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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/02/2026 has been entered.
IDS
The IDS document(s) filed on 04/08/2026 have been considered. Copies of the PTO-1449 documents are herewith enclosed with this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 has been considered but are
moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (KR 20200080923 A), English translation provided, hereafter “Park”, and further in view of Jeong et al. (US 2016/0190218 A1), hereafter “Jeong”.
As to claim 1, Park teaches a display device, comprising:
a substrate (Page 4, Par. 2, 2, Fig. 7);
a pixel area (Page 4, Par. 4, 21-24) including two or more subpixels on the substrate, and of the pixel area, a first subpixel (23) area where a color filter (Page 5, Par. 9, 43) is positioned and a second subpixel area (24) adjacent to the first subpixel area are disposed;
a first overcoat layer (Page 5, Par. 8, 3b; see annotated Fig. 7 below) and a second overcoat layer (see annotated Fig. 7 below) that are disconnected from each other (where the wiring from element 31-34 connect to element 5) in a disconnected area between the first subpixel area and the second subpixel area, the first overcoat layer and the second overcoat layer respectively positioned in the first subpixel area and the second subpixel area (see annotated Fig. 7 below); and
a first bank layer positioned at a boundary of the first subpixel area and a second bank layer positioned at a boundary of the second subpixel area (see annotated Fig. 7 below),
wherein the first bank layer and the second overcoat layer include an overlapping portion (see annotated Fig. 7 below) where the first bank layer and the second overcoat layer overlap with each other on the color filter (Overlapping portion is located on the color filter; Examiner notes that “on” in is a broad term and in its Broadest Reasonable Interpretation doesn’t mean directly contacting).
PNG
media_image1.png
662
866
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Park fails to teach wherein a portion of the first bank layer is interposed (i)between the first overcoat layer and second overcoat layer and (ii) within the disconnected area that is between the first overcoat layer and the second overcoat layer and overlaps with a portion of the color filter.
Jeong teaches a similar device where a portion of a bank layer (⁋ [0065], Fig. 3, 361a) is interposed between two overcoat layers (341+342) and within the disconnected area of both overcoat layers and overlapping with a portion of a color filter (230).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Park’s banks, which are located above the disconnect of the first and second overcoat layer, to interpose both the overcoat layers as taught by Jeong for the benefit of preventing a color sensing difference due to different light leakages and allow light reflected by the electrode to pass through the color filter (⁋⁋ [0063]-[0065]).
As to claim 2, Park teaches wherein the first bank layer and the second overcoat layer contact each other at the overlapping portion (shown in annotated Fig. 7).
As to claim 3, Park teaches wherein the disconnected area between the first overcoat layer and the second overcoat layer is positioned in an area of the first bank layer (see annotated Fig. 7).
As to claim 4, Park teaches wherein a boundary of the first bank layer and the second bank layer is positioned in an area of the second overcoat layer (see annotated Fig. 7).
As to claim 5, Park teaches wherein the first subpixel area is one of a red subpixel, a blue subpixel (Page 5, Par. 9, 43, “blue”), and a green subpixel.
As to claim 6, Park teaches wherein the second subpixel area is a white subpixel (Page 4, Par. 5, 24, “emit white (W) light”).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Jeong, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kwak et al. (US 2017/0285424 A1), hereafter “Kwak”.
As to claim 7, Park and Jeong fail to teach further comprising a light blocking member disposed on the color filter.
Kwak teaches a similar display device with a light blocking member (Par. 0114, 376, Fig. 7) disposed on a color filter (354).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the light blocking portion as taught by Kwak into the display device of Park and Jeong to prevent light transmitted through the switching element and the data lines from being emitted outwards (Par. 0111)
As to claim 8, Kwak teaches wherein the light blocking member includes a first electrode (Par. 0114, PE).
As to claim 9, Kwak teaches wherein the color filter (354) is disconnected between the first overcoat layer (Par. 0114, left 391, Fig. 7) and the second overcoat layer (right 391).
As to claim 10, Kwak teaches wherein the light blocking member is positioned in the disconnected area of the color filter (Fig. 7 shows 376 positioned in the disconnected area of 354).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARNELL HUNTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1796. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30pm.
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, Sue Purvis 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.
/CARNELL HUNTER III/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights