`
`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
`wwwnsptogov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
` F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`CONF {MATION NO.
`
`12/630, 862
`
`12/04/2009
`
`Satoru KASE
`
`501.50379X00
`
`1548
`
`20457
`
`7590
`
`01/20/2011
`
`ANTONELLLTERRY, STOUT&KRAUS,LLP
`1300 NORTH SEVENTEENTH STREET
`SUITE 1800
`ARLINGTON, VA 22209-3873
`
`SANTONOCITO, MICHAEL P
`
`4154
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`01/20/2011
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`12/630,862
`
`KASE ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Michael Santonocito
`
`Art Unit
`4154
`
`-- 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 1MONTH(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 CFR 1. 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)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 04 December 2009.
`
`a)I:l This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)I:l This action is non-final.
`
`3)|: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
`
`4)IXI CIaIm(s) 1-10 is/are pending in the application.
`
`4a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`5)I:I CIaIm(s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`6)I:l CIaIm(s) _ is/are rejected.
`
`
`7)I:l CIaIm(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`8)|Zl CIaIm(s) -_10 rae subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`OH] The drawing(s) filed on _ is/are: a)|:l accepted or b)I: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).
`
`11)|:l 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
`
`12)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)|:l AII
`
`b)I:l Some * c)|:l None of:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.|:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _
`
`3.|:I 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) D Notice of Draftsperson‘s Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`3) El Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/OS)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date _.
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`4) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper N°(5 )/Mai| Date. _
`5)I:I Notice of Informal Patent Application
`)6|:| Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20110113
`
`
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/630,862
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 4154
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Election/Restrictions
`
`1.
`
`Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C.
`
`121 :
`
`l.
`
`Claims 1-8, drawn to a manufacturing method of a display device,
`
`classified in class 445, subclass 25.
`
`ll.
`
`Claims 9-10, drawn to a display device, classified in class 313,
`
`subclass 512.
`
`The inventions are distinct, each from the other because of the following reasons:
`
`2.
`
`Inventions l and II are related as process of making and product made.
`
`The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that
`
`the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different
`
`product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially
`
`different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)).
`
`In the instant case, as opposed to forming
`
`the resin by hardening via radiation, the product as claimed can be practiced by
`
`another materially different process, such as forming the resin by plasma
`
`enhanced chemical vapor deposition.
`
`3.
`
`Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all
`
`these inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons
`
`given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if
`
`restriction were not required because at least the following reason(s) apply:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/630,862
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 4154
`
`(a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of
`
`their different classification;
`
`(b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their
`
`recognized divergent subject matter;
`
`(c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching
`
`different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different
`
`search queries);
`
`(d) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable
`
`to another invention;
`
`(e) the inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35
`
`U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
`
`Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete
`
`
`must include (i) an election of a invention to be examined even though the
`
`requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the
`
`claims encompassing the elected invention.
`
`The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To
`
`reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply
`
`does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction
`
`requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse.
`
`Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered
`
`timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to
`
`petition under 37 CFR 1.144. lf claims are added after the election, applicant
`
`must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/630,862
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 4154
`
`If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of
`
`these claims are readable upon the elected invention
`
`Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not
`
`patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence
`
`now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on
`
`the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the
`
`inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be
`
`used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
`
`4.
`
`A telephone call was made to Melvin Kraus on 13 January 2011 to request
`
`an oral election to the above restriction requirement, but did not result in an
`
`election being made.
`
`5.
`
`Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected
`
`invention, the inventorship must be amended in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(b)
`
`if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at
`
`least one claim remaining in the application. Any amendment of inventorship
`
`must be accompanied by a request under 37 CFR 1.48(b) and by the fee
`
`required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
`
`6.
`
`The examiner has required restriction between product and process
`
`claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product, and the product
`
`claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that depend
`
`from or otherwise require all the limitations of the allowable product claim will be
`
`considered for rejoinder. fl claims directed to a nonelected process invention
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/630,862
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 4154
`
`must require all the limitations of an allowable product claim for that process
`
`invention to be rejoined.
`
`In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the
`
`product claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the
`
`rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with
`
`37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria
`
`for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112.
`
`Until all claims to the elected product are found allowable, an otherwise proper
`
`restriction requirement between product claims and process claims may be
`
`maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with
`
`an allowable product claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821 .04(b).
`
`Additionally, in order to retain the right to rejoinder in accordance with the above
`
`policy, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during
`
`prosecution to require the limitations of the product claims. Failure to do so may
`
`result in a loss of the right to rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition
`
`against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the
`
`restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues.
`
`See MPEP § 804.01.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from
`
`the examiner should be directed to Michael Santonocito whose telephone
`
`number is 571 -270-7364. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday
`
`through Thursday from 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM EST.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 12/630,862
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 4154
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
`
`examiner’s supervisor, Patrick Assouad can be reached on 571 -272—221 0. 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.
`
`/M. S./
`
`/Toan Ton/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 4154
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2889
`
`