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
Receipt is acknowledged of a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) and a submission, filed on 02/27/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Kim discloses a wall structure (as labeled by examiner below), the wall structure having a top surface (as labeled by examiner below) and a sidewall, the sidewall having at least one scalloped surface (side surface non-uniformity); and
depositing a sidewall planarization layer directly on the wall structure forming a planarized surface across and filling at least one of a plurality of voids (gaps in layer 100 formed by 100c making gaps in layer 100) along the at least one scalloped surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
747
1329
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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, 4, 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. 20220223666 in view of Won et al. 20180331328.
PNG
media_image1.png
747
1329
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, fig. 5A of Kim discloses a method for forming an encapsulating structure 300 on an organic light emitting diode (OLED) patterned substrate, comprising:
an OLED patterned substrate having a wall structure (as labeled by examiner above), the wall structure having a top surface (as labeled by examiner above) and a sidewall, the sidewall having at least one scalloped surface (side surface non-uniformity); and
depositing a sidewall planarization layer directly on the wall structure forming a planarized surface across and filling at least one of a plurality of voids (gaps in layer 100 formed by 100c making gaps in layer 100) along the at least one scalloped surface.
Kim does not disclose of positioning an OLED patterned substrate into a plasma processing chamber.
However, Won discloses a method of forming positioning a patterned substrate into a plasma processing chamber and depositing a sidewall planarization layer.
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a method of Kim further comprising positioning an OLED patterned substrate into a plasma processing chamber in order to form a clean and defect free film with a deposition tool.
Regarding claim 4, Kim necessary discloses further comprising; repeating the depositing the sidewall planarization layer as the layer is atomic layer and furthermore Kim discloses of 330 and 310 which are repeating the depositing the sidewall planarization layer as the layer as well.
Regarding claim 6, Kim and Won disclose claim 1, but do not disclose wherein the thickness of the sidewall planarization layer is between about 0.1 μm to about 1.0 μm.
However, note that Kim inherent disclose that the sidewall planarization layer has some thickness.
As such it would have been obvious to form a method comprising wherein the thickness of the sidewall planarization layer is between about 0.1 μm to about 1.0 μm in order to ease the stress desired and thick enough protection layer.
Regarding claim 10, fig. 5A of KIm discloses further comprising forming a barrier layer PVX1 on the sidewall planarization layer.
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Won in view of Kim et al. 20110053362 (Kim2).
Regarding claim 3, Kim and Won disclose clam 1, but do not disclose further comprising: curing the sidewall planarization layer using a mixed gas plasma in the processing chamber.
However, par [0047] of Kim2 discloses curing a mask pattern layer using a mixed gas plasma in the processing chamber in order to harden the mask pattern layer.
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a method Kim and Won further comprising: curing the sidewall planarization layer using a mixed gas plasma in the processing chamber such as taught by Kim2 in order to harden the sidewall planarization layer.
Regarding claim 5, Kim and Won disclose claim 4. Kim necessary discloses further comprising; repeating the depositing the sidewall planarization layer as the layer is atomic layer and furthermore Kim discloses of 330 and 310 which are repeating the depositing the sidewall planarization layer as the layer as well.
Kim and Won do not disclose further comprising: repeating the curing the sidewall planarization layer.
However, par [0047] of Kim2 discloses curing a mask pattern layer using a mixed gas plasma in the processing chamber in order to harden the mask pattern layer.
Note curing is a process that is repeated second after second until total desired time is done.
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a method Kim and Won further comprising: repeating the curing the sidewall planarization layer such as taught by Kim2 in order to harden the sidewall planarization layer.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Won in view of Choi et al. 20140024180.
Regarding claim 2, Kim and Won discloses claim 1, but do not disclose wherein depositing the sidewall planarization layer comprises flowing fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F).
However, par [0033] of Choi discloses a planarization material 402 is a polymer-like material having film properties including both organic and inorganic states, suitable examples of the polymer-like material may include plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO), hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDSO), fluorine doped hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDSO:F), or other silicon/carbon containing SiO composite. Deposition of the pp-HMDSO material layer is achieved by flowing an oxygen-containing gas and HMDSO gas. During deposition of the pp-HMDSO layer, the ratio of the flow of oxygen-containing gas to the flow of HMDSO gas is controlled to control the organic/inorganic state and properties of the resulting pp-HMDSO layer.
As such it would have been obvious to form a method of Kim and Won comprising wherein depositing the sidewall planarization layer comprises flowing fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F) such as taught by Choi in order to form a polymer-like material having film properties including both organic and inorganic states.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Won and Choi in view of Ho et al. 20110256041.
Regarding claims 8-9, Kim and Won and Choi do not disclose wherein the fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F) flows through a degasser before entering the plasma processing chamber;wherein the fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F) flows from the degasser and through a vaporizer before entering the processing chamber.
However, fig. 3A and par [0042] of Ho discloses plasma processing chamber comprising in par [0042] In applications in which the fluid, such as the liquid precursor 66, is toxic or caustic, a purge line 100 is connected between the degasser 92 and a gas tank 104 to allow the operator to purge the liquid vaporization system 63 of the fluid (e.g., liquid precursor 66 and its vapor) before servicing any valves, vaporizers, or other components. To further reduce the amount of residual liquid precursor 66 in the system 63, a vacuum line 106 coupled to the vacuum system of the process chamber 61 can be used with the purge line 100 to evacuate residual liquid precursor 66 from the system.
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a method of Huang and Won and Choi further comprising wherein the fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F) flows through a degasser before entering the plasma processing chamber; wherein the fluorinated plasma-polymerized hexamethyldisiloxane (pp-HMDSO:F) flows from the degasser and through a vaporizer before entering the processing chamber to allow the operator to purge the liquid vaporization system 63 of the fluid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VONGSAVANH SENGDARA whose telephone number is (571)270-5770. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM 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, PURVIS A. Sue can be reached on (571 )272-1236. 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.
/VONGSAVANH SENGDARA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights