Ex Parte Lee et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 16, 2016

12788669 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 16, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
121788,669 05/27/2010
23363 7590 09/20/2016
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP
POBOX29001
Glendale, CA 91209-9001
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Moon-Jae LEE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
67744/Sl437 7111
EXAMINER
TUNG, DAVID
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2694
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/20/2016 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):
pto@lrrc.com
pair_cph@firsttofile.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte MOON JAE-LEE, WON-JUN SONG, SUN-HEE LEE,
YOUNG-HEE LEE, MU-HYUN KIM, HYE-DONG KIM,
and JI-YOUNG KIM
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669 1
Technology Center 2600
Before MARC S. HOFF, JOHNNY A. KUMAR, and KAMRAN JIVANI,
Administrative Patent Judges.
HOFF, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a Final Rejection of
claims 1-20. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.
Appellants' invention is a touch screen display apparatus including
sensor units to sense and process light signals, and pixel units to drive pixels
according to the light signal processing performed by the sensor unit. The
apparatus includes a substrate. A plurality of pixel units are disposed on the
1 The real party in interest is Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
substrate at a first layer, each including a first electrode, a second electrode,
and an emission layer interposed between the first electrode and the second
electrode. A plurality of sensor units are also disposed on the substrate at a
first layer, each including a sensor first electrode, a sensor second electrode,
and an organic light receiving layer interposed between the sensor first
electrode and the sensor second electrode. See Abstract.
Claim 1 is exemplary of the claims on appeal:
1. A touch screen display apparatus comprising:
a substrate;
a plurality of sensor units on the substrate at a first layer
and configured to sense and to process light signals, wherein
each of the sensor units comprises a sensor first electrode, a
sensor second electrode, and an organic light receiving layer
interposed between the sensor first electrode and the sensor
second electrode;
a plurality of pixel units on the substrate at the first layer
and configured to drive pixels according to the light signal
processing performed by the sensor units, wherein each of the
pixel units comprises a first electrode, a second electrode, and
an emission layer interposed between the first electrode and the
second electrode; and
a plurality of transistors on the substrate at a second layer
that is interposed between the substrate and the first layer.
The Examiner relies upon the following prior art in rejecting the
claims on appeal:
Cok US 2004/0140960 Al July 22, 2004
Park '038 US 2006/0146038 Al July 6, 2006
Choi US 2008/0303023 Al Dec. 11, 2008
Park '840 US 2009/0315840 Al Dec. 24, 2009
("Park II")
2
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
Claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Choi, Park, Cok, and Park II.
Throughout this decision, we make reference to the Appeal Brief
("App. Br.," filed Jan. 24, 2014), the Reply Brief ("Reply Br.," filed Aug. 5,
2014), and the Examiner's Answer ("Ans.," mailed June 5, 2014) for their
respective details.
ISSUES
1. Does Choi disclose or suggest a plurality of sensor units on the
substrate at a first layer, and a plurality of pixel units on the substrate at the
first layer?
2. Does Choi disclose or suggest forming a first electrode of the pixel
unit and a sensor first electrode of the sensor unit on a same layer?
3. Does Park disclose or suggest forming a first electrode of the pixel
unit and a sensor first electrode of the sensor unit on a same layer?
ANALYSIS
CLAIMS 1-11
Appellants' argument that Choi does not disclose a plurality of sensor
units on the substrate at a first layer, and a plurality of pixel units at the first
layer, is not persuasive to show Examiner error.
3
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
Figure 1 of Choi is reproduced below:
. ...; .. ----. i: :-::
L__>...__ .......... +-"-.,.._... ................................................ __..,._ ........... ~"+-.......... --~~ -.......--..................... .._.,_ .............. _ ... ~>~/~/~."~/-'./_ .......... ~
·:g:~. ·:?~ 1<1~? :~~-~- 1~\':; ~~1·~ ·::~2 ~:~.:~
................. : ............. -? ·-··········,-,'.· ~ .............. . ......... •
i: f;:~~ : ?O ~ ~~(~
.,................................................... : ~~.;) ..................................................... ,.,,. ... ,.. ................................ 1.~~(:i .............................. ,.,,..
Figure 1 of Choi is a schematic sectional view illustrating a pixel of
an organic light-emitting display apparatus.
The Examiner finds that sensor regions 150 of Choi, including gate
electrode 162, drain/source electrodes 163 and 164, and light receiving layer
161, correspond to the "plurality of sensor units on the substrate at a first
layer" recited in claim 1. Ans. 4.
The Examiner further finds that display regions 120 of Choi,
including light emission layer 142, first electrode 141, and second electrode
143, correspond to the "plurality of pixel units at the first layer" recited in
claim 1. Ans. 4--5.
In the Response to Argument, the Examiner explains that "Choi' s
sensor region 150 and pixel region 120 are both above substrate 110, which
serves at a bottom layer." Ans. 23.
We agree with the Examiner's finding that "'first layer' is undefined,
and that the terminology does not say 'directly.[']" Ans. 22. Appellants
4
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
argue in the Brief that the sensor TFT 160 and the organic light emitting
device 140 "are located at different layers." App. Br. 6. Appellants have
made no argument that the Specification requires the claimed "layer" to be
construed narrowly, and have presented no evidence that any disclosure
precludes the Examiner from construing all the elements above substrate
110 as being at the same "layer." We therefore agree with the Examiner's
finding that the elements constituting sensor TFT 160, as well as the
elements constituting organic light-emitting device 140, are both present in
Choi on the substrate at a first layer, in correspondence with the limitations
of claim 1.
We recognize that the content of the Examiner's Answer is somewhat
self-contradictory, as it also contains an annotated copy of Choi Figure 1,
with an annotation referring to element 110 as "SUBSTRATE AT A FIRST
LAYER." Ans. 22. We resolve the inconsistency between the Examiner's
positions in favor of the position characterizing Choi' s sensor region and
pixel region as being above the first level, because that position has been
held throughout prosecution, including in the explanation of the rejection in
the Examiner's Answer (see Ans. 4) and because it avoids an illogical
application of the reference to the claim language. Appellants have been on
notice regarding the Examiner's position, and had full opportunity to
respond to it.
Appellants' only argument concerning the Park, Cok, and Park II
references is that they fail to cure the argued deficiencies of Choi. We find
no deficiencies, as stated supra. As a result, we sustain the Examiner's
§ 103 rejection of claim 1, as well as claims 2-11 not separately argued,
over Choi, Park, Cok, and Park II.
5
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
CLAIMS 12-20
Appellants' argument that Choi does not disclose "forming a first
electrode of the pixel unit and a sensor first electrode of the sensor unit on a
same layer" is substantively the same argument Appellants made with
respect to the rejection of claim 1 over Choi. See App. Br. 10-11. As
explained supra, we find no error in the Examiner's finding that the sensor
TFT 160 and the organic light-emitting device 140 of Choi correspond to the
claimed sensor unit and pixel unit respectively, as well as the Examiner's
finding that the two units are formed on the same layer.
Alternatively, Appellants have not presented any argument in the
Reply Brief to refute the Examiner's finding in the Answer that Park
discloses a first electrode of a pixel unit and the sensor first electrode of the
sensor unit being on a same layer. See Ans. 14--15 and 24; Park Fig. 3 and
iTiT 164--174.
As we find no error, we sustain the Examiner's§ 103 rejection of
claims 12-20 over Choi, Park, Cok, and Park II.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Choi discloses a plurality of sensor units on the substrate at a first
layer, and a plurality of pixel units on the substrate at the first layer.
2. Choi discloses forming a first electrode of the pixel unit and a
sensor first electrode of the sensor unit on a same layer.
3. Park discloses forming a first electrode of the pixel unit and a
sensor first electrode of the sensor unit on a same layer.
6
Appeal2014-008796
Application 12/788,669
ORDER
The Examiner's rejection of claims 1-20 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l )(iv).
AFFIRMED
7