UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`16/102,615
`
`08/ 13/2018
`
`Yeon Cu KIM
`
`P7765USOO
`
`6009
`
`H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, PLC
`1894 PRESTON WHITE DRIVE
`RESTON, VA 20191
`
`YANG NAN-“NC!
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2622
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/09/2020
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`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.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`PATENT @ PARK-LAW. COM
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Advisory/lotion
`Before [/79 Filing ofa” Appea/Bfief
`
`Application No.
`
`16/1021615
`Examiner
`NAN-YI NG YANG
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`KIM, Yeon Cu
`Art Unit
`2622
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`-- 7'he MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`THE REPLY FILED 01 April 2020 FAILS TO PLACE THIS APPLICATION IN CONDITION FOR ALLOWANCE.
`N
`N Tl E
`F APPEAL FILED
`
`1.
`
`The reply was filed after a final rejection. No Notice of Appeal has been filed. To avoid abandonment of this application, applicant must timely file
`one of the following replies: (1) an amendment, affidavit, or other evidence, which places the application in condition for allowance;
`(2) a Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee) in compliance with 37 CFR 41.31; or (3) a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with
`37 CFR 1.114 if this is a utility or plant application. Note that RCEs are not permitted in design applications. The reply must be filed within one of
`the following time periods:
`months from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`a) C] The period for reply expires
`b)
`The period for reply expires on: (1) the mailing date of this Advisory Action; or (2) the date set forth in the final rejection, whichever is later.
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`c) CI A prior Advisory Action was mailed more than 3 months after the mailing date of the final rejection in response to a first after-final reply filed
`within 2 months of the mailing date of the final rejection.The current period for reply expires
`months from the mailing date of
`[hepf/bfAdV/Sij/Ac/Ibfl or SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection, whichever is earlier.
`ExammerNole: If box 1
`is checked, check either box (
`), (b) or (c). ONLY CHECK BOX (b) WHEN THIS ADVISORY ACTION IS THE
`FIRST RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS FIRST AFTER-FINAL REPLY WHICH WAS FILED WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF THE FINAL
`REJECTION. ONLY CHECK BOX (c) IN THE LIMITED SITUATION SET FORTH UNDER BOX (0). See MPEP 706.07( ).
`Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). The date on which the petition under 37 CFR 1.136(a) and the appropriate
`extension fee have been filed is the date for purposes of determining the period of extension and the corresponding amount of the fee. The
`appropriate extension fee under 37 CFR 1 .17(a) is calculated from: (1) the expiration date of the shortened statutory period for reply originally
`set in the final Office action; or (2) as set forth in (b) or (c) above, if checked. Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the
`mailing date of the final rejection, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`N TI E
`F APPEAL
`
`. A brief in compliance with 37 CFR 41.37 must be filed within two months of the date of filing the Notice
`2. E] The Notice of Appeal was filed on
`of Appeal (37 CFR 41 .37(a)), or any extension thereof (37 CFR 41 .37(e)), to avoid dismissal of the appeal. Since a Notice of
`Appeal has been filed, any reply must be filed within the time period set forth in 37CFR 41 .37(
`).
`AMENDMENTS
`
`3. CI The proposed amendments filed after a final rejection, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will n_o_t be entered because
`a) CI They raise new issues that would require further consideration and/or search (see NOTE below);
`b) CI They raise the issue of new matter (see NOTE below);
`c) C] They are not deemed to place the application in better form for appeal by materially reducing or simplifying the issues for
`appeal; and/or
`d) [:I They present additional claims without canceling a corresponding number of finally rejected claims.
`NOTE:
`(See 37CFR 1.116 and 41 .33(
`)).
`4. D The amendments are not in compliance with 37CFR 1.121. See attached Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment (PTOL-324).
`5. D Applicants reply has overcome the following rejection(s):
`6. D Newly proposed or amended claim(s)
`would be allowable if submitted in a separate, timely filed amendment canceling the non-allowable
`claim( ).
`For purposes of appeal, the proposed amendment(s):(a)Dwill not be entered, or (b).will be entered, and an explanation of how the
`new or amended claims would be rejected is provided below or appended.
`AFFIDAVIT R THER EVIDEN E
`
`7.
`
`8. [I A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`9. I:I The affidavit or other evidence filed after final action, but before or on the date of filing a Notice of Appeal will n_o_t be entered because applicant
`failed to provide a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit or other evidence is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37
`CFR 1.116( ).
`10. CI The affidavit or other evidence filed after the date of filing the Notice of Appeal, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will n_o_t be entered because
`the affidavit or other evidence failed to overcome a_|| rejections under appeal and/or appellant fails to provide a showing of good and sufficient
`reasons why it is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 41 .33(d)(
`).
`11. C] The affidavit or other evidence is entered. An explanation of the status of the claims after entry is below or attached.
`RE
`E T F R RE
`N IDERATI N THER
`
`12.
`
`The request for reconsideration has been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because:
`See Continuation Sheet.
`
`
`
`13. CI Note the attached Information DISC/osure Slalemen/(s). (PTO/SB/08) Paper No(
`14. CI Other:
`.
`STATUS OF CLAIMS
`
`).
`
`15. The status of the claim(s) is (or will be) as follows:
`Claim(s) allowed :m.
`Claim(s) objected tam.
`Claim(s) rejectedfl.
`Claim(s) withdrawn from consideration:none.
`/NAN-YING YANG/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-303 (Rev. 08-2013)
`
`Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief
`
`Paper No. 20200404
`
`

`

`Continuation Sheet (PTOL-303)
`
`App"°at'°" N°' 16/102615
`
`Continuation of REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION/OTHER 12. The request for reconsideration has
`been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because: As to claim 1,
`claim states "a first sub-area comprising at least one first pixel unit; and at least one second sub-area...
`wherein the at least one second pixel unit further comprises: at least one fourth pixel configured to display
`a white color". Applicant submits "Therefore, Hickl and Yuan provides no objective reason to combine
`them in the manner combined. The Office Action alleges that it would have been obvious to incorporate
`the pixel color arrangement of Yuan into Hickl “to improve quality of the color filter substrate and enhance
`visual effects of the display device.” Office Action, at 4. However, neither Hickl nor Yuan provide any
`evidence that combination of the pixel color arrangement of Yuan into Hickl may provide any improvement
`to the seamless tiled display since the tile displays of Hickl does not have any peripheral area partially
`covered by black matrix. If this hindsight-based, conclusory analysis may support a prima facie case of
`obviousness, any form of optical improvement may be adopted into Hickl, regardless of whether Hickl
`includes such structure to improve from or not."
`Examiner respectfully disagrees. Hickl discloses a video wall-type display device (figure 2, a video
`wall-type display device, paragraph 94, display wall) comprising: a plurality of display modules (figure 2,
`multiple display modules), each of the display modules comprising: a display area (figure 2, display area
`within dashed lines, paragraph 5) comprising: a first sub-area comprising at least one first pixel unit (figure
`2, the center pixels, i.e., pixels in the top row, columns 2 and 3), the at least one second sub-area
`comprising at least one second pixel unit; and at least one second sub-area (figure 2, the pixels surround
`the first sub-area) disposed to adjoin and to surround the first sub-area; and a non-display area (figure 2,
`non-display area outside the dashed lines surrounding the display area, paragraph 5) disposed to
`surround the display area, wherein each of the at least one first pixel unit and the at least one second pixel
`unit comprises: a first pixel (figure 2, first pixel displays “R” color) configured to display a first color; a
`second pixel (figure 2, second pixel displays “G” color) configured to display a second color; and a third
`pixel (figure 2, third pixel displays “B” color) configured to display a third colors, the first, second, and third
`colors being different from each another (figure 2, the colors are different from each other). Hickl does not
`disclose the second pixel unit of of the display area of Hickl comprises a fourth pixel configured to display
`a white color. In the same endeavored field Yuan teaches a display device comprising: a display area (
`figure 2A, “21” and “22”) comprising a first sub-area (figure 2A, central display region “22”) comprising at
`least one first pixel unit (paragraph 32, the central display region “22” may include a plurality of first
`sub-pixels, a plurality of second sub-pixels and a plurality of third sub-pixels); and at least one second
`sub-area (figure 2A, peripheral display region “21” adjoin and surround “22”) disposed to adjoin and to
`surround the first sub-area, the at least one second sub-area comprising at least one second pixel unit (
`figure 6, at least one second pixel unit); wherein the at least one second pixel unit further comprises: at
`least one fourth pixel configured to display a white color (figure 6, fourth pixel “W”). Therefore, it would
`have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to
`have modified the video wall-type display device of Hickl to have the second pixel to comprise at least one
`fourth pixel configured to display a white color, as taught by Yuan, in order to improve quality of the color
`filter substrate and enhance visual effects of the display device. Applicant argued that Yuan discloses the
`embodiments of the color filter substrate to optically compensate for the peripheral display region.
`However, the rejection is made based on the currently pending claim limitation. lf Applicant believes that
`the current invention is different from Examiner’s interpretation of the prior art, the claim language should
`be amended to reflect the difference and more clearly define Applicant’s invention.
`
`