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 .
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2018/0124933 A1) in view of Gwon et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2020/0194508 A1), Hong et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2019/0296097 A1), Kim et al. (Patent No. US 10,347,866 B1) and He et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2022/0045300 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Park teaches a display device (¶ 0128, figs. 4-5 & 11-12 among others) comprising:
a substrate (¶ 0110: 200);
a planarization layer (¶ 0093: 260) on the substrate (fig. 12: 260 disposed on 200);
a passivation layer (¶ 0092: 250) on the planarization layer (fig. 12: 250 disposed on a bottom surface of 260);
a pixel electrode (¶ 0094: 281) on the passivation layer (fig. 12: 281 disposed at least indirectly on 250);
a pixel-defining layer (¶ 0094: bank 284) exposing the pixel electrode and on the pixel electrode (fig. 12: 284 on and exposing 281);
an emissive layer (¶ 0094: light emitting layer 283) on the pixel electrode (fig. 12: 283 disposed on 281);
a spacer (¶ 0079: buffer 130);
a dam structure (¶ 0079: 120) spaced apart from the spacer (fig. 12: 120 laterally spaced from 130) and an encapsulation layer (¶ 0101: 290) covering the pixel-defining layer, the dam structure and the spacer (fig. 12: 280 covers 284, 120 and at least a lower sidewall of 130), the encapsulation layer comprising an inorganic encapsulation layer (¶ 0102: 291) and an organic encapsulation layer (292) sequentially stacked on one another,
wherein an upper surface of the spacer is located at a higher position (¶ 0125: H2) than a portion of an upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer (see annotated fig. 12 above: upper surface of a portion of 292 located at height H3) from one surface or an upper surface of the substrate (fig. 12: H2 higher than H3), the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer being a surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate (H3 comprised by surface of 292 in region NDA furthest from upper surface of 200) and overlapping the pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate (fig. 12: 292 overlaps 284 in thickness direction),
wherein the upper surface of the spacer is at a higher position than a portion of an upper surface of the dam structure (fig. 12: H2 higher than H1), the portion of the upper surface of the dam structure being a surface of the dam structure furthest from the upper surface of the substrate (fig. 12: H1 comprised by top surface of 120), and
wherein a height measured from the upper surface of the substrate to the portion of the upper surface of the dam structure along the thickness direction (H1) is equal to or greater than a height measured from the upper surface of the substrate to the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer along the thickness direction (see annotated fig 12 above: H1 greater than H3).
Park does not teach:
the substrate comprising a plurality of islands separated by slits, and a plurality of bridges connecting between adjacent ones of the islands,
the spacer and the dam disposed on the pixel-defining layer,
a first portion of the first inorganic encapsulation layer overlaps the upper surface of the dam structure in the thickness direction,
a second portion of the inorganic encapsulation layer overlaps the upper surface of the spacer in the thickness direction, and/or
the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate overlapping the pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate.
Gwon teaches a display device (¶ 0048 & fig. 12) including an encapsulation layer (¶¶ 0142, 0146: 283 and 290, similar to 291 and 292 of Park) covering a pixel-defining layer, a dam structure and a spacer (270, DAM2, and DAM1, similar to 284, 120 and 130 of Park), the encapsulation layer comprising an inorganic encapsulation layer (291) and an organic encapsulation layer (290) sequentially stacked on one another (fig. 12), the first inorganic encapsulation layer including a first portion overlapping an upper surface of a dam structure (¶ 0126: 283 overlaps upper surface of DAM2, similar to 120 of Park) in the thickness direction, and a second portion overlapping an upper surface of a spacer structure (¶ 0126: 283 overlaps upper surface of DAM1, similar to 130 of Park) in the thickness direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the first inorganic encapsulation layer of Park to overlap an upper surface of the dam structure, as a means to prevent water and oxygen from being permeated (Gwon, ¶ 0137) into the spacer (130 of Park, DAM1 of Gwon) in the case that a crack occurs in the dam (120 of Park, DAM2 of Gwon), and/or prevent organic film (282 of Gwon, 292 of Park) from being exposed to the outside of the display device or from being permeated into the pad area (respective areas PA of Gwon and Park) improving device reliability.
Park in view of Gwon does not teach:
the substrate comprising a plurality of islands separated by slits, and a plurality of bridges connecting between adjacent ones of the islands,
the spacer and the dam disposed on the pixel-defining layer, or
the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate overlapping the pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate.
Hong teaches a display device (figs. 1 & 7 among others: 1) including a substrate (¶ 0073 & fig. 5: 110) comprising a plurality of islands (¶ 0077: ‘IS’) separated by slits (¶ 0078: cutouts ‘Co’), and a plurality of bridges (¶ 0077: ‘BR’) connecting between adjacent ones of the islands (¶ 0077 & fig. 7: BR connects IS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the device of Park in view of Gwon with the islands of Hong, as a means to provide a stretchable display without damage (Hong, ¶ 0083).
Park in view of Gwon and Hong does not teach
the spacer and the dam disposed on the pixel-defining layer, or
the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate overlapping the pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate.
Kim teaches a dam portion and/or spacer portion (212 and/or 223) formed on a pixel-defining layer (119, including portions 211 and 222).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to arrange the dam and spacer of Park in view of Gwon and Hong on the pixel-defining layer, as a means to increase the height of the dam and/or spacer (210, 220), further preventing organic materials from flowing in a direction of an edge of the substrate (Kim, col. 10 lines 5-9), and preventing cracks from spreading to the display area (Kim, col. 15 lines 25-28).
Park in view of Gwon, Hong and Kim does not teach
the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate overlapping the pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate.
He teaches a display device (fig. 3) including a dam structure and a spacer (¶ 0148: 370, 371), an encapsulation layer (¶ 0144: 65) comprising an inorganic encapsulation layer (651) and an organic encapsulation layer (652) sequentially stacked on one another (fig. 3: 370/371, 651 and 652 sequentially stacked), the spacer including an upper surface located at a higher position than a portion of an upper surface of an organic encapsulation layer from one surface or an upper surface of a substrate (fig. 3: upper surface of 371 higher than upper surface of 652 with respect to substrate 60),
the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from the upper surface of the substrate overlapping a pixel-defining layer along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate (¶ 0151, fig. 3: uppermost surface of 652 overlaps pixel definition layer 81 in a thickness direction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the spacer of Park in view of Gwon, Hong and Kim with the height of He, as a means to effectively block the organic encapsulation layer, and occupy a smaller layout space (He, ¶ 0150).
Since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 538, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 (2007); Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282, 189 USPQ 449, 453 (1976); Anderson' s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 62-63, 163 USPQ 673, 675 (1969); Great Atlantic & P. Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equip. Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 152, 87 USPQ 303, 306 (1950). See MPEP § 2143.02.
Regarding claim 15, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 14, further comprising:
a recess pattern defined by removing the planarization layer (Park, fig. 12: recess defined by removed portions of 260),
wherein the recess pattern surrounds the spacer in a plan view (Park, fig. 11: at least a portion of recess surrounds 130).
Park in view of Gwon, Hong and Kim as applied to claim 14 above fails to teach the recess pattern is further defined by removing the passivation layer.
However, Park does teach an embodiment (fig. 30 & related text), wherein a recess (recess in NDA region, corresponding to that of fig. 12) is defined by removing a passivation layer (¶ 0271: 261) and a planarization layer (¶ 0273: 262).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the recess patten of Park in view of Gwon, Hong and Kim to include a removed portion of a passivation layer, as a means to all for formation of a thin film transistor proximal to light emitting device 280 (Park, ¶ 0271, fig. 30), providing stable supply of power source by decreasing the resistance between the TFT and the light emitting device.
Regarding claim 16, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 15, wherein a sidewall of the recess pattern comprises a side surface of the passivation layer and a side surface of the planarization layer (Park, fig. 30: recess in NDA region comprises side surfaces of 261 and 262), and
wherein the side surface of the passivation layer protrudes outward from the side surface of the planarization layer (Park, fig. 30: side surface of 262 protrudes laterally away from side surface of 261).
Regarding claim 17, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 14, further comprising:
a dam structure (Park, ¶ 0079: 120, and/or Kim, 212/223) on the pixel-defining layer (Kim, fig. 2: 212/223 disposed on portions of pixel-defining layer 119) and surrounding the spacer and the pixel electrode in a plan view (Park, fig. 11: 120 surrounds 130 and 281, and Kim figs. 2-3: 223 surrounds 212 and electrode 111),
wherein the upper surface of the spacer is located at a higher position than an upper surface of the dam structure from the one or an opposite surface of the substrate (Park, fig. 12: upper surface of 130 higher than upper surface of 120 from upper surface of 200).
Regarding claim 18, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 17, wherein the pixel electrode and the dam structure are in each of the plurality of islands, and the spacer is in at least some of the plurality of islands (Park, fig. 12 & Hong figs. 8-12: 281, 120 and 130 disposed in display area DA and periphery area NDA, which are included in island IS of Hong).
Regarding claim 19, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 18, wherein the spacer and the dam structure are separated from each other (Park, fig. 12: 130 and 120 laterally separated).
Regarding claim 20, Park in view of Gwon, Hong, Kim and He teaches the display device of claim 14, wherein the spacer protrudes above the organic encapsulation layer (Park, fig. 12: 130 protrudes above a portion of 292).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations stating:
“wherein an upper surface of the spacer is at a higher position than a portion of an upper surface of the dam structure and a portion of an upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer, the portion of the upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer being a surface of the organic encapsulation layer furthest from an upper surface of the substrate and disposed in the display area” as recited in claim 1.
Park et al. (US 2018/0124933 A1) teaches a display device including a display area (DA) a non-display area (NDA), a dam structure (120), a spacer (130), an organic encapsulation layer (292), and a pixel-defining layer (284), an upper surface of the spacer at a higher position than an upper surface of the dam structure and an upper surface of the organic encapsulation layer (fig. 12: upper surface of 130 higher than upper surfaces of 120 and 292). However, Park teaches the portion of the organic encapsulation layer lower than the spacer is positioned in the non-display area, rather than the display area as required by independent claim 1.
Furthermore, Park fails to teach the portion of the organic encapsulation layer 292 lower than the spacer 130 is arranged to overlap the pixel-defining layer 284 along a thickness direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the substrate (fig. 12: the portion of 292 overlapping 284 in thickness direction is higher than spacer 130).
He et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2022/0045300 A1) teaches a spacer (371) positioned higher than a dam (372) and an organic encapsulation layer (652), the organic encapsulation layer overlapping a pixel definition layer (81). However, He fails to teach the spacer positioned in a display area.
In light of these limitations in the claims (see Applicant’s fig. 8 & ¶ 00118 of the instant specification), the previously applied references do not anticipate or obviate the claimed invention as in the context of the claims.
Claims 2-13 depend on claim 1, and are allowed for implicitly including the allowable subject matter indicated above.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-9, filed 2/11/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 112(b) rejections of claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, these rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-12, with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 1-13, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, these rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-13 with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 14-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 1.136(a).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/BRIAN TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 2818