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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 13, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0292622 A1, hereinafter “Lee”).
In reference to claim 1, Lee discloses a device which meets the claim. Fig. 6-10 of Lee disclose a display panel which comprises a pixel-driving circuit (T1) arranged in an array. There is a plurality of light-emitting pixels including a plurality of first pixels (SP3), a plurality of second pixels (SP1), and a plurality of third pixels (SP2). An insulating layer (PL) is located between the pixel-driving circuit (T1) and the light-emitting pixels (SP1, SP2, SP3) and is provided with a plurality of first through holes (VIA_C), a plurality of second through holes (VIA_A), and a plurality of third through holes (VIA_B). The first pixels (SP3), the second pixels (SP1), and the third pixels (SP2) are electrically connected to the pixel-driving circuit (T1) via the first through holes (VIA_C), the second through holes (VIA_A), and the third through holes (VIA_B) respectively. The below version of fig. 10 of Lee has been modified to show that centers of the second pixels (SP1) are connected to the pixel-driving circuit (T1) in a same row are located in a line differing from a line in which centers of the third pixels (SP2) connected to the pixel-driving circuit (T1) in a same row are located. Centers of the second pixels (SP1) connected to the pixel-driving circuit (T1) in a same column are located in a line differing from a line in which centers of the third pixels (SP2) connected to the pixel-driving circuit (T1) in a same column are located. Centers of the second through holes (VIA_A) corresponding to the second pixels (SP1) in a same row are located in a line differing from a line in which centers of the third through holes (VIA_B) corresponding to the third pixels (SP2) in a same row are located. Centers of the second through holes (VIA_A) corresponding to the second pixels (SP1) in a same column are located in a line differing from a line in which centers of the third through holes (VIA_B) corresponding to the third pixels (SP2) in a same column are located.
PNG
media_image1.png
748
896
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, fig. 10 of Lee shows a connecting line of the centers of the second through holes (VIA_A) corresponding to the second pixels (SP1) in the same row is parallel with a connecting line of the centers of third through holes (VIA_B) corresponding to the third pixels (SP2) in the same row, and a connecting line of the centers of second holes (VIA_A) corresponding to the second pixels (SP1) in the same column is parallel with a connecting line of the centers of third through holes (VIA_B) corresponding to the third pixels (SP2) in the same column.
In reference to claim 3, fig. 10 of Lee shows that along one of a first direction (X-direction) and a second direction (Y-direction), the center of one of the second pixels (SP1) is located outside a connecting line of the centers of the adjacent two third pixels (SP2). The center of one of the third pixels (SP2) is located outside a connecting line of the centers of the adjacent two second pixels (SP1). The first direction (X-direction) is a direction in which the first pixels (SP3) are repeatedly arranged. The second direction (Y-direction) is a direction perpendicular to the first direction (X-direction). Along the other one of the first direction (X-direction) and the second direction (Y-direction), a connecting line connecting the center of one of the second pixels (SP1) and the center of the adjacent one of the third pixels (SP2) is parallel to the other one of the first direction (X-direction) and the second direction (Y-direction).
With regard to claim 4, in fig. 1 of the currently filed specification, the examiner notes that the applicant does not include the through hole (104, 105, 106) as a part of the shape of pixel (101, 102, 103). Thus fig. 10 of Lee discloses that a shape of one of the first pixels (SP3) is a rectangle, a shape of one of the second pixels (SP1) is a square, a shape of one of the third pixels (SP2) is a rectangle. A long edge of one of the first pixels (SP3) is parallel to a long edge of one of the third pixels (SP2), and a short edge of one of the first pixels (SP3) is parallel to one edge of one of the second pixels (SP1).
In reference to claim 6, a long edge of one of the first pixels (SP3) is parallel to one edge of one of the second pixels (SP1) whose shape is a parallelogram or one edge of one of the third pixels (SP2) whose shape is a parallelogram, and a short edge of one of the first pixels (SP3) is parallel to one edge of one of the third pixels (SP2) whose shape is the parallelogram or one edge of one of the second pixels (SP1) whose shape is the parallelogram.
With regard to claim 13, the below version of fig. 10 of Lee has been modified to show the second pixels (SP1) and the third pixels (SP2) that are adjacent to the first pixel (SP3) and between them in the X-direction. The centers of two of the second pixels (SP1) and two of the third pixels (SP2) adjacent to the first pixel (SP1) are four vertices of a predetermined quadrilateral, the predetermined quadrilateral at least includes a first internal angle equal to 90 degrees and a second internal angle equal to 90 degrees, and the predetermined quadrilateral is a parallelogram.
PNG
media_image2.png
748
896
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 17, the below version of fig. 10 of Lee has been modified to show that an intersection of a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the second pixels (SP1) adjacent to the first pixel (SP3) and a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the third pixels (SP2) adjacent to the first pixel (SP3) is located within a range enclosed by a circle. The center of the first pixel (SP3) serves as a center of the circle and a predetermined line segment serves as the radius of the circle.
PNG
media_image3.png
760
820
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 18, a projection of the first pixel (SP3) on a plane where the display panel is located covers the intersection.
In reference to claim 19, the below version of fig. 10 of Lee has been modified to show the second pixels (SP1) and the third pixels (SP2) that are adjacent to the first pixel (SP3) and between them in the X-direction. Fig. 10 of Lee shows that the centers of the first pixels (SP3) are located outside a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the second pixels (SP1) adjacent to the first pixel (SP3) as well as outside a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the third pixels (SP2) adjacent to the first pixel (SP3).
PNG
media_image4.png
754
820
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 7, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Zhao et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0251532 A1, hereinafter “Zhao”).
In reference to claim 7, Lee does not disclose that a shape of one of the first pixels (SP3) includes a convex arc, and a shape of one of the second pixels (SP1) and a shape of one of the third pixels (SP2) both include a concave arc and/or a convex arc. However fig. 1 of Zhao discloses the use of a first pixel having an elliptical shape (101) which has two convex arcs (their ends) as well as having second pixel (103) and a third pixel (102) which both have a concave arc and a convex arc. Zhao discloses that using pixels with such shapes complement each other to increase the aperture ratio of the display (p. 7, paragraph 124) which is desirable in the art (p. 6, paragraph 105). In view of Zhao, it would therefore be obvious to implement the Lee device such that the shape (101 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the first pixels (SP3 – fig. 10 of Lee) includes a convex arc in the form of an ellipsis (101 – fig. 1 of Zhao), and a shape (103 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the second pixels (SP1 – fig. 10 of Lee) and a shape (102 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the third pixels (SP2 – fig. 10 of Lee) both include a concave arc and a convex arc.
With regard to claim 8, in the device of Lee constructed in view of Zhao, the shape (101 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the first pixels (SP3) is an ellipse, a shape (103 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the second pixels (SP1 – fig. 10 of Lee) and a shape (102 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the third pixels (SP2 – fig. 10 of Lee) both include a plurality of concave arcs and a plurality of convex arcs. Two ends of one of the convex arcs are respectively connected to two of the concave arcs, two ends of one of the concave arcs are respectively connected to two of the convex arcs, and an arc length of one of the convex arcs is less than an arc length of one of the concave arcs; wherein the arc length of the concave arc (103 – fig. 1 of Zhao) in the second pixel (SP1 – fig. 10 of Lee) is greater or less than the arc length of the concave arc (102 – fig. 1 of Zhao) in the third pixel (SP2 – fig. 10 of Lee).
In reference to claim 10, in the device of Lee constructed in view of Zhao, the shape (101 – fig. 1 of Zhao) of one of the first pixels (SP3) is an ellipse. The below version of fig. 10 of Lee has been modified to show that a first included angle between a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the second pixels adjacent to the first pixel and a long axis of the ellipse is equal to 90 degrees, and a second included angle between a connecting line connecting the centers of two of the third pixels adjacent to the first pixel and the long axis of the ellipse is equal to 90 degrees.
PNG
media_image5.png
748
896
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Sun et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2016/0078807 A1, hereinafter “Sun”) and further in view of Zhao.
In reference to claim 12, Lee does not disclose that a shape of one of the first pixels (SP3) is a trapezoid, and a shape of one of the second pixels (SP1) and a shape of one of the third pixels (SP2) include a plurality of concave arcs and/or a plurality of convex arcs. However Sun discloses the use of trapezoidal pixel shapes in order to increase the aspect ratio (p. 4, paragraph 42). Additionally fig. 1 of Zhao discloses the use of pixels (102, 103) which have a plurality of concave arcs and a plurality of concave arcs. Zhao discloses that using pixels with such shapes complement each other to increase the aperture ratio of the display (p. 7, paragraph 124) which is desirable in the art (p. 6, paragraph 105). In view of Zhao, it would therefore be obvious to implement the Lee device such that the shape of the first pixels (SP3 – fig. 10 of Lee) is a trapezoid and the shapes of one of the second pixels (SP1) and one of the third pixels (SP2) include a plurality of concave arcs and a plurality of convex arcs.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2005/0280355 A1, hereinafter “Lee 355”).
In reference to claim 20, Lee does not explicitly disclose that a thickness of a luminescent material layer of one of the first pixel (SP3 - blue), the second pixel (SP1 - red), and the third pixel (SP2 - green) which has a higher luminous efficiency is greater than a thickness of a luminescent material layer of one of the first pixel (SP3 - blue), the second pixel (SP1 - red), and the third pixel (SP2 - green) which has a lower luminous efficiency. However Lee 355 discloses that organic blue luminescent materials have a lower luminous efficiency than organic red and green luminescent materials (p. 1, paragraph 13) and thus the organic blue luminescent material is made thinner than that organic red and green light emitting materials for improved luminous efficiency and display characteristics (p. 3, paragraphs 37, 47). In view of Lee 355, it would therefore be obvious to implement the second pixel (SP1 - red) or the third pixel (SP2 - green) which each has a higher luminous efficiency than the first pixel (SP3 -blue) with a thickness greater than a thickness of a luminescent material layer of the first pixel (SP3 - blue) in the Lee device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 9, 11, and 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: in the examiner’s opinion, it would not be obvious to implement a display panel with a pixel-driving circuit arranged in a array, a plurality of light-emitting pixels that include a plurality of first pixels, a plurality of second pixels, a plurality of third pixels, an insulating layer between the pixel-driving circuit and the light-emitting pixels, such that the first, second, and third pixels are respectively electrically connected to the pixel-driving circuit by a plurality of first, second, and third through holes in the insulating layer in combination with the suggested layout of the second and third pixels required by the applicant in claims 5 and 14-16.
In the examiner’s opinion, it would also not be obvious to implement a display panel with a pixel-driving circuit arranged in a array, a plurality of light-emitting pixels that include a plurality of first pixels, a plurality of second pixels, a plurality of third pixels, an insulating layer between the pixel-driving circuit and the light-emitting pixels, such that the first, second, and third pixels are respectively electrically connected to the pixel-driving circuit by a plurality of first, second, and third through holes in the insulating layer in combination with the suggested layout, shapes, and curvature radii of the second and third pixels described by the applicant in claims 9 and 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN QUINTO whose telephone number is (571)272-1920. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9-5:30.
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, Britt Hanley can be reached at 571-270-3042. 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.
/KEVIN QUINTO/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights