indicator with two pixels large enough to each contain a legible image (¶0143).
Grosse-Puppendahl teaches, as claimed in claim 9, a first electrode (102) and the second electrode (110) are positioned to sandwich the electrophoretic medium layer (104) and the piezoelectric material layer (108).
Grosse-Puppendahl discloses, as claimed in claim 13, wherein the first electrode (102) overlaps with substantially all of the electrophoretic medium layer (104).
Grosse-Puppendahl discloses, as claimed in claim 14, wherein the second electrode (110) overlaps with substantially all of the piezoelectric material layer (108).
Grosse-Puppendahl fails to teach, as claimed in claim 15, fails to teach wherein the dark colored images are printed onto the at least one of the first electrode without a background wherein the dark colored images are printed onto the at least one of the first electrode without a background4 (¶0144 “The back electrode 705 of this embodiment shown in FIG. 12A is transparent such that a fixed-image located on the back-side of the back electrode may be seen from the viewing side”).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the first electrode comprising one or more images, as taught by Atkinson, for the purpose of providing an indicator with two pixels large enough to each contain a legible image (¶0143).
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grosse-Puppendahl (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0285828 A1) in view of Atkinson (US Patent Publication Number 20190114947 A1) and in further view of Shimizu (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0363242 A1).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 3, wherein the second electrode comprises a conductive adhesive laminated on the piezoelectric material layer. In a related art, Shimizu teaches an optical device wherein the second electrode (41) comprises a conductive adhesive laminated (41b) on the piezoelectric material layer (21).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the metalized piezoelectric film, as taught by Shimizu, for the purpose of providing a way of applying voltage to the piezoelectric element (¶0010).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 10, wherein the second electrode comprises a conductive adhesive laminated on the piezoelectric material layer. In a related art, Shimizu teaches an optical device wherein the second electrode (41) comprises a conductive adhesive laminated (41b) on the piezoelectric material layer (21).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the metalized piezoelectric film, as taught by Shimizu, for the purpose of providing a way of applying voltage to the piezoelectric element (¶0010).
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grosse-Puppendahl (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0285828 A1) in view of Atkinson (US Patent Publication Number 20190114947 A1) and in further view of Heo (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0140161 A1).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 4, wherein the piezoelectric material layer and the second electrode comprise a metalized piezoelectric film. In a related art, Heo teaches an optical device wherein the piezoelectric material layer and the second electrode comprise a metalized piezoelectric film (¶0058 “a dielectric constant and may increase a piezoelectric voltage constant. At least one of the Mn and the Ni may be additionally doped in a PZN-PZT material prior to the sintering process to provide the 001 crystal direction. In this case, the PZN-PZT material having an increased piezoelectric voltage” and “¶0059 “an electrode may be formed by printing a paste containing a metal powder on the upper and lower sides or both sides of a PZN-PZT material”)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the metalized piezoelectric film, as taught by Heo, for the purpose of providing a desirable temperature stability and a desirable piezoelectric characteristic (¶0041).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 11, wherein the piezoelectric material layer and the second electrode comprise a metalized piezoelectric film. In a related art, Heo teaches an optical device wherein the piezoelectric material layer and the second electrode comprise a metalized piezoelectric film (film (¶0058 “a dielectric constant and may increase a piezoelectric voltage constant. At least one of the Mn and the Ni may be additionally doped in a PZN-PZT material prior to the sintering process to provide the 001 crystal direction. In this case, the PZN-PZT material having an increased piezoelectric voltage” and “¶0059 “an electrode may be formed by printing a paste containing a metal powder on the upper and lower sides or both sides of a PZN-PZT material”).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the metalized piezoelectric film, as taught by Heo, for the purpose of providing a desirable temperature stability and a desirable piezoelectric characteristic (¶0041).
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grosse-Puppendahl (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0285828 A1) ) in view of Atkinson (US Patent Publication Number 20190114947 A1) and in further view of Danner (US Patent Publication Number 2008/0174853 A1).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 5, wherein the thickness of the electro-optic display is less than 50 micrometers. In a related art, Danner teaches an optical device herein the thickness of the electro-optic display is less than 50 micrometers. (¶0074 “possibly not more than about 25 µm”)
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the thickness of the electro optic display , as taught by Danner, for the purpose of providing a way to protect the electro-optic medium present in the final display from too much exposure to ultra-violet radiation (¶0058).
Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson fail to disclose, as claimed in claim 12, wherein the thickness of the electro-optic display is less than 50 micrometers. In a related art, Danner teaches an optical device herein the thickness of the electro-optic display is less than 50 micrometers. (¶0074 “possibly not more than about 25 µm””),
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the electro-optic display, as taught by Grosse-Puppendahl and Atkinson, with the thickness of the electro optic display , as taught by Danner, for the purpose of providing a way to protect the electro-optic medium present in the final display from too much exposure to ultra-violet radiation (¶0058).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Comiskey (US Patent Number 6,473,072 B1) considered the closest prior art teaches electro-optic display (Fig. 1) comprising, in this order a first electrode (53); an electrophoretic medium layer (54); a piezoelectric material layer (56).
Lecain (US Patent Publication Number 2004/0027327 A1) teaches an electro-optic display comprising a first electrode, an electrophoretic medium layer, and a second electrode.
Bae (US Patent Publication Number 2012/0218622 A1) teaches an electro-optic display comprising a first electrode, an electrophoretic medium layer, and a second electrode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOURNEY F SUMLAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4pm.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
JOURNEY F. SUMLAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
22 September 2026
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
1 The examiner has interpreted the phrase in this order to mean that the layers are arranged in the display device from top to bottom in this sequence but does not limit any intervening layers that are not claimed.
2 Fig.12A that shows the 1607 on a white background (see legend in Fig. 11). Also ¶0140 teaches opaque is white, containing TiO.sub.2 particles.
3 The examiner has interpreted that printed/laminted on the electrode are functional equivalents in the application. See ¶0088 of the instant application that states “images or shapes may be printed or laminated onto a white background and onto either the electrode”. Also ¶0140 teaches opaque is white, containing TiO.sub.2 particles.
4 Since its transparent inherently there is no background.
Prosecution Insights