`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313- 1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
`
` F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`CONF {MATION NO.
`
`12/153,568
`
`05/21/2008
`
`Mutsuko Hatano
`
`ASAM—0285
`
`7887
`
`7590
`9999,9919
`JuancaflosAMmq —
`c/o Stites & Harbison PLLC
`BURKHART9 ELIZABETH A
`1199 North Fairfax Street
`9119999
`Alexandria, VA 223 14- 1437
`
`NM
`
`1715
`
`
`
`
`NOT *ICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/22/2013
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/0r attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`iplaw @ stites.com
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
` 12/153,568 HATANO ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`ELIZABETH BURKHART
`1715
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS,
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136(a).
`In no event however may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)|Zl Responsive to communication(s) filed on 12 October 2012.
`
`2a)IZI This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`
`3)|:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:l Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`5)IZ Claim(s) 1-5 and9 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6)|:| Claim(s)_ is/are allowed.
`
`7)|Xl Claim(s) 1-5_and9 is/are rejected.
`
`8)I:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`9)|:I Claim((s)
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway
`program at a participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`httn:i/www usntq. quwua'ertslanr events/
`h/index.'s or send an inquiry to PPeredback us toxev.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:| The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)|:l The drawing(s) filed on _ is/are: a)|:l accepted or b)|:l objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`12)|:| The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`13)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)|:l All
`
`b)I:I Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _
`
`3.|:l Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`1) I] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`2) I] Notice of Draftsperson‘s Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`3) I] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date _.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`4) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper N0(S )/Mai| Date. _
`5)I:I NOTICQ 0f Informal Patent Application
`6)I:I Other:—
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 01-12)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20130113
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/153,568
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 1715
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1-5 and 9 are pending in the application. The amendment filed
`
`10/12/2012 has been entered and carefully considered.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed
`or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the
`
`subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject
`matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made
`
`to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was
`made.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Shimoda et al (US 2002/0146893) in view of French et al (US 2007/0091062), Chang et
`
`al (US 2002/0031605), and lnoue et al (US 2003/0040164).
`
`Shimoda discloses a method of making a display device comprising: forming a
`
`resin material layer 2 on a main surface of a glass substrate 1 [0109], forming a plurality
`
`of lamination material layers 4 configuring a display circuit on the resin material layer
`
`[0119], and generating exfoliation at the interface between the resin material layer and
`
`glass substrate by irradiating light from the surface on the opposite side of the glass
`
`substrate [0100] (Fig. 5 & 7). The resin material layer may be polyimide [0109]. The
`
`display circuit includes a polarization plate to form an active matrix LCD (Fig. 36; [0119];
`
`[0368D.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/153,568
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 1715
`
`Shimoda does not disclose using the resin material layer from which the glass
`
`substrate is removed as a substrate for the display device, that the resin material layer
`
`is formed by curing the resin, or that an oriented film is formed on the polarizing plate.
`
`French discloses forming a display device wherein a rigid glass substrate is
`
`removed from a plastic substrate after deposition of the display circuits such that
`
`conventional substrate handling and processing is enabled with minimal extra
`
`equipment (Abstract). The plastic substrate enables lighter and thinner display devices
`
`[0002]. The plastic substrate may be polyimide [0068].
`
`Chang discloses that polyimide for a display device may be coated on a
`
`substrate and then cured to form a film [0007].
`
`lnoue discloses a method of forming an active matrix liquid crystal display (LCD)
`
`wherein an oriented film is used for orienting a liquid crystal layer (Fig. 26; [0262]-
`
`[0263]
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`invention by applicant to use the resin material layer (i.e. polyimide) of Shimoda as the
`
`substrate for the display device as suggested by French in order to form thinner and
`
`lighter display devices. Further, it would have been obvious to form the polyimide layer
`
`of Shimoda or French by curing the resin on the substrate as suggested by Chang since
`
`it was a known method of depositing a polyimide film on a substrate for a display
`
`device. Further, it would have been obvious to include an oriented film on the polarizing
`
`plate of Shimoda as suggested by lnoue since it was common for orientation of liquid
`
`crystal layers.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/153,568
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 1715
`
`Regarding Claims 3 and 4, Shimoda discloses forming a barrier layer 3 between
`
`the resin layer 2 and the display circuit 4. The barrier layer may be silicon oxide [0115]-
`
`[0116}
`
`Regarding Claim 5, Shimoda discloses that the display circuit includes a thin film
`
`transistor [0119] (Fig. 36).
`
`Thus, claims 1-5 would have been obvious within the meaning of 35 USC 103
`
`over the combined teachings of Shimoda, French, Chang, and lnoue
`
`3.
`
`Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shimoda
`
`et al (US 2002/0146893) in view of French et al (US 2007/0091062), Chang et al (US
`
`2002/0031605), and lnoue et al (US 2003/0040164) as applied above and further in
`
`view of Kim et al (US 2006/0043889).
`
`Shimoda, French, Chang, and lnoue do not disclose forming an electric
`
`conductive film on the glass substrate and forming the coated resin (e.g. polyimide) on
`
`the electric conductive film.
`
`Kim discloses forming a display device wherein an electric conductive anti-static
`
`layer is formed on a donor substrate to suppress static electricity that may occur when
`
`the donor substrate is detached. The antistatic layer may be ZnO [0033].
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`invention by applicant to form an electric conductive layer as suggested by Kim on the
`
`glass substrate of Shimoda or French in order to suppress static electricity when
`
`removing the glass substrate.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/153,568
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 1715
`
`Thus, claim 9 would have been obvious within the meaning of 35 USC 103 over
`
`the combined teachings of Shimoda, French, Chang, Inoue, and Kim.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`4.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 10/12/2012 have been fully considered but they are
`
`not persuasive. Applicant argues that lnoue discloses that a polarizing plate and an
`
`oriented film are placed on opposite sides without lamination thereof, and thus teaches
`
`away from the claimed invention of forming an oriented film on the polarizing plate. The
`
`Examiner disagrees. lnoue teaches that an active matrix board 440, which is on a
`
`polarizing plate 420, may have an orientation film (not shown) thereon for orienting a
`
`liquid crystal layer (Fig. 26; [0262]). Thus, the orientation film of lnoue is on the
`
`polarizing plate, although not in direct contact. The claims as presently written do not
`
`require that the oriented film and the polarizing plate be in direct contact with one
`
`another, nor do they exclude intervening layers.
`
`Conclusion
`
`5.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR1.136(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
`
`extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/153,568
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 1715
`
`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 ELIZABETH BURKHART whose telephone number is
`
`(571)272-6647. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 6:30-3:00.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Timothy Meeks can be reached on 571-272—1423. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272—1000.
`
`/Elizabeth Burkhart/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 1715
`
`