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 .
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final office action in response to the communication filed 11/18/2022.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claims 4-6 and 15-17 have been withdrawn.
Claims 1-3, 7-14, and 18-20 have been examined.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant' s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The instant application claims priority to Application No. Korean Application 10-2021-0166110 filed on 11/26/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A (FIG. 3 and 4) claims 2-3 and 13-14 and generic claims 1, 7-12, and 18-20 in the reply filed on 8/15/2025 is acknowledged. Claim4-6 a withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species B.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/18/2025 and 8/20/2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
(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.
Claims 1-3, 7, 8, 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (US 20110272715 A1).
The following annotated figure 2 from Kang will be used in discussion:
PNG
media_image1.png
569
981
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1. An organic light-emitting display device (Kang, Abstract) comprising:
a substrate; (Kang, Fig. 2, substrate 100)
an insulating layer disposed on the substrate; (Fig. 4 showing a cross section of part of the device from Fig. 2, insulating layer 215 and planarization layer 217)
a first electrode disposed on the insulating layer; (Fig. 2, first electrode 231)
a pixel defining layer (first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) disposed on the first electrode and defining an emission area by an opening exposing at least part of the first electrode; (See annotated Fig. 2, emission area EA)
a metal layer (second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’, [0025] the second pixel defining sub-layer 219 b’ is made from an inorganic material. Metal is understood to be an inorganic material.) disposed on the pixel defining layer (the second pixel defining sublayer 219b’ is deposited on the first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) and in a non-emission area (annotated Fig. 2NEA) around the emission area (EA);
an organic light-emitting layer (intermediate layer 233) disposed on the first electrode (first electrode 231) in the opening; and (See Fig. 2)
2. The organic light-emitting display device of claim 1, wherein the metal layer is in direct contact with the pixel defining layer. (See Fig. 2, first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’ and second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’)
7. The organic light-emitting display device of claim 1, wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 4, insulating layer 215 and planarization layer 217) comprises a first organic insulating layer (insulating layer 215) and a second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 217)
8. The organic light-emitting display device of claim 7, further comprising a conductive layer (annotated Fig. 2, conductive layer 223a) disposed between the first organic insulating layer (insulating layer 215) and the second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 217)
12. An organic light-emitting display device (Kang, Abstract) comprising:
a substrate; (Kang, Fig. 2, substrate 100)
a thin film transistor disposed on the substrate and comprising a semiconductor layer, a gate electrode, a source electrode, and a drain electrode; (Fig. 4 showing a cross section of part of the device from Fig. 2, TFT 220 including drain/source electrode 223, active layer 22, and a gate electrode 227.)
an insulating layer disposed on the thin film transistor; (Fig. 4, insulating layer 215 and planarization layer 217)
a first electrode disposed on the insulating layer; (Fig. 2, first electrode 231)
a pixel defining layer (first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) disposed on the first electrode and defining an emission area by an opening exposing at least part of the first electrode; (See annotated Fig. 2, emission area EA)
a metal layer (second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’, [0025] the second pixel defining sub-layer 219 b’ is made from an inorganic material. Metal is understood to be an inorganic material.) disposed on the pixel defining layer (the second pixel defining sublayer 219b’ is deposited on the first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) and in a non-emission area (annotated Fig. 2NEA) around the emission area (EA);
an organic light-emitting layer (intermediate layer 233) disposed on the first electrode (first electrode 231) in the opening; and (Fig. 2)
a second electrode (Fig. 2 second electrode 235) disposed on the organic light-emitting layer in the emission area and the non-emission area, wherein the metal layer is disposed between the pixel defining layer and the second electrode in the non-emission area. (See Fig. 2)
13. The organic light-emitting display device of claim 12, wherein the metal layer is in direct contact with the pixel defining layer. (See Fig. 2, first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’ and second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’)
18. The organic light-emitting display device of claim 12, wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 4, insulating layer 215 and planarization layer 217) comprises a first organic insulating layer (insulating layer 215) and a second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 217)
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 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 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Kang or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kang in view of Choung et al US 10396136 B2 (hereinafter Choung).
Regarding claim 3, Kang discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Kang further discloses:
further comprising a first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer, ([0030], the intermediate layer 233 includes an organic emission layer, a hole transport layer, which may be considered a first functional layer.)
…
and the metal layer (second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’) is disposed on the upper surface of the pixel defining layer (first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) and a side wall of the opening and between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer. ([0029], “[t]he intermediate layer 233 overlaps the second pixel defining sub-layer 219 b′, which is formed to be thin.” Therefore, the metal layer 219b’ on the sidewall of the pixel defining layer and between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer 233.)
Kang further discloses the intermediate layer 233 is on the part of the upper surface of the pixel defining layer as shown in annotated figure at S1. Furthermore, [0029], the intermediate layer 233 may be continuously formed on the entire surface of the substrate 100. This can be considered to be extending on the upper surface. Therefor Kang would disclose “wherein the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer,” and thereby disclose all the elements of the claim under 102(a)(1).
In the alternative, Choung which teaches an organic light emitting display (Choung, Abstract), discloses:
wherein the first functional layer (Choung, Fig. 3, first intermediate layer 321) extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer, (pixel-defining film 180)
The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.
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 device of Kang to have the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer as taught by Choung for purposes of having the first emission pattern being disposed in both the emission portion and the non-emission portion. (Choung, Col. 7, lines, 31-35.)
Regarding claim 14, Kang further discloses:
The organic light-emitting display device of claim 12, further comprising a first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer, ([0030], the intermediate layer 233 includes an organic emission layer, a hole transport layer, which may be considered a first functional layer.)
…
and the metal layer (second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’) is disposed on the upper surface of the pixel defining layer (first pixel defining sub-layer 219a’) and a side wall of the opening and between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer. ([0029], “[t]he intermediate layer 233 overlaps the second pixel defining sub-layer 219 b′, which is formed to be thin.” Therefore, the metal layer 219b’ on the sidewall of the pixel defining layer and between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer 233.)
Kang further discloses the intermediate layer 233 is on the part of the upper surface of the pixel defining layer as shown in annotated figure at S1. Furthermore, [0029], the intermediate layer 233 may be continuously formed on the entire surface of the substrate 100. This can be considered to be extending on the upper surface. Therefor Kang would disclose “wherein the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer,” and thereby disclose all the elements of the claim under 102(a)(1).
In the alternative, Choung which teaches an organic light emitting display (Choung, Abstract), discloses:
wherein the first functional layer (Choung, Fig. 3, first intermediate layer 321) extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer, (pixel-defining film 180)
The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.
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 device of Kang to have the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer as taught by Choung for purposes of having the first emission pattern being disposed in both the emission portion and the non-emission portion. (Choung, Col. 7, lines, 31-35.)
Claims 9, 10, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang in view of Kim et al. KR 20180062253 A (hereinafter Kim, Google translation provided.)
Regarding claim 9, Kang discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Kang does not appear to disclose “the metal layer ([0025] second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’ is an inorganic material (i.e. a metal)) comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg).
However, Kim teaches “an organic light emitting display device capable of preventing outgassing generated in outer layers of an organic light emitting diode (OLED) from affecting the OLED” (Kim, Abstract), discloses:
the metal layer (Kim, Fig. 1, first outgassing barrier layer 500 and second outgassing barrier layer 400) comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg). (page 2/8 of the Google translation of Kim, the metal forming the outgassing barrier layer is Ytterbium)
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 device of Kang to have the metal layer comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg) as taught by Kim for purposes of preventing the OLED from being deteriorated by the outgas. (Page 3/8 of the Google translation of Kim.)
Regarding claim 10, Kang discloses all of elements claim 1.
Kang also discloses that the range of the thicknesses which has a lower level of .1 µm (1000Å). (Kang, [0027].) However, Kang does not appear to disclose the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.
Kim further discloses, that the thickness of the first outgassing barrier layer may be between 10 Å to 50 Å. (Page 2/8 of the google translation of Kim.) and the thickness of the second outgassing barrier layer may be tween 10 Å to 50 Å. Therefore a total thickness of 20 Å to 100 Å. Which is within the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.
Regarding claim 19, Kang discloses all the elements of claim 12.
Kang does not appear to disclose “the metal layer ([0025] second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’ is an inorganic material) comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg).
However, Kim teaches “an organic light emitting display device capable of preventing outgassing generated in outer layers of an organic light emitting diode (OLED) from affecting the OLED” (Kim, Abstract), discloses:
the metal layer (Kim, Fig. 1, first outgassing barrier layer 500 and second outgassing barrier layer 400) comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg). (Page 2/8 of the Google translation of Kim, the metal forming the outgassing barrier layer is Ytterbium.)
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 device of Kang to have the metal layer comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ytterbium (Yb) and magnesium (Mg) as taught by Kim for purposes of preventing the OLED from being deteriorated by the outgas. (page 3/8 of the Google translation of Kim.)
Regarding claim 20, Kang discloses all of elements claim 12.
Kang also discloses that the range of the thicknesses has a lower level of .1 µm (1000Å). (Kang, [0027].) However, Kang does not appear to disclose the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.
Kim further discloses, that the thickness of the first outgassing barrier layer may be between 10 Å to 50 Å. (Page 2/8 of the google translation of Kim.) and the thickness of the second outgassing barrier layer may be tween 10 Å to 50 Å. Therefore a total thickness of 20 Å to 100 Å. Which is within the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang in view of Kwon US 20170025483 A1 (hereinafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 11, Kang discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Kang does disclose the metal layer (second pixel defining sub-layer 219b’) which by necessity would have a shape that is defined by the top surface of the pixel defining layer (first pixel defining sub-layer 219a)’ upon which is it deposited on but does not appear to disclose the plan view geometry of the metal layer or the pixel defining layer. Therefore does not appear to explicitly teach, “an octagonal shape in a plan view. “
However, Kwon which teaches an OLED display which includes a first electrode and pixel defining layer having a polygonal shape opening (Kwon, Abstract), discloses:
…. an octagonal shape in a plan view. (Fig. 1, the third opening OM3 of the pixel defining layer PDL. [0080] OM3 has a polygonal shape that is an octagon.)
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 device of Kang to have the pixel defining layer (and therefore the metal layer that is deposited on said pixel defining layer) with an octagonal shape in plan view as taught by Kwon for purposes improving manufacturing yield in a high resolution OLED display with a limited display area. (Kwon, [0016].) Furthermore, 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 device of Kang to have the metal layer with an octagonal shape in plan view as taught by Kwon because absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant the metal layer would have a plan view shape that is defined by the pixel defining layer. MPEP 2144.04.IV.B
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nakamura US 20120228603 A1 – Fig. 2A shows a device which has a metal layer (insulating film barrier 143b which is made from an inorganic material) which is on a pixel defining layer (insulating barrier 143a) on an OLED device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEIM KIRIN GREWAL whose telephone number is (703)756-1515. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. 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, 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.
/HEIM KIRIN GREWAL/ Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/SUE A PURVIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893