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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
An amendment filed on 01/15/2026 in response to the Office Action mailed on 10/20/2025 is
being acknowledged and entered into the record. The present Non-Final rejection is made by taking into
fully consideration all the amendments.
Response to Arguments
With regards to the previous 112(b) rejection of Claims 1-7, 9-10, 13-19, and 20, Applicant has amended Claim 1 and Claim 20 to delete the limitations that gave rise to the previous 112(b) rejections. Therefore, the 112(b) rejection of Claims 1-7, 9-10, 13-19, and 20 has been withdrawn. However, new 112(b) rejections are made for Claims 2-7, 9-10 and 13-14, as outlined below.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 11-14 of the remarks, filed on 01/15/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 20 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of 103 rejection is made in view of previously applied reference of Huang et al. (previously referred to as WO ‘623) in combination with newly found prior art reference of Ding et al. The combination of Huang et al. and Ding et al. teach the newly added limitations of Claims 1 and 20, as outlined in the rejection below.
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 2-7, 9-10 and 13-14 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation " the at least one of first barrier members " in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitation will be interpreted as referring back to the peel-off barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
Claims 3-7 are rejected due to their dependency on Claim 2.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a plurality of first barrier members” in line 2. However, it is not clear as to whether the above limitation refers back to the “first barrier member” recited in Claim 2 or if it is another second first barrier member.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitation will be interpreted as referring back to the first barrier member of claim 2, both of them referring back to the peel-off barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
Claim 4 is rejected due to its dependency on Claim 4.
Claim 9 recites the limitation " the first barrier pattern " in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitation will be interpreted as referring back to a portion of the peel-off barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
Claim 10 is rejected due to its dependency on Claim 9.
Claim 13 recites the limitations " the second barrier pattern " in line 6” and " the third barrier pattern " in line 7”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitations will be interpreted as referring back to different portions of the peel-off barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
Claim 14 recites the limitations " the plurality of first barrier members " in line 2, and " the second barrier pattern " in line 6 and " the third barrier pattern " in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitations will be interpreted as referring back to portions of the peel-off barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
Claim 14 further recites the limitation " the plurality of second barrier members " in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, the above limitation will be interpreted as referring back to the fracture barrier structure recited in Claim 1.
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.
Rejection note: Italicized claim limitations are limitations not explicitly disclosed in the primary
reference but disclosed in the secondary reference(s).
Claims 1-7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (WO 2020192121 A1), in view of Ding et al. (US 20210028249 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Huang et al. teaches a display substrate 300 comprising
a display region 301 (Fig. 5A: 301, lines 497-498 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
wherein the display region 301 includes an open pore region 3011, a first pixel region R2 and an isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3011, R1, R2, Fig. 5A: 301, 3011, lines 497-498 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
the isolation region R1 is located between the first pixel region R2 and the open pore region 3011, the isolation region R1 surrounds the open pore region 3011 (see annotated Fig. 5C: R1, R2, 3011, Fig. 5A: 3011),
and a boundary line between the open pore region 3011 and the isolation region R1 is a cutting line (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3011, R1, cutting line, , lines 852-853 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
and the display substrate 300 further comprises: a fracture barrier structure 3013 located at the isolation region R1 (annotated Fig. 5C: 3013, R1, , lines 498-506 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
the isolation region R1 comprising a reserved cutting transition region R3 located between the fracture barrier structure 3013 and the open pore region 3011( see annotated Fig. 5C: R3, 3011, 3013);
a peel-off barrier structure 3012 located at the reserved cutting transition region R3 (annotated Fig. 5C: 3012, R3, lines 498-506 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
a distance L between the side of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 closest to the open pore region 3011 and the cutting line is such that: 0 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] L [Symbol font/0xA3] 30 µm (annotated Fig. 5C: L);
Note that according to Fig. 5C, a distance L is greater than or equal to 0 µm and less than or equal to a finite number (say “a” for example), i.e., 0 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] L [Symbol font/0xA3] a µm, which overlaps the claimed range. According to MPEP § 2144.05 (I), “In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
and an encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 (Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, lines 565-567 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
a first portion of the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 being located on a side of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 facing away from a base 302 of the display substrate (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, 302, 3012, first portion);
the peel-off barrier structure 3012 makes a surface of the display substrate 300 in contact with the first portion of the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 uneven (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, 302, 3012, first portion),
wherein the display substrate 300 further comprises: a retaining wall structure 319, 317 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, lines 562, 565 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
the retaining wall structure 319, 317 being arranged on the isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, R1),
the orthographic projection of the fracture barrier structure 3013 on the base 302 of the display substrate being located between the orthographic projection of the retaining wall structure 317, 319 on the base 302 and the orthographic projection of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 on the base 302 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3013, 3012, 317, 319, 302);
the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 extending from the first pixel region R2 to the isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: R1, R2, 305, 306, 307),
and the encapsulation structure comprising a first inorganic encapsulation layer 305, an organic encapsulation layer 306 and a second inorganic encapsulation layer 307 which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 302 (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, lines 572, 576 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
the first inorganic encapsulation layer 305 and the second inorganic encapsulation layer 307 both comprising the first portion (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 307, first portion);
the organic encapsulation layer 306 being located on a side of the retaining wall structure 317, 319 away from the open pore region 3011 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 306, 317, 319);
and the retaining wall structure 319, 317 comprising a first retaining wall 319, 317 and a second retaining wall, wherein the first retaining wall and the second retaining wall are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region, and a height of the first retaining wall being lower than a height of the second retaining wall in a direction perpendicular to the base.
Ding et al. teaches a display substrate comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Huang et al.:
and the retaining wall structure 1036, 1037, 161 comprising a first retaining wall 1036 and a second retaining wall 1037, 161, wherein the first retaining wall 1036 and the second retaining wall 1037, 161 are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region 102, and a height of the first retaining wall 1036 being lower than a height of the second retaining wall 1037, 161 in a direction perpendicular to the base 13 (Fig. 2A: 1036, 1037, 161, 102, 12, paragraph 0124, 0208).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Huang et al. and Ding et al. in order to have the retaining wall structure comprising a first retaining wall and a second retaining wall, wherein the first retaining wall and the second retaining wall are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region, and a height of the first retaining wall being lower than a height of the second retaining wall in a direction perpendicular to the base. By doing so, the lower retaining wall would assist material deposition and leveling while the higher retaining wall would prevent overflow of material.
Regarding Claim 2, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the at least one of first barrier members 3012 are arranged around the open pore region 3011 (see Fig. 5A: 3012, 3011).
Note that Claim 2 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
Regarding Claim 3, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein an orthographic projection of the cutting line on a base of the display substrate at least partially overlaps an orthographic projection of the first barrier member closest to the open pore region on the base;
or, the orthographic projection of the cutting line on the base 302 does not overlap the orthographic projection of the first barrier member 3012 closest to the open pore region 3011 on the base 302 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3012, 302, 3011, cutting line).
Note that Claim 3 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
PNG
media_image1.png
877
1880
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5C of Huang et al. (WO 2020192121 A1)
Regarding Claim 4, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein the peel-off barrier structure 3012 comprises a plurality of first barrier members 3012, the plurality of first barrier members 3012 being nested in sequence (not shown in Figures, see lines 490-493 in English translation of Huang et al.).
Note that according to lines 490-493, Huang et al. teaches multiple barrier walls nested in sequence.
Note that Claim 4 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
Regarding Claim 5, Huang et al. fails to explicitly teach the display substrate according to claim 4, wherein a distance H2 between adjacent first barrier members satisfies: 10 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] H2 [Symbol font/0xA3] 30 µm.
However, Huang et al. states that the barrier structures are spaced apart by a certain distance and thus identifies the above spacing H2 as a result-effective variable. According to MPEP § 2144.05 (II-A), differences in dimension will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such dimension is critical. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)
Since the applicant has not established the criticality of the claimed atomic content range, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above distance through routine optimization such that 10 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] H2 [Symbol font/0xA3] 30 µm.
Regarding Claim 6, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein the fracture barrier structure 3013 comprises a plurality of second barrier members 3013, the second barrier members 3013 being arranged around the open pore region 3011, the plurality of second barrier members 3013 being nested in sequence (Fig. 5A: 3013, 3011, see lines 490-493 in English translation of Huang et al.).
Note that according to lines 490-493, Huang et al. teaches multiple barrier walls nested in sequence.
Regarding Claim 7, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 6, wherein the first barrier members 3012 and the second barrier members 3013 are arranged equidistantly in a direction parallel to a base 302 of the display substrate (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3012, 3013);
and/or the arrangement pitch of the first barrier members is larger than the arrangement pitch of the second barrier members in the direction parallel to the base of the display substrate.
Regarding Claim 9, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the first barrier pattern 3012 comprises a first sub-pattern 3012-1, a second sub-pattern 3012-2 and a third sub-pattern 3012-3 stacked in sequence in a direction away from a base 302 of the display substrate, boundaries of the first sub-pattern 3012-1 and the third sub-pattern 3012-3 each exceed boundaries of the second sub-pattern 3012-2 in a direction parallel to the base 302, and the first notch 3012A is formed between the first sub-pattern 3012-1 and the third sub-pattern 3012-3 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3012, 3012-1, 3012-2, 3012-3, 3012A, lines 523-527 in English translation of Huang et al.).
Note that Claim 9 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
Regarding Claim 10, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 9, the display substrate according to claim 9, wherein the display substrate further comprises
a thin film transistor 311, 312 located at the first pixel region R2, the thin film transistor 311, 312 comprises a source drain electrode layer 312, and the source drain electrode layer 312 comprises a first conductive layer 3121, a second conductive layer 3122 and a third conductive layer 3123 which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 302; the first sub-pattern 3012-1 and the first conductive layer 3121 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, the second sub-pattern 3012-2 and the second conductive layer 3122 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the third sub-pattern 3012-3 and the third conductive layer 3123 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3012-1, 3012-2, 3012-3, 3121, 3123, 3123, 311, 312, 302, lines 534-545 in English translation of Huang et al.);
or, the display substrate further comprises a second source drain metal layer located at the first pixel region, and the second source drain metal layer comprises a fourth conductive layer, a fifth conductive layer and a sixth conductive layer which are stacked in sequence along the direction away from the base; the first sub-pattern and the fourth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, the second sub-pattern and the fifth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the third sub- pattern and the sixth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material.
Regarding Claim 13, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the display substrate further comprises a sub-pixel driving circuit located at the first pixel region R2, the sub-pixel driving circuit comprising a capacitance structure 313, 315, 314, the capacitance structure 313, 315, 314, comprising a first plate 313 and a second plate 314 arranged opposite to each other, and the first plate 313 being located between the second plate 314 and the base 302 of the display substrate (in English translation of Huang et al.: 313, 314, 315, 302, lines 534-545 in English translation of Huang et al.);
and the second barrier pattern and the second plate are arranged on the same layer and in the same material; and/or the third barrier pattern and the first plate are arranged on the same layer and in the same material.
Note that in the embodiment of Fig. 5C, the barrier structure 3012 does not comprise a second barrier pattern and third barrier pattern.
However, in a different embodiment shown in Fig. 8B, Huang et al. teaches a barrier pattern 4012 that comprises a second barrier pattern 4012-2 and a third barrier pattern 4012-3 and further teaches the following limitation not disclosed in the embodiment of Fig. 5C:
and the second barrier pattern 4012-2 and the second plate 414 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material; and/or the third barrier pattern 4012-3 and the first plate 413 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material (see annotated Fig. 8B: : 413, 414, 4012-2, 4012-3, lines 667-678 in English translation of Huang et al.).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the different embodiments of Huang et al. in order to come up with the claimed invention as recited in claim 13. Doing so would simplify the manufacturing process.
Note that Claim 13 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
PNG
media_image2.png
785
1858
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8B of Huang et al. (WO 2020192121 A1)
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of different embodiments of Huang et al. shown in Fig. 5C and Fig. 8B teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, the display substrate according to claim 1,
wherein the plurality of first barrier members 3012/4012 are divided into a first portion of the first barrier members (4012) and a second portion of the first barrier members (3012) (see annotated Fig. 5C and 8B),
Note that according to lines 490-493, Huang et al. teaches multiple barrier structures nested in sequence. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have arranged two first barriers members in the display substrate of Fig. 5C, one having a structure similar to 4012 of Fig. 8B and another having structure similar to 3012 of Fig. 5C next to two second barrier member having structure similar to 4013 of Fig. 8B in order to further minimize cracking and delamination of the device layers. In such an arrangement, the barrier member having structure similar to 4012 (see Fig. 8B) is interpreted as the first portion of the first barrier member and the barrier member having structure similar to 3012 (see Fig. 5C) is interpreted as the first portion of the first barrier member.
the first portion of the first barrier members (4012) being located between the second portion of the first barrier members (3012) and the plurality of second barrier members 3013 (see annotated Fig. 5C and 8B);
the first portion of the first barrier members (4012) comprises the second barrier pattern 4012-2 and a third barrier pattern 4012-3 (see annotated Fig. 8B: 4012, 4012-2, 4012-3);
the second portion of the first barrier members (3012) does not comprise the second and third barrier patterns (see annotated Fig. 5C and 8B);
Note that the first barrier members (3012) in Fig. 5C does not comprise the second and third barrier patterns.
and the second barrier member 4013 has the same structure as the first portion of the first barrier members (4012) (see annotated Fig. 5C and 8B).
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the different embodiments of Huang et al. in order to come up with the claimed invention as recited in claim 13. Doing so would further minimize cracking and delamination of the device layers.
Note that Claim 14 is examined based on the interpretation provided under the 112(b) rejection above.
Regarding Claim 19, Huang et al. teaches a display device comprising the display substrate according to claim 1 (lines 893-894 in English translation of Huang et al.).
Regarding Claim 20, Huang et al. teaches a method for manufacturing a display substrate 300, wherein the display substrate 300 comprises
a display region 301 (Fig. 5A: 301, lines 497-498 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
and the display region 301 comprises an open pore region 3011, a first pixel region R2 and an isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3011, R1, R2, Fig. 5A: 301, 3011, lines 497-498 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
the isolation region R1 is located between the first pixel region R2 and the open pore region 3011, the isolation region R1 surrounds the open pore region 3011 (see annotated Fig. 5C: R1, R2, 3011, Fig. 5A: 3011),
and a boundary line between the open pore region 3011 and the isolation region R1 is a cutting line (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3011, R1, cutting line, , lines 852-853 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
the method for manufacturing the display substrate 300 comprising: fabricating a fracture barrier structure 3013 located in the isolation region R1 (annotated Fig. 5C: 3013, R1, , lines 498-506 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
fabricating a peel-off barrier structure 3012, the peel-off barrier structure 3012 being located at the reserved cutting transition region and a sacrificial cutting region R3 (annotated Fig. 5C: 3012, R3, lines 498-506 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
a distance L between the side of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 closest to the open pore region 3011 and the cutting line is such that: 0 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] L [Symbol font/0xA3] 30 µm (annotated Fig. 5C: L);
Note that according to Fig. 5C, a distance L is greater than or equal to 0 µm and less than or equal to a finite number (say “a” for example), i.e., 0 µm [Symbol font/0xA3] L [Symbol font/0xA3] a µm, which overlaps the claimed range. According to MPEP § 2144.05 (I), “In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
fabricating an encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 (Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, lines 565-567 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
a first portion of the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 being located on a side of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 facing away from a base 302 of the display substrate (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, 302, 3012, first portion);
the peel-off barrier structure 3012 makes a surface of the display substrate 300 in contact with the first portion of the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 uneven (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, 302, 3012, first portion),
and the step of forming the open pore region 3011 and the isolation region R1 comprises: cutting the display substrate along the cutting line, the cutting line being a boundary line between the reserved cutting transition region and the sacrificial cutting transition region R3, and removing all the structures surrounded by the cutting line to form the open pore region 3011 (see annotated Fig. 5C: R3, 3011, R1, lines 978, 979 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
wherein the display substrate 300 further comprises: a retaining wall structure 319, 317 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, lines 562, 565 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
the retaining wall structure 319, 317 being arranged on the isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, R1),
the orthographic projection of the fracture barrier structure 3013 on the base 302 of the display substrate being located between the orthographic projection of the retaining wall structure 317, 319 on the base 302 and the orthographic projection of the peel-off barrier structure 3012 on the base 302 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3013, 3012, 317, 319, 302);
the encapsulation structure 305, 306, 307 extending from the first pixel region R2 to the isolation region R1 (see annotated Fig. 5C: R1, R2, 305, 306, 307),
and the encapsulation structure comprising a first inorganic encapsulation layer 305, an organic encapsulation layer 306 and a second inorganic encapsulation layer 307 which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 302 (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 306, 307, lines 572, 576 in English Translation of Huang et al.);
the first inorganic encapsulation layer 305 and the second inorganic encapsulation layer 307 both comprising the first portion (annotated Fig. 5C: 305, 307, first portion);
the organic encapsulation layer 306 being located on a side of the retaining wall structure 317, 319 away from the open pore region 3011 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 306, 317, 319);
and the retaining wall structure 319, 317 comprising a first retaining wall 319, 317 and a second retaining wall, wherein the first retaining wall and the second retaining wall are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region, and a height of the first retaining wall being lower than a height of the second retaining wall in a direction perpendicular to the base.
Ding et al. teaches a method for manufacturing display substrate comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Huang et al.:
and the retaining wall structure 1036, 1037, 161 comprising a first retaining wall 1036 and a second retaining wall 1037, 161, wherein the first retaining wall 1036 and the second retaining wall 1037, 161 are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region 102, and a height of the first retaining wall 1036 being lower than a height of the second retaining wall 1037, 161 in a direction perpendicular to the base 13 (Fig. 2A: 1036, 1037, 161, 102, 12, paragraph 0124, 0208).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Huang et al. and Ding et al. in order to have the retaining wall structure comprising a first retaining wall and a second retaining wall, wherein the first retaining wall and the second retaining wall are sequentially arranged in a direction close to the open pore region, and a height of the first retaining wall being lower than a height of the second retaining wall in a direction perpendicular to the base. By doing so, the lower retaining wall would assist material deposition and leveling while the higher retaining wall would prevent overflow of material.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (WO 2020192121 A1), in view of Ding et al. (US 20210028249 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Bang et al. (US 20200381653 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Huang et al. and Ding et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the display substrate further comprises:
a planarization layer 317, a pixel definition layer 319 and a spacer layer 308 which are sequentially stacked and arranged in a direction away from the base 302, wherein the planarization layer 317, the pixel definition layer 319 and the spacer layer 308 are all located in the first pixel region R2 (as taught by Huang et al., see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, 308, R2, lines 562-567 in English translation of Huang et al.);
the first retaining wall 317, 319 comprising a first retaining wall pattern 317 and a second retaining wall pattern 319 which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 302 (as taught by Huang et al., see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, 302, retaining wall);
the first retaining wall pattern and the pixel definition layer being arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the second retaining wall pattern and the spacer layer being arranged on the same layer and in the same material; or the first retaining wall pattern 317 and the planarization layer 317 being arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the second retaining wall pattern 319 and the pixel defining layer 319 being arranged on the same layer and in the same material (as taught by Huang et al., see annotated Fig. 5C: 317, 319, lines 562-567 in English translation of Huang et al.);
and the second retaining wall 1036, 161 comprising a third retaining wall pattern 161, a fourth retaining wall pattern 1037 and a fifth retaining wall pattern which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 13 (as taught by Ding et al., (Fig. 2A: 1037, 161, paragraph 0124, 0208);
the third retaining wall pattern 161 and the planarization layer 160 being arranged on the same layer and in the same material (Fig. 2A: 160, 161, paragraph 0128)
the fourth retaining wall pattern 1037 and the pixel definition layer 18 being arranged on the same layer and in the same material (Fig. 2A: 160, 161, paragraph 0126),
and the fifth retaining wall pattern and the spacer layer being arranged on the same layer and in the same material.
The combination of Huang et al. and Ding et al. fails to explicitly teach a fifth retaining wall pattern, and the fifth retaining wall pattern and the spacer layer being arranged on the same layer and in the same material.
However, Bang et al. teaches a display substrate comprising a fifth retaining wall pattern 115b, and the fifth retaining wall pattern 115b and the spacer layer 115 being arranged on the same layer and in the same material (Fig. 5: 115, 115b, paragraph 0166).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Huang et al., Ding et al. and Bang et al. in order to have a fifth retaining wall pattern, and the fifth retaining wall pattern and the spacer layer being arranged on the same layer and in the same material. By doing so, the fifth retaining wall would offer greater barrier height and forming the above patterns synchronously would simplify the manufacturing process.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (WO 2020192121 A1), in view of Ding et al. (US 20210028249 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Li et al. (CN 111129351 A).
Regarding Claim 17, Huang et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the display substrate further comprises: a plurality of inner isolation posts, wherein the plurality of inner isolation posts are arranged at the isolation region, the plurality of inner isolation posts are located at one side of the retaining wall structure away from the open pore region, the inner isolation posts surround the open pore region, the plurality of inner isolation posts are nested and arranged in sequence, and a side surface of the inner isolation posts has a second notch;
and a light-emitting functional layer 303, wherein the light-emitting functional layer 303 comprises a portion located at the first pixel region R2 and a portion of the isolation region R1 (Fig. 5B: 303, annotated Fig. 5C: R1, R2, lines 517-533 in English Translation of Huang et al.),
and the portion of the light-emitting functional layer located at the isolation region is interrupted at the side of the inner isolation posts.
Li et al. teaches a display substrate comprising the following limitations not disclosed in Huang et al.:
wherein the display substrate further comprises: a plurality of inner isolation posts 8, wherein the plurality of inner isolation posts 8 are arranged at the isolation region (area other that A, B and C of Fig. 13), the plurality of inner isolation posts 8 are located at one side of the retaining wall structure 2 away from the open pore region C, the inner isolation posts 8 surround the open pore region C, the plurality of inner isolation posts 8 are nested and arranged in sequence, and a side surface of the inner isolation posts 8 has a second notch (the indentation between each post 8); and a light-emitting functional layer 50, wherein the light-emitting functional layer (the striped layer directly contacting and surrounding the retaining wall 2 of Fig. 13) comprises a portion located at the first pixel region A and a portion of the isolation region (area other that A, B and C of Fig. 13), and the portion of the light-emitting functional layer located at the isolation region is interrupted at the side of the inner isolation posts 8 (see Fig. 13: 8, 2, A, B, C, lines 124-129, 376-381 in English translation of Li).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the teachings of Huang et al., Ding et al. and Bang et al. in order to come up with the claimed invention as recited in claim 17. Doing so would minimize stress transmission into the pixel region.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Huang et al. and Li et al. teaches the display substrate according to claim 17,
wherein the display substrate further comprises a thin film transistor 311, 312 located in the first pixel region R2, the thin film transistor 311, 312 comprises a source drain electrode layer 312, and the source drain electrode layer 312 comprises a first conductive layer 3121, a second conductive layer 3122 and a third conductive layer 3123 which are stacked in sequence in a direction away from the base 302 (see annotated Fig. 5C: 3121, 3123, 3123, 311, 312, 302, lines 534-545 in English translation of Huang et al.);
the inner isolation post comprises a first isolation pattern, a second isolation pattern and a third isolation pattern which are stacked and arranged in sequence along a direction away from the base, the first isolation pattern and the first conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, the second isolation pattern and the second conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the third isolation pattern and the third conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material;
or, the display substrate further comprises a second source drain metal layer located at the first pixel region, and the second source drain metal layer comprises a fourth conductive layer, a fifth conductive layer and a sixth conductive layer which are stacked in sequence along the direction away from the base; the first isolation pattern and the fourth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, the second isolation pattern and fifth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the third isolation pattern and the sixth conductive layer are arranged on the same layer and in the same material.
However, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have combined the teachings of both Huang et al. and Li et al. and modified the structure of the isolation posts of Li et al. to be similar to any of the barrier structures 3012/3013 of Huang et al. such that the inner isolation post comprises a first isolation pattern (similar to 3012-1 of annotated Fig. 5C), a second isolation pattern (similar to 3012-2 of annotated Fig. 5C) and a third isolation pattern (similar to 3012-3 of annotated Fig. 5C) which are stacked and arranged in sequence along a direction away from the base 302, the first isolation pattern (similar to 3012-1 of annotated Fig. 5C) and the first conductive layer 3121 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, the second isolation pattern (similar to 3012-2 of annotated Fig. 5C) and the second conductive layer 3122 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material, and the third isolation pattern (similar to 3012-3 of annotated Fig. 5C) and the third conductive layer 3123 are arranged on the same layer and in the same material (see also rejection of Claim 10 above). Doing so would enable the synchronous fabrication of the isolation posts and the transistor, further simplifying the manufacturing process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMNA F IQBAL whose telephone number is 571-272-1587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30 am - 5.30 pm EST.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at 571-272-5055. 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.
/HAMNA FATHIMA IQBAL/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 06/03/2026
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights