DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “light-emitting device layer”, the “orthographic projection” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Since there is no corresponding reference numerals in the specification, it is difficult to determine which element(s) in the drawing(s) correspond(s) to the claimed limitation(s).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Since there is no corresponding reference numerals in the specification for the “light-emitting device layer”, the “orthographic projection”, it is difficult to determine which element(s) in the drawing(s) correspond(s) to the claimed limitation(s).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 1, 9, 15, the multiple occurrences of comprising make it unclear as to which features are part of the array substrate. Also, it is unclear what is meant by “located at a side…away from..” Further, “one-to-one” is unclear whether there is one hole per opening, and one color filter per hole. Furthermore, the terminology “allow for formation” does not describe what structural characteristic of the first organic film layer causes this (i.e., functional).
In claims 4, 15, it is unclear what is meant by “covers…away from..”
In claims 5, 16, it is unclear what is meant by “thickness…away from..”
In claim 7, the phrase "grid-like" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable.
In claim 15, the multiple occurrences of comprising make it unclear as to which features are part of the array substrate.
The other claims are rejected base on their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are, to the extent taught and understood, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP Publication No. 3223122 (Yang) in view of KR Publication No. 2018-0077856 (Park), cited by Applicant.
Yang discloses
Claim 1. An organic light-emitting display panel, comprising:
an array substrate SUB comprising a pixel definition layer PXL comprising a plurality of pixel openings OP;
a light-emitting device layer DP-OLED comprising a plurality of light-emitting units PXA each disposed in one of the pixel openings OP;
a thin-film encapsulation layer TFE covering the light-emitting device layer DP-OLED;
a black matrix layer BM-P1 / BM-P2 located at a side of the thin-film encapsulation layer TFE away from the array substrate SUB and comprising a plurality of first through holes BM1-OP and a light-shielding portion BM-P1 surrounding the first through holes BM1-OP, wherein the first through holes BM1-OP have a one-to-one correspondence with the pixel openings OP;
a first organic film layer AM2 filled at least in the first through holes BM1-OP and allowing for formation of a second through hole BM2-OP in each of the first through holes BM1-OP;
an organic planarization layer WM covering the black matrix layer BM-P1 / BM-P2 and the first organic film layer AM2, wherein the organic planarization layer WM has a refractive index (plastic resin, typically 1.60 - 1.89) greater than a refractive index (optical clear film / resin or pressure sensitive adhesive film, typically 1.47 - 1.52) of the first organic film layer AM2; and
a color filter layer CF disposed on the organic planarization layer WM and comprising a plurality of color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) having a one-to-one correspondence with the first through holes BM1-OP;
wherein an orthographic projection of each of the pixel openings OP and an orthographic projection of a corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP projected on a plane on which the array substate SUB is located at least partially overlap each other, the orthographic projection of the corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP and an orthographic projection of a corresponding one of the color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) projected on the plane on which the array substate SUB is located at least partially overlap each other, each of the second through holes BM2-OP has an inverted trapezoidal shape in cross-section in a direction perpendicular to the array substrate SUB, and an interface between the first organic film layer AM2 and the organic planarization layer WM in each of the second through holes BM2-OP is located at an angle between 40 degrees and 70 degrees (incline) with respect to a plane parallel with the array substate SUB.
Yang fails to disclose
a first organic film layer filled at least in the first through holes; and
an organic planarization layer filled in each of the second through holes.
Park teaches
An organic light-emitting display panel, comprising:
an organic layer 174 filled in each of the (inclined) through holes.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to provide an organic layer filled in inclined through holes of Yang. The motivation would be to improve the viewing angle and increase the light efficiency a taught by Park.
Yang discloses
Claim 2. The display panel of claim 1, wherein the orthographic projection of each of the pixel openings OP and the orthographic projections of the corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP and the corresponding one of the color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) projected on the plane on which the array substate SUB is located completely overlap each other.
Yang discloses
Claim 3. The display panel of claim 1, wherein the refractive index of the first organic film layer AM2 (optical clear film / resin or pressure sensitive adhesive film, typically 1.47 - 1.52) is between 1.2 and 1.5, and the refractive index of the organic planarization layer WM is between 1.7 and 2.0 (plastic resin, typically 1.60 - 1.89) .
Yang discloses
Claim 4. The display panel of claim 1, wherein the first organic film layer AM2 covers a surface of the light-shielding portion BM-P1 away from the array substrate SUB.
Yang discloses
Claim 5. The display panel of claim 1, wherein the first organic film layer AM2 has a thickness between 1 micron and 10 microns (10 micron to 80 micron) in a direction perpendicular to a side wall of the first through holes BM1-OP, and the organic planarization layer WM has a thickness between 5 microns and 30 microns (20 micron to 150 micron) on a side of the light-shielding portion BM-P1 away from the array substrate SUB.
The combination of references fails to teach
Claim 6. The display panel of claim 1, wherein the organic light-emitting display panel further comprises a second organic film layer covering the color filter layer, and the second organic film layer has a refractive index between 1.3 and 1.5.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to provide second organic film layer in the modified device of Yang. The motivation would be duplication of parts based on their suitability for the intended purpose. See MPEP 2144.04, 2144.07.
Yang discloses
Claim 7. The display panel of claim 1,
Yang discloses
Claim 8. The display panel of claim 7, wherein an orthographic projection of the touch electrode TE1 - TE3 does not overlap the orthographic projection of any one of the pixel openings OP projected on the plane on which the array substrate SUB is located.
Yang discloses
Claim 9. An organic light-emitting display panel, comprising:
an array substrate SUB comprising a pixel definition layer PXL comprising a plurality of pixel openings OP:
a light-emitting device layer DP-OLED comprising a plurality of light-emitting units PXA each disposed in one of the pixel openings OP;
a thin-film encapsulation layer TFE covering the light-emitting device layer DP-OLED;
a black matrix layer BM-P1 / BM-P2 located at a side of the thin-film encapsulation layer TFE away from the array substrate SUB and comprising a plurality of first through holes BM1-OP and a light-shielding portion BM-P1 surrounding the first through holes BM1-OP, wherein the first through holes BM1-OP have a one-to-one correspondence with the pixel openings OP;
a first organic film layer AM2 filled at least in the first through holes BM1-OP and allowing for formation of a second through hole BM2-OP in each of the first through holes BM1-OP;
an organic planarization layer WM covering the black matrix layer BM-P1 / BM-P2 and the first organic film layer AM2, wherein the organic planarization layer WM has a refractive index (plastic resin, typically 1.60 - 1.89) greater than a refractive index (optical clear film / resin or pressure sensitive adhesive film, typically 1.47 - 1.52) of the first organic film layer AM2; and
a color filter layer CF disposed on the organic planarization layer WM and comprising a plurality of color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) having a one-to-one correspondence with the first through holes BM1-OP.
Yang fails to disclose
a first organic film layer filled at least in the first through holes; and
an organic planarization layer filled in each of the second through holes.
Park teaches
An organic light-emitting display panel, comprising:
an organic layer 174 filled in each of the (inclined) through holes.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to provide an organic layer filled in inclined through holes of Yang. The motivation would be to improve the viewing angle and increase the light efficiency a taught by Park.
Yang discloses
Claim 10. The display panel of claim 9, wherein an orthographic projection of each of the pixel openings OP and the orthographic projections of the corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP projected on a plane on which the array substate SUB is located at least partially overlap each other, and the orthographic projection of the corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP and an orthographic projection of a corresponding one of the color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) projected on the plane on which the array substate SUB is located completely overlap each other.
Yang discloses
Claim 11. The display panel of claim 10, wherein the orthographic projection of each of the pixel openings OP and the orthographic projections of the corresponding one of the first through holes BM1-OP and the corresponding one of the color filter units (red, green, blue, gray) projected on the plane on which the array substate SUB is located completely overlap each other.
Yang discloses
Claim 12. The display panel of claim 9, wherein the refractive index of the first organic film layer AM2 (optical clear film / resin or pressure sensitive adhesive film, typically 1.47 - 1.52) is between 1.2 and 1.5, and the refractive index of the organic planarization layer WM is between 1.7 and 2.0 (plastic resin, typically 1.60 - 1.89).
Yang discloses
Claim 13. The display panel of claim 9, wherein each of the second through holes BM2-OP has an inverted trapezoidal shape in cross-section in a direction perpendicular to the array substrate SUB.
Yang discloses
Claim 14. The display panel of claim 13, wherein an interface between the first organic film layer AM2 and the organic planarization layer WM in each of the second through holes BM2-OP is located at an angle between 40 degrees and 70 degrees (incline) with respect to a plane parallel with the array substate SUB.
Yang discloses
Claim 15. The display panel of claim 9, wherein the first organic film layer AM2 covers a surface of the light-shielding portion BM-P1 away from the array substrate SUB.
Yang discloses
Claim 16. The display panel of claim 9, wherein the first organic film layer AM2 has a thickness between 1 micron and 10 microns (10 micron to 80 micron) in a direction perpendicular to a side wall of the first through holes BM1-OP, and the organic planarization layer WM has a thickness between 5 microns and 30 microns (20 micron to 150 micron) on a side of the light-shielding portion BM-P1 away from the array substrate SUB.
The combination of references fails to teach
Claim 17. The display panel of claim 9, wherein the organic light-emitting display panel further comprises a second organic film layer covering the color filter layer, and the second organic film layer has a refractive index between 1.3 and 1.5.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to provide second organic film layer in the modified device of Yang. The motivation would be duplication of parts based on their suitability for the intended purpose. See MPEP 2144.04, 2144.07.
Yang discloses
Claim 18. The display panel of claim 9,
Yang discloses
Claim 19. The display panel of claim 18, wherein an orthographic projection of each of the touch electrodes TE1 - TE3 does not overlap the orthographic projection of any one of the pixel openings OP projected on the plane on which the array substrate SUB is located.
Yang discloses (Abstract)
Claim 20. A display device comprising the display panel of claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. EP Publication No. 3109742 (Kwon), U.S. Patent Nos. 9,081,141 (Tsukamoto), 10,916,615 (Hu) teach an OLED display panel that tries to replace the usual polarizer with a layered optical structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERESA M ARROYO whose telephone number is (703)756-1576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 A.M. E.T. - 5:00 P.M. E.T.).
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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571.272.1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TERESA M. ARROYO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights