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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12374239 B2 (hereinafter ‘239 patent), in further view of Kishimoto et al., US 20220100234 A1 (hereinafter “Kishimoto”).
Claims of ‘239 patent
Claims of pending application
1. A display apparatus comprising:
a display module having a folding area and inflection areas respectively on both sides of the folding area in a first direction;
a third layer on a surface of the display module that is opposite to a display surface of the display module;
a first layer on a surface of the third layer that is opposite to the display module; and
a second layer on a surface of the first layer that is opposite to the third layer,
wherein a first empty space is defined between the display module and the second layer in a thickness direction in at least one of the inflection areas, and a second empty space is defined from the third layer entirely through the first layer and the second layer in the thickness direction at a center of the folding area,
wherein the second layer extends continuously over the first empty space in the first direction, and
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, the second layer is a digitizer layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer.
1. A display apparatus comprising:
a display module having a folding area in a first direction;
a third layer on a surface of the display module that is opposite to a display surface of the display module;
the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module;
a first layer on a surface of the third layer that is opposite to the display module; and
a second layer on a surface of the first layer that is opposite to the third layer,
wherein a first empty space is defined between the display module and the second layer in a thickness direction in at least an area adjacent to the folding area,
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, the second layer is a digitizer layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer.
2. The display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first layer forms a space portion defining the first empty space.
2. The display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first layer forms a space portion defining the first empty space.
3. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is rectangular.
3. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is rectangular.
4. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is semi-elliptical.
4. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is semi-elliptical.
5. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
5. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
6. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion is a first space portion,
wherein the first layer forms a second space portion defining the second empty space, and
wherein the first and second space portions are spaced apart from each other in the first direction.
6. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion is a first space portion,
wherein the first layer forms a second space portion defining a second empty space which is defined at a center of the folding area, and
wherein the first and second space portions are spaced apart from each other in the first direction.
7. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion extends through an entire thickness of the first layer.
7. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion extends through an entire thickness of the first layer.
8. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion extends through less than an entire a thickness of the first layer.
8. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion extends through less than an entire a thickness of the first layer.
9. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein,
when the display module is folded, the inflection areas have an inflection point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and
wherein the first empty space is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding inflection point.
9. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein,
when the display module is folded, the area adjacent to the folding area have a bending point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and
wherein the first empty space is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding bending point.
10. The display apparatus of claim 9, wherein a height of the space portion is maximum at the inflection point.
10. The display apparatus of claim 9, wherein a height of the space portion is maximum at the bending point.
11. The display apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first layer comprises a first protective member in the folding area with respect to the inflection areas and
a second protective member that is different from the first protective member on a side opposite to the folding area.
11. The display apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first layer comprises a first protective member in the folding area and
a second protective member that is different from the first protective member in the area adjacent to the folding area.
12. The display apparatus of claim 11, wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member.
12. The display apparatus of claim 11, wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member.
13. The display apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the first layer and the second layer are separated in a center of the folding area.
13. The display apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the first layer and the second layer are separated in a center of the folding area.
14. A method of manufacturing a display apparatus, the method comprising:
preparing a display module having a folding area and inflection areas respectively on both sides of the folding area in a first direction;
disposing a third layer on a surface of the display module opposite to a display surface of the display module;
disposing a first layer having a first space portion and a second space portion on a surface of the third layer opposite to the display module to form a first empty space below at least one of the inflection areas and a second empty space at a center of the folding area and continuously extending from the third layer through the first layer; and
disposing a second layer on a surface of the first layer opposite to the third layer to extend continuously over the first empty space in the first direction and having an opening at the center of the folding area open to the second empty space,
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, the second layer is a digitizer layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer.
14. A method of manufacturing a display apparatus, the method comprising:
preparing a display module having a folding area;
disposing a third layer on a surface of the display module opposite to a display surface of the display module;
disposing a first layer having a first space portion on a surface of the third layer opposite to the display module to form a first empty space in an area adjacent to the folding area; and
disposing a second layer on a surface of the first layer opposite to the third layer to extend continuously over the first empty space in a first direction,
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, the second layer is a digitizer layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the first space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the first space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
16. The method of claim 14, wherein the first space portion extends through a portion of a thickness of the first layer.
16. The method of claim 14, wherein the first space portion extends through a portion of a thickness of the first layer.
17. The method of claim 14,
wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises:
arranging a first protective member in the folding area of the first layer with respect to the at least one of the inflection areas; and
arranging a second protective member, which is different from the first protective member, on a side opposite to the folding area.
17. The method of claim 14,
wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises:
arranging a first protective member in the folding area of the first layer; and
arranging a second protective member, which is different from the first protective member, in the area adjacent to the folding area.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member.
19. The method of claim 14, wherein,
when the display module is folded, the inflection areas have an inflection point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and
wherein the first space portion is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding inflection point.
19. The method of claim 14, wherein, when the display module is folded, the areas area adjacent to the folding area have a bending point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and wherein the first space portion is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding the bending point.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises disposing the first layer so that a thickness of the first layer is minimum at the inflection point.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises disposing the first layer so that a thickness of the first layer is minimum at the bending point.
Regarding claims 1-20, although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. In particular, the “area adjacent to the folding area” as claimed in pending application is referred as “inflection area” in ‘239 patent, the “bending point” of pending application is referred as “inflection point” in ‘239 patent, and every claim limitations of pending application is covered by scope of ‘239 patent.
All claimed subject matter of instant applicant is disclosed by claims 1-20 of ‘239 patent except for the claim clause wherein the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module.
Claims of ‘239 patent discloses, as in claims of pending application, that the third layer is a support plate layer.
In similar filed endeavor of display device, Kishimoto discloses the concept of a support layer in display device may continuously extending across the entire surface of a display module (fig. 3A, paragraphs 105-113, support layer / shoch absorbing layer 370 extending continuously across entire surface of display module 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring a support plate layer of display device to extend across surface of display module, such as disclosed by Kishimoto, into the display device of ‘239 patent, such that the third lay of ‘239 patent as a support layer extend across surface of display module, to constitute the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module, such is incorporation of a known concept into a known device to yield predictable result, the result would have been predictable and would allow support plate layer to support display module.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman et al., US 20220102671 A1 (hereinafter “Boardman”), in further view of Li, US 20180375040 A1 (hereinafter “Li”), and Kishimoto et al., US 20220100234 A1 (hereinafter “Kishimoto”).
Regarding claim 1, Boardman discloses a display apparatus (see abstract, display panel) comprising:
a display module (fig. 2-6, display panel 220, 320, 420, 520, or 620, paragraph 59, 69) having a folding area (fig. 2-6, see annotated figure below, folding area 222B, 322B, 422B, 522B, or 622B, paragraphs 61-63) in a first direction;
a third layer on a surface of the display module that is opposite to a display surface of the display modules (fig. 2-6, adhesive layer 222, 322, 422, 522, 622, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100);
a first layer on a surface of the display module that is opposite to a display surface of the display module (shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 as the claimed first layer, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100, 105); and
a second layer on a surface of the first layer that is opposite to the display module (fig. 2-6, housing layer 240, 340, 440, 540 or 640 as the claimed second layer, paragraphs 65, 67, 84, 100, 106),
wherein a first empty space is defined between the display module and the second layer in a thickness direction in at least an area adjacent to the folding area (see annotated figure below, “inflection area” as the claimed “at least an area adjacent to the folding area” near 224A/B, 324A/B, 424A/B, 525A/B, 624A/B, or, 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B, each pair may be individuality interpreted as the inflection area wherein folding curve changes, paragraphs 61-63, 70, 85, 86, 101, 109, the inflection area include first empty space).
PNG
media_image1.png
543
848
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer (fig. 2-6, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100, first layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 is a shock absorber layer / cushion layer, and third layer adhesive layer 222, 322, 422, 522, 622 provide support to display module above).
Boardman does not disclose in particular the second layer is a digitizer layer.
In similar field of flexible display device, Li discloses a flexible display device having a display module (fig. 3B, fig. 5, display layer 2 / 200, paragraph 62, display layer 200), a first layer (fig. 3B, fig. 5, adhesive layer 31/32/301, paragraph 54, plurality of adhesive part which are spaced apart) forming spaces on both sides of a folding area (fig. 3b, fig. 5, folding direction), and a second layer disposed opposite to the display module away from the folding direction of flexible panel, wherein the second layer comprises a digitizer layer (fig. 5, paragraph 62, touch layer 100).
Both Boardman and Li discloses flexible display apparatus with second layer dispose away from display layer toward direction away from bending direction of the display device, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring the second layer of display device as digitizer layer, such as disclosed by Li, into the display device of Boardman for the second layer to comprise digitizing function, to constitute, wherein the second layer is a digitizer layer, the result would have been predictable and would allow the display to digitize touch input while at the same time to be flexible to accommodate various usage conditions.
Boardman in view of Li does not discloses in particular wherein the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module;
In similar filed endeavor of display device, Kishimoto discloses the concept of a support layer in display device may continuously extending across the entire surface of a display module (fig. 3A, paragraphs 97, 98, 114, support layer formed by adhesive layer 1010 or 1020 extend across entire surface of display module 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring a support plate layer of display device to extend across surface of display module, such as disclosed by Kishimoto, into the display device of Boardman in view of Li, such that the adhesive layer of Boardman in view of Li as a support layer extend across surface of display module, to constitute the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module, such is incorporation of a known concept into a known device to yield predictable result, the result would have been predictable and would allow adhesive layer to support display module.
Regarding claim 2, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first layer forms a space portion defining the empty space (see annotated figure in rejection of claim 1 above, Boardman, fig. 2-6, space portion 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B etc. formed by shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 as the claimed first layer, paragraphs 61-63, 70, 85, 86, 101, 109).
Regarding claim 3, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is rectangular (see annotated figure in rejection of claim 1 above, Boardman, fig. 2-6, rectangular space portion 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B etc. formed by shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 as the claimed first layer).
Regarding claim 7, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses wherein the space portion extends through an entire thickness of the first layer (see annotated figure in rejection of claim 1 above, Boardman, fig. 2-6, space portion 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B etc. extends through an entire thickness of the shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 as the claimed first layer, paragraphs 61-63, 70, 85, 86, 101, 109).
Regarding claim 9, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein, when the display module is folded, the area adjacent to the folding area have a bending point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and wherein the first empty space is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding inflection point (see embodiment in Boardman, fig. 4, paragraphs 82-87, annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
630
819
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 9, wherein a height of the space portion is maximum at the bending point (see Boardman, annotated fig. 4 from rejection of claim 9 above, the space in layer 224 forms a substantially rectangular shape with parallel edges and a constant height/thickness across the range, hence, at the bending point as well across the bending areas, the height/thickness of the space portion is at a maximum level, and thickness of the first layer is at a minimum level).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses (from claim 11) the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first layer comprises a first protective member in the folding area and a second protective member that is different from the first protective member in the area adjacent to the folding area, and (from claim 12) wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member (Boardman, fig. 6, paragraphs 105-109, see annotated figure below, paragraph 108, the shock absorber layer 632A-636A in folding area as overall less thickness and rigidity than shock absorber layer 632B-636B on other sides of inflection areas).
PNG
media_image3.png
824
1043
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the first layer and the second layer are separated in a center of the folding area (see Boardman, embodiment in fig. 5, paragraphs 99-101, annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
900
1167
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, as applied in rejection of claim 1 above, in further view of Yee, US 20210104694 A1 (hereinafter “Yee”)
Regarding claim 4, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2.
Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is semi-elliptical.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Yee discloses flexible display device with folding area (fig. 1, fig. 6, flexible display device with folding area FA), wherein it is taught spacing formed in material layer near folding area may optionally formed with semi-elliptical cross-sectional shape (fig. 6, paragraphs 99-102, air gap spacing formed in bending layer 200 having semi-elliptical cross-sectional shape).
PNG
media_image5.png
540
735
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto and Yee disclose flexible display panel with spacing defined by bending/folding layer near folding area, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose the spacing formed by the first bending layer is of a semi-elliptical cross-sectional shape. Yee discloses similar display panel with bending/folding layer defining a semi-elliptical cross-sectional shape. Since Applicant has failed to disclose that specifying the cross-sectional shape of spacing formed by bending/folding layer of flexible display device to be semi-elliptical shape (instead of other shape such as rectangular) provides any distinct advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring spacing of flexible layer to have a semi-elliptical shape such as disclosed by Yee, into the display device of Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, to constitute wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is semi-elliptical, the predictable result of providing spacing in the first layer near folding / inflection area of flexible display device to facilitate bending/folding of the display device would have been the same.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, as applied in rejection of claim 1 above, in further view of Ai et al, US 10020462 B2 (hereinafter “Ai”)
Regarding claim 5, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2.
Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Ai discloses flexible display device with folding area (fig. 5-13, flexible display device 14 with flexible area 14), wherein it is taught spacing formed in material layer near folding area may optionally formed with concave-convex cross-sectional shape (fig. 8, col. 5, ln. 52 – col 6, ln. 45, groove spacing formed in bending layer 24 having concave-convex shape).
PNG
media_image6.png
610
722
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto and Ai disclose flexible display panel with spacing defined by bending/folding layer near folding area, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose the spacing formed by the first bending layer is of a concave-convex cross-sectional shape. Ai discloses similar display panel with bending/folding layer defining a concave-convex cross-sectional shape. Since Applicant has failed to disclose that specifying the cross-sectional shape of spacing formed by bending/folding layer of flexible display device to be concave-convex shape (instead of other shape such as rectangular) provides any distinct advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring spacing of flexible layer to have a concave-convex shape such as disclosed by Ai, into the display device of Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, to constitute wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is concave-convex, the predictable result of providing spacing in the first layer near folding / inflection area of flexible display device to facilitate bending/folding of the display device would have been the same.
Regarding claim 8, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose wherein the space portion extends through less than an entire a thickness of the first layer.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Ai discloses flexible display device with folding area (fig. 5-13, flexible display device 14 with flexible area 14), wherein it is taught spacing formed in material layer near folding area may optionally extends through less than an entire thickness of a first flexible layer (fig. 9-11, col. 5, ln. 52 – col 6, ln. 45, groove spacing formed in bending layer 24 not extending through entire thickness).
PNG
media_image7.png
586
824
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto and Ai disclose flexible display panel with spacing defined by bending/folding layer near folding area, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose the spacing formed may extend through less than a full thickness of a first flexible layer. Ai discloses similar display panel with bending/folding layer having spacing not extending through the entire thickness. Since Applicant has failed to disclose that specifying spacings in flexible layer extending or not extending through entire thickness of the flexible layer provides any distinct advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring spacing of flexible layer to not extend through an entire thickness of a flexible layer, such as disclosed by Ai, into the display device of Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, to constitute wherein the space portion extends through less than an entire a thickness of the first layer, the predictable result of providing spacing in the first layer near folding / inflection area of flexible display device to facilitate bending/folding of the display device would have been the same.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, as applied in rejection of claim 1 above, in further view of Min, US 20210141418 A1 (hereinafter “Min”).
Regarding claim 6, Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto discloses the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the space portion is a first space portion (see annotated figure in rejection of claim 1 above, Boardman, fig. 2-6, first space portion 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B etc. formed by shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 paragraphs 61-63, 70, 85, 86, 101, 109)
Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto does not disclose in particular wherein the first layer forms a second space portion defining a second empty space which is defined at a center of the folding area, and wherein the first and second space portions are spaced apart from each other in the first direction.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Min discloses a flexible display panel (paragraph 79) with first empty space (fig. 8B, 8C, paragraphs 118-125, layer AL4 with uneven patterns UEP1 and UEP2) and a second empty space defined between a display surface (fig. 7, DA) and a second layer (fig. 8B, 8C, layer SP) at a center of the folding area (fig. 8B, 8C, paragraphs 118-125, layer AL4 with uneven patterns UEP3) defined in an intermediate first layer (fig. 8B, 8C, layer AL4) between the display module and the second layer, that the first empty space and the second empty space are defined in the first layer, wherein the space portion is a first space portion and wherein the first layer forms a second space portion defining a second empty space which is defined at a center of the folding area, and wherein the first and second space portions are spaced apart from each other in the first direction (Min, fig. 8B, 8C, UEP1 and UEP2 corresponds to the claimed first space portion, UEP3 corresponding to the claimed second space portion).
PNG
media_image8.png
916
782
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
788
807
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto and Min disclose flexible display device with substrate layers accommodating for bending of display module, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of forming first layer with different empty space portions and forming second layer continuously over first empty space to facilitate bending of flexible display, such as disclosed by Min, into the flexible module of Boardman in view of Li and Kishimoto, to constitute wherein the first layer forms a second space portion defining a second empty space which is defined at a center of the folding area, and wherein the first and second space portions are spaced apart from each other in the first direction, such is incorporation of known concept into known device to yield predictable result, the predictable result of allowing display device to be bend would have been the same.
Claims 14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto.
Regarding claim 14, Boarderman discloses a method of manufacturing a display apparatus (see abstract, display panel), the method comprising:
preparing a display module (fig. 2-6, display panel 220, 320, 420, 520, or 620, paragraph 59, 69) having a folding area (fig. 2-6, see annotated figure below, folding area 222B, 322B, 422B, 522B, or 622B, paragraphs 61-63);
disposing a third layer on a surface of the display module opposite to a display surface of the display module (fig. 2-6, adhesive layer 222, 322, 422, 522, 622, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100);
disposing a first layer having a first space portion on a surface of the third layer opposite to the display module to form a first empty space in an area adjacent to the folding area (shock absorber layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 as the claimed first layer, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100, 105, see annotated figure below, “inflection area” as the claimed “an area adjacent to the folding area” near 224A/B, 324A/B, 424A/B, 525A/B, 624A/B, or, 228A/B, 328A/B, 428A/B, each pair may be individuality interpreted as the inflection area wherein folding curve changes, paragraphs 61-63, 70, 85, 86, 101, 109, the inflection area include first empty space); and
PNG
media_image1.png
543
848
media_image1.png
Greyscale
disposing a second layer on a surface of the first layer opposite to the third layer (fig. 2-6, housing layer 240, 340, 440, 540 or 640 as the claimed second layer, paragraphs 65, 67, 84, 100, 106),
wherein the first layer is a cushion layer, and the third layer is a support plate layer (fig. 2-6, paragraphs 59, 67, 70, 82, 100, first layer 230, 330, 430, 530, 630 is a shock absorber layer / cushion layer, and third layer adhesive layer 222, 322, 422, 522, 622 provide support to display module above).
Boardman does not disclose in particular the second layer extend continuously over the first empty space in a first direction.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Min discloses a flexible display panel (paragraph 79) with first empty space (fig. 8B, 8C, paragraphs 118-125, layer AL4 with uneven patterns UEP1 and UEP2) and a second empty space defined between a display surface (fig. 7, DA) and a second layer (fig. 8B, 8C, layer SP) at a center of the folding area (fig. 8B, 8C, paragraphs 118-125, layer AL4 with uneven patterns UEP3) defined in an intermediate first layer (fig. 8B, 8C, layer AL4) between the display module and the second layer, wherein the second layer extends continuously over the first empty space in the first direction.
PNG
media_image9.png
788
807
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman and Min disclose flexible display device with substrate layers accommodating for bending of display module, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of forming first layer with different empty space portions and forming second layer continuously over first empty space to facilitate bending of flexible display, such as disclosed by Min, into the flexible module of Boardman, to constitute wherein the second layer extends continuously over the first empty space in the first direction, such is incorporation of known concept into known device to yield predictable result, the predictable result of allowing display device to be bend would have been the same.
Boardman in view of Min does not disclose in particular the second layer is a digitizer layer.
In similar field of flexible display device, Li discloses a flexible display device having a display module (fig. 3B, fig. 5, display layer 2 / 200, paragraph 62, display layer 200), a first layer (fig. 3B, fig. 5, adhesive layer 31/32/301, paragraph 54, plurality of adhesive part which are spaced apart) forming spaces on both sides of a folding area (fig. 3b, fig. 5, folding direction), and a second layer disposed opposite to the display module away from the folding direction of flexible panel, wherein the second layer comprises a digitizer layer (fig. 5, paragraph 62, touch layer 100).
Both Boardman in view of Min and Li discloses flexible display apparatus with second layer dispose away from display layer toward direction away from bending direction of the display device, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring the second layer of display device as digitizer layer, such as disclosed by Li, into the display device of Boardman in view of Min, for the second layer to comprise digitizing function, to constitute wherein the second layer is a digitizer layer, the result would have been predictable and would allow the display to digitize touch input while at the same time to be flexible to accommodate various usage conditions.
Boardman in view of Min and Li does not discloses in particular wherein the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module;
In similar filed endeavor of display device, Kishimoto discloses the concept of a support layer in display device may continuously extending across the entire surface of a display module (fig. 3A, paragraphs 97, 98, 114, support layer formed by adhesive layer 1010 or 1020 extend across entire surface of display module 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring a support plate layer of display device to extend across surface of display module, such as disclosed by Kishimoto, into the display device of Boardman in view of Min and Li, such that the adhesive layer of Boardman in view of Min and Li as a support layer extend across surface of display module, to constitute the third layer continuously extending across the entire surface of the display module, such is incorporation of a known concept into a known device to yield predictable result, the result would have been predictable and would allow adhesive layer to support display module.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto discloses (from claim 17) the method of claim 14, wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises: arranging a first protective member in the folding are of the first layer, and arranging a second protective member, which is different from the first protective member, in the area adjacent to the folding area, and (from claim 18) wherein a rigidity of the second protective member is greater than a rigidity of the first protective member (Boardman, fig. 6, paragraphs 105-109, see annotated figure below, paragraph 108, the shock absorber layer 632A-636A in folding area as overall less thickness and rigidity than shock absorber layer 632B-636B on other sides of inflection areas).
PNG
media_image3.png
824
1043
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto discloses the method of claim 14, wherein, when the display module is folded, the area adjacent to the folding area have a bending point at which a rate of change of a slope of the display module changes from positive to negative or from negative to positive in the first direction, and wherein the first space portion is symmetrical with respect to the corresponding inflection point (see embodiment in Boardman, fig. 4, paragraphs 82-87, annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
630
819
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the disposing of the first layer comprises disposing the first layer so that a thickness of the first layer is minimum at the bending point (see Boardman, annotated fig. 4 from rejection of claim 19 above, the space in layer 224 forms a substantially rectangular shape with parallel edges and a constant height/thickness across the range, hence, at the bending point as well across the bending areas, the height/thickness of the space portion is at a maximum level, and thickness of the first layer is at a minimum level).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto, as applied in rejection of claim 14 above, and in further view of Ai.
Regarding claim 15, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto discloses the method of claim 14.
Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose wherein a cross-sectional shape of the first space portion in the first direction is concave-convex.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Ai discloses flexible display device with folding area (fig. 5-13, flexible display device 14 with flexible area 14), wherein it is taught spacing formed in material layer near folding area may optionally formed with concave-convex cross-sectional shape (fig. 8, col. 5, ln. 52 – col 6, ln. 45, groove spacing formed in bending layer 24 having concave-convex shape).
PNG
media_image6.png
610
722
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto, as well as Ai disclose flexible display panel with spacing defined by bending/folding layer near folding area, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose the spacing formed by the first bending layer is of a concave-convex cross-sectional shape. Ai discloses similar display panel with bending/folding layer defining a concave-convex cross-sectional shape. Since Applicant has failed to disclose that specifying the cross-sectional shape of spacing formed by bending/folding layer of flexible display device to be concave-convex shape (instead of other shape such as rectangular) provides any distinct advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring spacing of flexible layer to have a concave-convex shape such as disclosed by Ai, into the display device of Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto, to constitute wherein a cross-sectional shape of the space portion in the first direction is concave-convex, the predictable result of providing spacing in the first layer near folding / inflection area of flexible display device to facilitate bending/folding of the display device would have been the same.
Regarding claim 16, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto discloses the method of claim 14, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose wherein the first space portion extends through less than an entire a thickness of the first layer.
In similar field of endeavor of flexible display device, Ai discloses flexible display device with folding area (fig. 5-13, flexible display device 14 with flexible area 14), wherein it is taught spacing formed in material layer near folding area may optionally extends through less than an entire thickness of a first flexible layer (fig. 9-11, col. 5, ln. 52 – col 6, ln. 45, groove spacing formed in bending layer 24 not extending through entire thickness).
PNG
media_image7.png
586
824
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Both Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto, as well as Ai disclose flexible display panel with spacing defined by bending/folding layer near folding area, Boardman in view of Min, Li and Kishimoto does not specifically disclose the spacing formed may extend through less than a full thickness of a first flexible layer. Ai discloses similar display panel with bending/folding layer having spacing not extending through the entire thickness. Since Applicant has failed to disclose that specifying spacings in flexible layer extending or not extending through entire thickness of the flexible layer provides any distinct advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem, it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the concept of configuring spacing of flexible layer to not extend through an entire thickness of a flexible layer, such as disclosed by Ai, into the display device of Boardman in view of Min and Li, to constitute wherein the first space portion extends through a portion of a thickness of the first layer, the predictable result of providing spacing in the first layer near folding / inflection area of flexible display device to facilitate bending/folding of the display device would have been the same.
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 PEIJIE SHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5522. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM - 6PM.
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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 5712727603. 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.
/PEIJIE SHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2622
/PATRICK N EDOUARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Prosecution Insights