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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6, 8-16 and 18-20 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.
The examiner is readily available for an interview and kindly requests the applicant to schedule for an interview should the applicant have any questions.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (20180061894) in view of Nam et al. (2020/0168668) further in view of Lee et al. (20190049779) further in view of Drolet et al. (20170292713) further in view of Somers et al. (20120086323)
Regarding Claim 1, in Fig. 9, Kim discloses display screen, comprising: a substrate 111; a light-emitting layer 262 disposed on the substrate; and a filter layer 291-294 disposed on the light-emitting layer and comprising a plurality of color filters 291-294 with diffusion function (330). Furthermore, the light- emitting layer 262 comprises a red sub-pixel, a green sub-pixel, and a blue sub-pixel that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state (please see response to the arguments section and paragraphs 0070 and 0158 of Kim et al.). Kim fails to disclose the newly added limitation of the light-emitting layer comprises a group of a red sub-pixel, a green sub-pixel, and a blue sub-pixel that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state, and the light-emitting layer further comprises boundary structures at two sides of the group of the red sub-pixel, the green sub-pixel, and the blue sub-pixel. However, Nam et al. disclose a display device where in Fig 2 and paragraphs 0052, 0058 and 0063-0065, the light-emitting layer 200 comprises a group of a red sub-pixel PX1, a green sub-pixel PX2, and a blue sub-pixel PX3 that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state, and the light-emitting layer further comprises boundary structures 220 (see paragraph 0064 which discloses the material of the element 220 which are capable of blocking light) at two sides of the group of the red sub-pixel PX1, the green sub-pixel PX2, and the blue sub-pixel PX3 (please note that pixel definition layer as disclosed element 220 is on BOTH sides of each individual light emitting layer stack 230)
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the required boundary structure in Kim as taught by Nam et al. in order to prevent light emitting from each individual light emitting layer stack 230 not to interfere with the neighboring one.
Kim and Nam et al. combination fails to disclose the newly added limitation where a filter layer directly contacting on the light emitting layer. However, Lee et al. disclose a cover conversion element where in paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0050, 0051, 0066, 0111 and 0112 and Figs. 2, 5, 6, 10 and 13, the required “directly contacting” limitation is disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have the required directly contacting limitation in Kim and Nam et al. combination as taught by Lee et al. in order to modulate the viewing angle of the display/screen depending on the color filter configuration.
Kim, Nam and Lee combination fails to disclose the newly added limitation of
housing that is made of one or more of plastic material, ceramic material, and metal material. However, Drolet et al., discloses displays with collimated light sources and quantum dots where in paragraph 0031 the required limitation of housing that is made of one or more of plastic material, ceramic material, and metal material is disclosed. Furthermore, in paragraphs 0047, 0049, 0054, 0057 and 0075, Drolet et al. discloses light output angle orientation with light emitting layer followed with scattering/diffusing particle embedded color filters
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the claimed invention to have the required housing in Kim, Nam and Lee combination as taught by Drolet in order to provide physical protection ti the display panel/screen.
Kim, Nam, Lee and Drolet combination fails to disclose the required added limitation of substrate being metal foil. However, Somers et al. discloses a display device where in Figs, 3, 4A and 4B and in paragraph 0049, the required metal foil substrate is disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the metal foil substrate in Kim, Nam, Lee and Drolet combination as taught by Somers et al. in order to make the display screen flexible. (Please note that paragraph 0049 of Somers et al. discloses that the substrate could be rigid such as glass similar to the instant application’s disclosure where this is disclosed in paragraph 0047 of the publication (20220384528). In fact this is the only location where the substrate is disclosed to be a metal foil in instant application)
Regarding Claim 2, in Kim, the color filters 291-294 are configured to diffuse a light emitted by the light-emitting layer, and comprise a red filter, a green filter, and a blue filter.
Regarding Claim 3, in Kim, the color filters 291-294 comprise a plurality of diffusion particles 330, and when the light passes through the filter layer, the light is (inherently, since the particles scatter the light and changes the angle direction of the light) diffused out of the display screen at various angles by the diffusion particles.
Regarding Claim 4, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 291-293 are arranged at intervals, the filter layer further comprises a black matrix 300, and the black matrix is disposed at the intervals between the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter.
Regarding Claim 5, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 294-293 are polygons, and the black matrix 300 is a polygon.
Regarding Claim 6, in Kim, color filters 291-294 comprise a plurality of red filters, green filters, and blue filters, the filter layer further comprises a black matrix, the black matrix 300 comprises a plurality of sub-black matrices, and the red filters, the green filters, the blue filters, and the sub-black matrices are alternately arranged over the entire filter layer.
Regarding Claim 8, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 291-293 are disposed corresponding to the red sub-pixel, the green sub-pixel, and the blue sub-pixel according to same color.
Regarding Claim 9, in Kim, a glass layer 280/112 disposed between the filter layer and the light-emitting layer.
Regarding Claim 10, in Kim, the glass layer 280/112 comprises one or more pieces of transparent glass.
Regarding Claim 11, in Figs. 2 and 9, Park discloses a housing; a circuit board disposed in the housing; and a display screen electrically connected to the circuit board, disposed in the housing (see Fig. 2), and comprising a substrate 111, a light-emitting layer 262, and a filter layer 291-294 disposed in sequence, wherein the display screen and the housing form a closed space, and the filter layer comprises a plurality of color filters 291-294 with diffusion function 330; wherein the light-emitting layer 262 and the circuit board (Fig. 2) are disposed on opposite sides of the substrate. Kim fails to disclose the newly added limitation of the light-emitting layer comprises a group of a red sub-pixel, a green sub-pixel, and a blue sub-pixel that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state, and the light-emitting layer further comprises boundary structures at two sides of the group of the red sub-pixel, the green sub-pixel, and the blue sub-pixel. However, Nam et al. disclose a display device where in Fig 2 and paragraphs 0052, 0058 and 0063-0065, the light-emitting layer 200 comprises a group of a red sub-pixel PX1, a green sub-pixel PX2, and a blue sub-pixel PX3 that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state, and the light-emitting layer further comprises boundary structures 220 (see paragraph 0064 which discloses the material of the element 220 which are capable of blocking light) at two sides of the group of the red sub-pixel PX1, the green sub-pixel PX2, and the blue sub-pixel PX3 (please note that pixel definition layer as disclosed element 220 is on BOTH sides of each individual light emitting layer stack 230)
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the required boundary structure in Kim as taught by Nam et al. in order to prevent light emitting from each individual light emitting layer stack 230 not to interfere with the neighboring one.
Kim and Nam et al. combination fails to disclose the newly added limitation where a filter layer directly contacts on the light emitting layer. However, Lee et al. disclose a cover conversion element where in paragraphs 0007, 0016, 0050, 0051, 0066, 0111 and 0112 and Figs. 2, 5, 6, 10 and 13 the required “directly contacts on the light emitting layer” limitation is disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have the required directly contacts limitation in Kim and Nam et al. combination as taught by Lee et al. in order to modulate the viewing angle of the display/screen depending on the color filter configuration.
Kim, Nam and Lee combination fails to disclose the newly added limitation of
housing that is made of one or more of plastic material, ceramic material, and metal material. However, Drolet et al., discloses displays with collimated light sources and quantum dots where in paragraph 0031 the required limitation of housing that is made of one or more of plastic material, ceramic material, and metal material is disclosed. Furthermore, in paragraphs 0047, 0049, 0054, 0057 and 0075, Drolet et al. discloses light output angle orientation with light emitting layer followed with scattering/diffusing particle embedded color filters
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing of the claimed invention to have the required housing in Kim, Nam and Lee combination as taught by Drolet in order to provide physical protection to the display panel/screen.
Kim, Nam, Lee and Drolet combination fails to disclose the required added limitation of substrate being metal foil. However, Somers et al. discloses a display device where in Figs, 3, 4A and 4B and in paragraph 0049, the required metal foil substrate is disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the metal foil substrate in Kim, Nam, Lee and Drolet combination as taught by Somers et al. in order to make the display screen flexible. (Please note that paragraph 0049 of Somers et al. discloses that the substrate could be rigid such as glass similar to the instant application’s disclosure where this is disclosed in paragraph 0047 of the publication (20220384528). In fact this is the only location where the substrate is disclosed to be a metal foil in instant application)
Regarding Claim 12, in Kim, the color filters 291-294 are configured to diffuse a light emitted by the light-emitting layer, and comprise a red filter, a green filter, and a blue filter.
Regarding Claim 13, in Kim, the color filters 291-294 comprise a plurality of diffusion particles, and when light passes through the filter layer, the light is diffused out of the display screen at various angles by the diffusion particles.
Regarding Claim 14, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 291-293 are arranged at intervals, the filter layer further comprises a black matrix 330, and the black matrix is disposed at the intervals between the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter.
Regarding Claim 15, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 291-293 are polygons, and the black matrix 330 is a polygon.
Regarding Claim 16, in Kim, the color filters 291-294 comprise a plurality of red filters, green filters, and blue filters, the filter layer further comprises a black matrix 330, the black matrix comprises a plurality of sub-black matrices, and the red filters, the green filters, the blue filters, and the sub-black matrices are alternately arranged over the entire filter layer. Furthermore, the light- emitting layer 262 comprises a red sub-pixel, a green sub-pixel, and a blue sub-pixel that emit light of corresponding colors in a power-on state (please see response to the arguments section and paragraphs 0070 and 0158 of Kim et al.)
Regarding Claim 18, in Kim, the red filter, the green filter, and the blue filter 291-293 are disposed corresponding to the red sub-pixel, the green sub-pixel, and the blue sub-pixel according to same color.
Regarding Claim 19, in Kim, the display screen further comprises 280/112 a glass layer disposed between the filter layer and the light- emitting layer.
Regarding Claim 20, in Kim, the glass layer 280/112 comprises one or more pieces of transparent glass.
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 FAZLI ERDEM whose telephone number is (571)272-1914. 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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at 571-272-1945. 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.
/FAZLI ERDEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 9/26/2025
Prosecution Insights