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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 10, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 and 21-30 are pending in the current application.
Claims 1, 21, and 26 are amended in the current application.
Claims 11-20 are canceled in the current application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks and amendments filed March 10, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues that Fournier, Wendler, and Bookbinder fail to show or suggest the newly amended claim limitations.
Examiner acknowledges. The rejections previously set forth are withdrawn due to the present claim amendments. However, new grounds of rejection have been set forth below, where Leng et al. (CN 109712530 A) is newly applied. Fournier in combination with Leng and Wendler is considered to establish a prima facie case of obviousness over the newly amended claims with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 26-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fournier et al. (US 2018/008181 A1) in view of Leng et al. (CN 109712530 A, herein English machine translation utilized for all citations).
Regarding Claim 1, Fournier teaches an electronic device comprising a display assembly 902 with a display layer 914 having an array of individual pixels for displaying images (Fournier, Abstract, [0004], [0071], [0083], [0112], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches the display layer 914 has a first flat portion and a second flat portion that are joined by a curved portion having a concave surface and an opposing convex surface (Fournier, [0112]-[0117], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a transparent protective cover 904 (a cover layer) overlapping the display assembly 902 and display layer 914, where the protective cover 904 can be formed of glass (Fournier, [0067], [0072], [0112], [0124], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a first material 932 that can be a potting material filling (molded onto) a gap formed by the concave surface and a second material 934 covering (molded onto) the convex surface (or alternatively frame components 754/854/954) (Fournier, [0111], [0116]-[0117], Figs 12-14).
PNG
media_image1.png
625
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fournier – Figure 14
PNG
media_image2.png
447
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fournier – Figure 12
Fournier remains silent regarding the first material 932 being a polymer material, and remains silent regarding a second polymer being molded onto a convex surface and being in direct contact with a cover layer.
Leng, however, teaches a flexible display device comprising a flexible display substrate 10 provided with a plurality of pixel units (i.e., a display having an array of pixels), a cover plate 40 (i.e., cover layer), a first bending protection layer 30 (see Figure 3; i.e., a second polymer molded onto a convex surface) in direct contact with the cover plate 40, and a second bending protection layer 30 coated in a bent region 13 (see Figure 6; i.e., a first polymer molded onto a concave surface) (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 2-4, Figs 3, 6). Leng teaches the bending protection layer material is formed of a thermosetting material (i.e., a polymer) that can be a fluid, injected, and then cured to form the bending protection layers shaped/molded to the convex and concave surfaces of the flexible display substrate 10 (Leng, Pgs 2-3, 6, Figs 3, 6).
PNG
media_image3.png
426
668
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 3
PNG
media_image4.png
404
653
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 6
Since Fournier and Leng both disclose display devices comprising a convex/concave portion having a material formed on each surface, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Leng’s bending protection layer guidance and materials to form Fournier’s first material 932 in the convex surface and to have added a bending protection layer (second polymer) to Fournier’s convex surface to yield a display device that reduces bending difficulty, reduces bending stress, protects against cracking of wiring components, does not creep over a lapse in time, and yields improved display effects as taught by Leng (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 1-4).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Fournier teaches the bending protection layer 30 material is formed of a thermosetting material (i.e., a polymer) that can be a fluid, injected, and then cured to form the bending protection layer 30 shaped/molded to the convex and concave surfaces of the flexible display substrate 10 (Leng, Pgs 2-3, 6).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Fournier teaches the electronic device comprises a housing sidewall 714, where the second polymer (or also molded plastic frame 754/854/954) fills the gap between the convex surface and the housing sidewall 714, and therefore, indirectly couples the display assembly 702/902 to the transparent glass protective cover 704/904 to the housing sidewall 714 with adhesives 762 and 768 (Fournier, [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14; Leng, Fig 3). Modified Fournier teaches the notch 756 is specifically sized to optimize the dimensions and shape to provide a generally continuous and planar configuration for all the aforementioned components; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have coupled all components in an optimized, generally continuous, and planar configuration by the known techniques disclosed by Fournier in a manner that renders obvious the structures of claim 3 with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success (Fournier, [0109]-[0110]; MPEP 2143).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Fournier teaches the second polymer (or also molded plastic frame 754/854/954) covering has a first portion that is interposed between the display layer 914 and the transparent glass protective cover 904, and a second portion that is interposed between the display layer 914 and the housing sidewall 714 (housing sidewall) (Fournier, Figs 12-14; Leng, Fig 3).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Fournier teaches a molded plastic frame 154/754/854/954 (third polymer) at least partially surrounds an outer periphery of the second polymer (Fournier, [0085], [0117], Figs 12-14; Leng, Fig 3). Alternatively, modified Fournier teaches adhesives 762 and 768 (third polymers) that at least partially surround an outer periphery to adhere to an outer housing 714 (Fournier, [0085], [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12-14; Leng, Fig 3).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Fournier depicts the molded plastic frame 154/754/854/954 (third polymer), adhesives 762 and 768 (alternative third polymers), and the second polymer being interposed between the protective cover 704/904 and the housing sidewall 714 (Fournier, [0107]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Fournier teaches the molded plastic frame 154/754/854/954 (third polymer) is mixed with fillers to enhance overall strength and rigidity (Fournier, [0085], [0107]), whereas the second polymer provides efficacious encapsulation and optimal compressive strength for flexible electronic device components, and exhibits elastic deformation properties to prevent cracking of wiring components (Fournier, [0117]; Leng, Pgs 2-4). In view of the foregoing, one skilled in the art would readily understand that the enhanced rigidity of the molded plastic frame 154/754/854/954 (third polymer) exhibits a higher elasticity modulus than the second polymer as established by known conventional rheological and mechanical characterization of polymeric materials with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Fournier teaches the molded plastic frame 154/754/854/954 (third polymer) and the second polymer are attached to the housing sidewall 714 with an adhesive 768 (Fournier, [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Fournier teaches the first material 932 is a potting material filling (molded onto) a gap formed by the concave surface and the first and second display layer 914 flat portions (Fournier, [0116], Fig 14).
Regarding Claim 26, Fournier teaches an electronic device comprising a display assembly 902 with a display layer 914 having an array of individual pixels for displaying images (Fournier, Abstract, [0004], [0071], [0083], [0112], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches the display layer 914 has a first flat portion and a second flat portion that are joined by a curved portion having a concave surface and an opposing convex surface (Fournier, [0112]-[0117], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a transparent protective cover 904 (a cover layer) overlapping the display assembly 902 and display layer 914, where the protective cover 904 can be formed of glass, and the display layer displays images through the transparent protective cover (Fournier, [0067], [0071]-[0072], [0112], [0124], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a first material 932 that can be a potting material filling (molded onto) a gap formed by the concave surface and a second material 934 covering (molded onto) the convex surface (or alternatively frame components 754/854/954) (Fournier, [0111], [0116]-[0117], Figs 12-14).
Fournier remains silent regarding the first material 932 being a polymer material, remains silent regarding a second polymer being located between the transparent cover and the display layer and molded onto the convex surface, and remains silent regarding the second polymer having first and second planar surfaces that are orthogonal to each other and meet at a corner.
Leng, however, teaches a flexible display device comprising a flexible display substrate 10 provided with a plurality of pixel units (i.e., a display having an array of pixels), a cover plate 40 (i.e., cover layer), a first bending protection layer 30 (see Figure 3; i.e., a second polymer molded onto a convex surface) in direct contact with the cover plate 40, and a second bending protection layer 30 coated in a bent region 13 (see Figure 6; i.e., a first polymer molded onto a concave surface) (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 2-4, Figs 3, 6). Leng’s first bending protection layer 30 (see annotated Figure 3; second polymer molded onto a convex surface) is located between the cover plate 40 and the display substrate 10, and has first and second planar surfaces that are orthogonal to each other and that meet at a corner (Leng, Fig 3). Leng teaches the bending protection layer material is formed of a thermosetting material (i.e., a polymer) that can be a fluid, injected, and then cured to form the bending protection layers shaped/molded to the convex and concave surfaces of the flexible display substrate 10 (Leng, Pgs 2-3, 6, Figs 3, 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
426
668
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 3 (annotated)
PNG
media_image4.png
404
653
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 6
Since Fournier and Leng both disclose display devices comprising a convex/concave portion having a material formed on each surface, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Leng’s bending protection layer guidance and materials to form Fournier’s first material 932 in the convex surface and to have added a bending protection layer (second polymer) to Fournier’s convex surface to yield a display device that reduces bending difficulty, reduces bending stress, protects against cracking of wiring components, does not creep over a lapse in time, and yields improved display effects as taught by Leng (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 1-4).
Regarding Claim 27, modified Fournier teaches the bending protection layer 30 material is formed of a thermosetting material (i.e., a polymer) that can be a fluid, injected, and then cured to form the bending protection layer 30 shaped/molded to the convex and concave surfaces of the flexible display substrate 10 (Leng, Pgs 2-3, 6).
Regarding Claim 28, modified Fournier teaches the electronic device comprises a housing sidewall 714 having a ledge with an adhesive 768, where the second polymer would (and molded plastic frame 154/754/954 in contact with the second polymer) at least indirectly attach the transparent glass protective cover 704/804/904 to the housing sidewall 714/814 ledge via concave notch 756 with adhesives 762 and 768 (Fournier, [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12-14; Leng, Fig 3).
Regarding Claim 29, modified Fournier teaches the molded plastic frame 154/754/954 (third polymer) that at least partially surrounds an outer periphery of the second polymer (Fournier, [0085], [0117], Fig 14; Leng, Fig 3). Modified Fournier depicts the molded plastic frame 154/754/954 (third polymer) and the second polymer being interposed between the protective cover 704/904 and the housing sidewall 714 having the ledge (Fournier, [0107]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14; Leng, Fig 3). Modified Fournier teaches the molded plastic frame 154/754/954 (third polymer) is mixed with fillers to enhance overall strength and rigidity (Fournier, [0085], [0107]), whereas the second polymer provides efficacious encapsulation and optimal compressive strength for flexible electronic device components and exhibits elastic deformation properties to prevent cracking of wiring components (Fournier, [0117]; Leng, Pgs 2-4). In view of the foregoing, one skilled in the art would readily understand that the enhanced rigidity of the molded plastic frame 154/754/954 (third polymer) exhibits a higher elasticity modulus (higher rigidity) than the second polymer as established by known conventional rheological and mechanical characterization of polymeric materials with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143).
Regarding Claim 30, modified Fournier teaches the first material 932 is a potting material filling (molded onto) a gap formed by the concave surface and the first and second display layer 914 flat portions (Fournier, [0116], Fig 14).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fournier et al. (US 2018/008181 A1) in view of Leng et al. (CN 109712530 A, herein English machine translation utilized for all citations) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wendler et al. (US 2011/0102307 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Fournier teaches the electronic device as discussed above for claim 1.
Modified Fournier remains silent regarding the second polymer comprising epoxy.
Wendler, teaches a flexible pixel assembly for use in electronic display devices, where a means for encapsulating and protecting electronics components includes applying and hardening a conventional potting material of epoxy to fill cavities and bond to wall surfaces without separation or overflowing without need of additional adhesion to provide efficacious encapsulation (Wendler, [0003]-[0004], [0011]-[0032], [0045]-[0054]). Wendler teaches the potting material exhibits optimal compressive strength (Wendler, [0046]-[0053]).
Since modified Fournier and Wendler both disclose flexible electronic devices comprising pixel components and Fournier suggests using potting materials that encapsulate for protection and compression for the second polymer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized Wendler’s conventional epoxy potting material for at least modified Fournier’s second polymer to yield a device that exhibits optimal performance characteristics; efficacious encapsulation; and protection from moisture, humidity, electrical, thermal, and mechanical shocks, and other detrimental environmental effects as taught by Wendler (Wendler, [0011]-[0032], [0045]-[0054]).
Claim 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fournier et al. (US 2018/008181 A1), in view of Leng et al. (CN 109712530 A, herein English machine translation utilized for all citations), and in view of Wendler et al. (US 2011/0102307 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Fournier teaches an electronic device comprising a display assembly 902 with a display layer 914 having an array of individual pixels for displaying images (Fournier, Abstract, [0004], [0071], [0083], [0112], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches the display layer 914 has a first flat portion and a second flat portion that are joined by a curved portion having a concave surface and an opposing convex surface (Fournier, [0112]-[0117], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a transparent protective cover 904 (a cover layer) overlapping the display assembly 902 and display layer 914, where the protective cover 904 can be formed of glass (Fournier, [0067], [0072], [0112], [0124], Figs 12, 14). Fournier teaches a first material 932 that can be a potting material filling (molded onto) a gap formed by the concave surface and a second material 934 covering (molded onto) the convex surface (or alternatively frame components 754/854/954) (Fournier, [0111], [0116]-[0117], Figs 12-14).
PNG
media_image1.png
625
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fournier – Figure 14
Fournier remains silent regarding the first material 932 being a polymer material, remains silent regarding a second polymer that encapsulates and is molded onto a part of a convex surface, remains silent regarding the second polymer having a planar surface that is orthogonal to a planar portion of the display layer, remains silent regarding the second polymer is interposed between the display layer and the cover glass, and remains silent regarding the second polymer planar surface extending to the cover glass.
Leng, however, teaches a flexible display device comprising a flexible display substrate 10 provided with a plurality of pixel units (i.e., a display having an array of pixels), a cover plate 40 (i.e., cover layer), a first bending protection layer 30 (see Figure 3; i.e., a second polymer molded onto a convex surface) in direct contact with the cover plate 40, and a second bending protection layer 30 coated in a bent region 13 (see Figure 6; i.e., a first polymer molded onto a concave surface) (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 2-4, Figs 3, 6). Leng’s first bending protection layer 30 (see annotated Figure 3; second polymer molded onto a convex surface) is located between the cover plate 40 and the display substrate 10, and has first and second planar surfaces that extend to the cover plate 40 (Leng, Fig 3). Leng teaches the bending protection layer material is formed of a thermosetting material (i.e., a polymer) that can be a fluid, injected, and then cured to form the bending protection layers shaped/molded to the convex and concave surfaces of the flexible display substrate 10 (Leng, Pgs 2-3, 6, Figs 3, 6).
PNG
media_image6.png
426
668
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 3 (annotated)
PNG
media_image4.png
404
653
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Leng – Figure 6
Since Fournier and Leng both disclose display devices comprising a convex/concave portion having a material formed on each surface, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied Leng’s bending protection layer guidance and materials to form Fournier’s first material 932 in the convex surface and to have added a bending protection layer (second polymer) to Fournier’s convex surface to yield a display device that reduces bending difficulty, reduces bending stress, protects against cracking of wiring components, does not creep over a lapse in time, and yields improved display effects as taught by Leng (Leng, Abstract, Pgs 1-4).
Modified Fournier remains silent regarding the second polymer being an epoxy.
Wendler, teaches a flexible pixel assembly for use in electronic display devices, where a means for encapsulating and protecting electronics components includes applying and hardening a conventional potting material of epoxy to fill cavities and bond to wall surfaces without separation or overflowing without need of additional adhesion to provide efficacious encapsulation (Wendler, [0003]-[0004], [0011]-[0032], [0045]-[0054]). Wendler teaches the potting material exhibits optimal compressive strength (Wendler, [0046]-[0053]).
Since modified Fournier and Wendler both disclose flexible electronic devices comprising pixel components and Fournier suggests using potting materials that encapsulate for protection and compression for the second polymer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized Wendler’s conventional epoxy potting material for at least modified Fournier’s second polymer to yield a device that exhibits optimal performance characteristics; efficacious encapsulation; and protection from moisture, humidity, electrical, thermal, and mechanical shocks, and other detrimental environmental effects as taught by Wendler (Wendler, [0011]-[0032], [0045]-[0054]).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Fournier teaches the electronic device comprises a housing sidewall 714, where the second epoxy polymer (or also molded plastic frame 754/854/954) indirectly couples the display assembly 702/902 in a concave notch 756 with adhesives 762 and 768 to the housing sidewall 714 and the transparent glass protective cover 704/904 (Fournier, [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14; Leng, Fig 3). Modified Fournier teaches the notch 756 is specifically sized to optimize the dimensions and shape to provide a generally continuous and planar configuration for all the aforementioned components; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have coupled all components in an optimized, generally continuous, and planar configuration by the known techniques disclosed by Fournier in a manner that renders obvious the structures of claim 22 with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success (Fournier, [0109]-[0110]; MPEP 2143).
Regarding Claim 23, modified Fournier teaches the second epoxy polymer is attached to the housing sidewall 714 with an adhesive 768 (Fournier, [0109]-[0110], [0117], Figs 12, 14; Leng, Fig 3).
Regarding Claim 24, modified Fournier teaches the first material 932 and second epoxy polymer are formed of conventional epoxy potting material, where the epoxy potting material is a polymer applied, molded/conformed, and hardened to form plastic efficacious encapsulation on the concave and convex surfaces of the display layer 914, respectively (Fournier, [0117]; Wendler, [0045]-[0054]; Leng, Pg 6, Fig 3).
PNG
media_image2.png
447
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fournier – Figure 12
Regarding Claim 25, modified Fournier teaches the second epoxy polymer has a first portion that is interposed between the display layer 914 and the transparent glass protective cover 904, and a second portion that is interposed between the display layer 914 and the housing sidewall 714 (housing sidewall) (Fournier, Figs 12-14; Leng, Fig 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELI D STRAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7088. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 7 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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/Eli D. Strah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782