vs! “111%
`\.\_:
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`15/498,053
`
`04/26/2017
`
`Takeki SATO
`
`20326.0101Usw1
`
`3164
`
`05/31/2018 —HAMRE, SCHUMANN,MUELLER&LARSONP.C. m
`7590
`53148
`45 South Seventh Street
`CATTANACH’ COLINJ
`Suite 2700
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402- 1683
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`2875
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/31/2018
`
`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):
`PTOMail @hsml.com
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 15/498,053 SATO ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventorto File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`2875COLIN CATTANACH $233
`
`-- 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 g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`after SIX (6) 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).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`-
`-
`
`Status
`
`1)IXI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 16AQI’i/ 2018.
`[I A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:| This action is non-final.
`2a)IZ| This action is FINAL.
`3)I: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)|:I 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 EX parte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PT0_413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`—
`4) I:I Other'
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date .
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180519
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)|XI C|aim(s) 1-5 and 7-9 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6 III Claim s) _ is/are allowed.
`s 1-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected.
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`I )
`
`_
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)|:l C|aim(s
`I
`* 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
` S
`htt
`://www.usoto. ov/ atents/init events) .h/index.‘
`
`
`
`
`
`, or send an inquiry to PF"I-Ifeedback{<‘buspto.qov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Z| The drawing(s) filed on 26 AQri/2017is/are: a)IXI 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).
`
`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).
`Certified copies:
`
`b)I:I Some” c)I:I None of the:
`a)|:l All
`1.I:I 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.I: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)
`
`
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA 0r AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`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 Amendment
`
`2.
`
`Applicant's amendment filed on 16 April 2018 has been entered. Claims 1 and 8 have
`
`been amended. Claim 6 has been cancelled. No claims have been added. Claims 1—5 and 7—9 are
`
`still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent.
`
`3.
`
`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 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.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the
`
`basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
`
`A person shall be entitled to a patent unless ,
`
`(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or
`otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng
`
`et al. (US 2012/0113351Al).
`
`6.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Cheng discloses et al. (Fig. 2) a display panel (290); a backlight unit
`
`(200, including an outer frame 210, and inner frame 220); and a double—sided adhesive tape (240,
`
`242) that fixedly bonds the display panel (290) and the backlight unit (to portion 220, 210, 220)
`
`to each other (paragraphs [0023]—[0025]), the double—sided adhesive tape comprising a main
`
`adhesive body (i.e. the body forming 240) and a tab (242) extending from the main adhesive
`
`body (as shown in Fig. 2), wherein at least a part of the tab (242) protrudes outward from an end
`
`portion of the display panel in planar view (from portion 250 at an end corner of the display
`
`panel 290, as shown in Fig. 2), and wherein the tab (242) is within an area defined by extensions
`
`of lateral edges of the main adhesive body (tab 242 is within an area defined by extensions
`
`[represented by dashed lines C and D] of the lateral edges of the main adhesive body
`
`[represented by dashed lines A and B] as shown in annotated Fig. 2 provided below).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`
`
`7.
`
`Regarding claim 7, Cheng et al. discloses (Fig. 2) the tab (242) is made of a material
`
`identical to a material of the double—sided adhesive tape (the tab 242 is an extending portion of
`
`formed integrally with 240, and thus is made of an identical material to 240, paragraphs [0024]—
`
`[0025]).
`
`8.
`
`Regarding claim 9, Cheng et al. discloses (Fig. 2) the double—sided adhesive tape (240,
`
`242) has a property in which adhesive strength is lowered when tensile force in a direction
`
`parallel to a bonding surface is applied to the double—sided adhesive tape in a state where the
`
`display panel and the backlight unit are bonded together (as described in paragraph [0025]).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`9.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 USC. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`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.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 2—5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al.
`
`11.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Cheng et al. teaches or suggests (Fig. 2) the backlight unit includes a
`
`frame (210, 220) holding the display panel (290), the frame includes a sidewall (216) extending
`
`in a thickness direction of the display panel (as shown in Fig. 2) and a mounting portion (224)
`
`extending horizontally inward from a position below a top surface of each of the sidewall (as
`
`shown in Fig. 2, having a portion on the comer of the frame, and additional portions adjacent
`
`thereto covered by 240, paragraph [0023]), the mounting portion (224) on which a peripheral
`
`portion of the display panel (290) is mounted (paragraph [0023]), and a notch (250) is formed in
`
`the sidewall to dispose the tab (as shown in Fig. 2).
`
`12.
`
`Cheng et al. does not teach or suggest said sidewall comprises four sidewalls.
`
`13.
`
`However, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Cheng et al. and
`
`incorporated the teachings of said sidewall comprises four sidewalls, since it has been held that
`
`mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St.
`
`Regis Paper C0. v. Bemis C0., 193 USPQ 8. In the instant case, one would have been motivated
`
`to surround and provide support to the display device from all four sides.
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Cheng et al. teaches or suggests (Fig. 2) the top surface of the
`
`sidewall (the top of 216) including the notch (250) is flush with a top surface of the mounting
`
`portion (as shown in Fig. 2, and as suggested by paragraph [0024]).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Cheng et al. teaches or suggests (Fig. 2, and annotated Fig. 2 provided
`
`below for clarity) the notch (250) is formed in the sidewall extending in a direction intersecting a
`
`direction in which the tab and the double—sided adhesive tape connected to the tab are arranged in
`
`a line (as indicated by the intersecting arrows shown in annotated Fig. 2 provided below).
`
`3‘:
`,.i“
`a VIN
`9,.
`3‘
`3’93
`
`.
`
`3883
`
`\
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Cheng et al. teaches or suggests (Fig. 2) the notch (250) is formed
`
`such that a width of the notch (i.e. a width of 250, in the vertical direction of Fig. 2, extending
`
`parallel to the outer surface of 212, and in a direction extending from the bottom of 212, towards
`
`250) is larger than a width of the tab (a width in the vertical direction of the tab 242, in the same
`
`direction outlined above for the notch 250, as shown in Fig. 2).
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 8, Cheng et al. teaches or suggests (Fig. 2) the double—sided adhesive
`
`tape (240, 242) is individually disposed in correspondence with one of the sides of the display
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`panel (as shown in Fig. 2), and the tab (250) is disposed at a corner of the display panel (as
`
`shown in Fig. 2).
`
`18.
`
`Cheng et al. does not explicitly teach or suggest four of said double—sided adhesive tapes
`
`are present, with a respective one of the double— sided adhesive tapes individually disposed in
`
`correspondence with each of the four sides of the display panel, and a respective one of the tabs
`
`is disposed at each of the four comers of the display panel.
`
`19.
`
`However, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Cheng et al. and
`
`incorporated the teachings of four of said double— sided adhesive tapes are present, with a
`
`respective one of the double—sided adhesive tapes individually disposed in correspondence with
`
`each of the four sides of the display panel, and a respective one of the tabs is disposed at each of
`
`the four corners of the display panel, since it has been held that mere duplication of essential
`
`working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper C0. v. Bemis C0.,
`
`193 USPQ 8. In the instant case, one would have been motivated to make the display rework
`
`able, or otherwise accessible to be removed or reworked, from all four sides of the display as
`
`needed or desired.
`
`20.
`
`The combined teachings of Cheng et al. teach or suggest all of the elements of the
`
`claimed invention, except for said display panel is rectangular.
`
`21.
`
`However, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the device of Cheng et al. and
`
`formed the display panel as a rectangular display panel, since it has been held by the courts that a
`
`change in shape or configuration, without any criticality in operation of the device, is nothing
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to
`
`provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ
`
`47 (CCPA 1976). In the instant case, one would have been motivated to provide the desired
`
`rectangular shape of the display panel to produce a well—known rectangular resolution for the
`
`image to be displayed (i.e. 16:9, etc.).
`
`22.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 16 April 2018 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`persuasive.
`
`a.
`
`In response to Applicant’s arguments that Cheng et a1. failed to disclose
`
`individually, or suggest in combination, the ". . .tab is within an area defined by
`
`extensions of lateral edges of the main adhesive body..." the Applicant is respectfully
`
`
`advised that while the claims of issued patents are interpreted in light of the specification,
`
`prosecution history, prior art and other claims, this is not the mode of claim interpretation
`
`to be applied during examination. During examination, the claims must be interpreted as
`
`broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center,
`
`70 USPQ2d 1827 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2004). In this case, and as outlined in the rejection
`
`above, the tab 242 of the device of Cheng et al. is reasonably provided within an area
`
`formed by extensions of the lateral edges of the main adhesive body (see the rejection
`
`outlined above, as well as annotated Fig. 2 of the Cheng et al. reference reproduced
`
`below for reference):
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`
`
`Conclusion
`
`23.
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this
`
`Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
`
`Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR l.l36(a).
`
`24.
`
`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 l.l36(a) Will be calculated from the mailing date of the adVisory action. In no event,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this
`
`final action.
`
`25.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure: see PTO-892 for pertinent prior art not relied upon for rejection.
`
`26.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to COLIN CATTANACH whose telephone number is (571)270—
`
`5203. The examiner can normally be reached on MON — FRI: 7:30AM to 5PM ET.
`
`27.
`
`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.
`
`28.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, J ong—Suk (James) Lee can be reached on 5712727044. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 57l—273—8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/498,053
`
`Page ll
`
`Art Unit: 2875
`
`29.
`
`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.
`
`/C. C./
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2875
`
`/Alexander Garlen/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
`
`