DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed March 27, 2026.
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being clearly anticipated by PARK et al. (2020/0040255) is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claim 1 more specifically defining the copolymer.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al (2020/0040255) in view of ARIDOMI et al (2019/0137874) and/or LEE et al (2019/0137874).
The claimed invention now recites the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
774
680
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PARK et al report a composition comprising a quantum dot a polymerizable monomer, an initiator, a hollow metal oxide particle, as reported in the previous paragraph and is included by reference.
With respect to claim 4 the cyclic ether groups claimed are not reported in a working example, however para. [0121] disclose the glycidyl acrylate monomers which are suitable as a repeating unit in the copolymer, see below:
PNG
media_image2.png
568
431
media_image2.png
Greyscale
ARIDOMI et al and LEE et al disclose composition for touch panels comprising a binder, photoinitiator, an unsaturated monomer and particles. Applicants are directed to Table 1 on page 22 wherein the polymer binders P2, P3, and P5 -P12 report the content of styrene at 45 mol% which meets the claimed range of formula (1) as well as the content of methacrylic acid (MAA)at 20 mol% at , and glycidyl methacrylate (MAA-GMA) at 15 mol%, see below:
PNG
media_image3.png
740
588
media_image3.png
Greyscale
LEE et al report composition for organic insulating film wherein the copolymer binders include styrene in an amount of 43 mol% with GMA and MAA see Table 1 below:
PNG
media_image4.png
288
382
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive quantum dot composites to select glycidyl acrylate and maleimide units as a monomeric unit in the copolymer of the Examples in PARK et al and formulate the copolymer binder resin with a mol% of styrene at 43-56 mol% as taught by ARIDOMI et al and LEE et al with the reasonable expectation of same or similar results for improved light scattering, high luminance, high efficiency and high color reproducibility as reported in para. [0038].
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ONO et al (2020/0115269) in view of ARIDOMI et al (2019/0137874) and/or LEE et al (2019/0137874).
The claimed invention has been recited above and is included by reference.
ONO et al ‘269 report a photosensitive composition comprising an alkali-soluble resin, a photopolymerizable monomer, a photopolymerization initiator, a hollow silica and an epoxy compound.
In the composition, the alkali-soluble resin is reported in Synthesis Example 1 on page 18, wherein the resin has a Styrene/GMA (glycidyl methacrylate/DCPMA (dicyclopentanyl methacrylate/BPDA (biphenyltetracarboxylic dianhydride), the photopolymerizable monomer is dipentaerythritol Penta acrylate formulated with an epoxy compound, and (I-4) a hollow silica particles, see Table on page 22 wherein Example 28 report the use of hollow silica ((I)-4).
ARIDOMI et al and LEE et al disclose composition for touch panels and display devices wherein the copolymer binder in an insulating layer includes monomeric units synthesized in an amount within the claimed range of mol% as disclosed above. The binders are used in the same field of endeavor such that the skilled artisan could select ranges of the monomeric repeating units as taught above and expect same or similar results.
The reference fails to report the specifics with respect to the touch panel incorporated into an organic light emitting display device, however the structures claimed in claims 19 and 20 are generic structures to touch panels and OLED, wherein ONO et al teach that the photosensitive composition can be used as an insulating layer in touch panels as seen on page 32, para. [0265].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of photosensitive compositions employ known binder as reported in ARIDOMI et al and LEE et al in Example 28 in an insulating composition for touch panels and place the touch panel in an OLED with the reasonable expectation having an insulating layer which is excellent in development adhesion and good solvent resistance.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SAIE et al (2012/0003436) is cited of interest as reporting compositions comprising unsaturated compounds, photoinitiators, binders and hollow particles for low refractive index comprising binders having styrene, MAA and a third comonomer. The mol% of the styrene fail to meet the ratios in the claimed copolymer binder of claim 1, however do disclose equivalent monomers with aromatic rings, such as benzyl methacrylate in the claimed range for styrene derived monomers, see (C-4) on page 18.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN S CHU whose telephone number is (571)272-1329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, IFP-Flex.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Huff, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-1385. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
/John S. Chu/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1737
J. Chu
June 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights