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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/9/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
The following is in response to the communication filed 7/9/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claims 1 and 12 have been amended.
Claims 4-6 and 15-17 have been withdrawn.
Claims 1-3, 7-14, and 18-20 have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/24/2026, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the title is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to the title.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 7/9/2026, with respect to the rejection of specifically claims 1 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. , as well as it’s dependent claims 2, 7, 8, 13, and 18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in further view of Choe US 20170194396 A1. See below for more detail.
Regarding, Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 7/9/2026, with respect to the specifically claims 3, 9-11, 14, and 19-20under 35 U.S.C. have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in further view of Choe US 20170194396 A1. See below for more detail.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US 20180233703 A1 (hereinafter Lee) and Choe US 20170194396 A1 (hereinafter Choe).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses:
An organic light-emitting display device (Lee, Abstract) comprising:
a substrate; (Lee, Fig. 2, substrate 100)
an insulating layer disposed on the substrate; (second insulation layer 130 and planarization layer 140, [0043]- [0044] second insulation layer 130 is made from SiOx and planarization layer 140 is formed of SiOx and may be considered an insulating layer consisting of a first insulating layer and a second insulating layer.)
a first electrode disposed on the insulating layer; (first electrode EL1)
a pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) disposed on the first electrode and defining an emission area by an opening exposing at least part of the first electrode; (Subpixel SP1 is defined by and the pixel defining layer PDL. See also [0056].)
a metal layer (mirror pattern MR, [0052] mirror pattern is made from a metal.) disposed on the pixel defining layer (See Fig. 2, [0053], the mirror pattern MR has substantially the same shape as the pixel defining layer PDL.) and in a non-emission area (mirror area MA) around the emission area (See Fig.1 the mirror area MA includes the mirror pattern MR which his surrounds the sub pixel area SP1, SP2, SP3.);
an organic light-emitting layer (intermediate layer 233) disposed on the first electrode (first electrode 231) in the opening; and (See Fig. 2)
a second electrode (second electrode EL2) disposed on the organic light-emitting layer (subpixel SP1) in the emission area and the non-emission area, (See Fig. 2, [0055] the second electrode is disposed on the pixel defining layer PDL and the light emitting structure 150.)
wherein the metal layer (mirror pattern MR) is disposed between the pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) and the second electrode (second electrode EL2) in the non-emission area and spaced from the first electrode(first electrode EL1) in a thickness direction of the organic light-emitting display device (See Fig. 2, the mirror pattern is above and spaced apart from the first electrode EL1.)…
Lee does not appear to disclose:
wherein, when viewed in the thickness direction, the metal layer defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter.
Choe which teaches a method of manufacturing an organic light-emitting display apparatus (Choe, Abstract), discloses:
wherein, when viewed in the thickness direction, the metal layer (Fig. 7, auxiliary electrode 261 which is disposed on a pixel defining layer 180) defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter. (Fig. 7, [0054], the auxiliary electrode having an island shape which the examiner understands would be a shape with a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter when viewed from a top view.)
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 Lee have the metal layer defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter for purposes of reducing voltage drop.
Regarding claim 2, Lee as modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Lee further discloses:
wherein the metal layer is in direct contact with the pixel defining layer. (See Fig. 2, [0053].)
Regarding claim 7, Lee as modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Lee further discloses:
wherein the insulating layer (Fig.2, second insulation layer 130 and planarization layer 140) comprises a first organic insulating layer (second insulating layer 130) and a second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 140) ([0043]- [0044] second insulation layer 130 is made from SiOx and planarization layer 140 is formed of SiOx and may be considered an insulating layer consisting of a first insulating layer and a second insulating layer.)
Regarding claim 8, Lee as modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 7.
Lee further discloses:
The organic light-emitting display device of claim 7, further comprising a conductive layer (Fig. 2, source electrode SE) disposed between the first organic insulating layer (second insulating layer 130) and the second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 140)
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses:
An organic light-emitting display device (Lee, Abstract) comprising:
a substrate; (Lee, Fig. 2, substrate 100)
a thin film transistor (thin film transistor TFT) disposed on the substrate (substrate 100) and comprising a semiconductor layer (active layer ACT), a gate electrode (gate electrode GE), a source electrode (source electrode SE), and a drain electrode (drain electrode DE);
an insulating layer disposed on the thin film transistor; (second insulation layer 130 and planarization layer 140, [0043]- [0044] second insulation layer 130 is made from SiOx and planarization layer 140 is formed of SiOx and may be considered an insulating layer consisting of a first insulating layer and a second insulating layer.)
a first electrode disposed on the insulating layer; (first electrode EL1)
a pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) disposed on the first electrode and defining an emission area by an opening exposing at least part of the first electrode; (Subpixel SP1 is defined by and the pixel defining layer PDL. See also [0056].)
a metal layer (mirror pattern MR, [0052] mirror pattern is made from a metal.) disposed on the pixel defining layer (See Fig. 2, [0053], the mirror pattern MR has substantially the same shape as the pixel defining layer PDL.) and in a non-emission area (mirror area MA) around the emission area (See Fig.1 the mirror area MA includes the mirror pattern MR which his surrounds the sub pixel area SP1, SP2, SP3.);
an organic light-emitting layer (intermediate layer 233) disposed on the first electrode (first electrode 231) in the opening; and (See Fig. 2)
a second electrode (second electrode EL2) disposed on the organic light-emitting layer (subpixel SP1) in the emission area and the non-emission area, (See Fig. 2, [0055] the second electrode is disposed on the pixel defining layer PDL and the light emitting structure 150.)
wherein the metal layer (mirror pattern MR) is disposed between the pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) and the second electrode (second electrode EL2) in the non-emission area and spaced from the first electrode(first electrode EL1) in a thickness direction of the organic light-emitting display device (See Fig. 2, the mirror pattern is above and spaced apart from the first electrode EL1.) …
Lee does not appear to disclose:
wherein, when viewed in the thickness direction, the metal layer defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter.
Choe which teaches a method of manufacturing an organic light-emitting display apparatus (Choe, Abstract), discloses:
wherein, when viewed in the thickness direction, the metal layer (Fig. 7, auxiliary electrode 261 which is disposed on a pixel defining layer 180) defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter. (Fig. 7, [0054], the auxiliary electrode having an island shape which the examiner understands would be a shape with a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter when viewed from a top view.)
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 Lee have the metal layer defines a continuous perimeter with no openings within the continuous perimeter for purposes of reducing voltage drop.
Regarding claim 13, Lee as modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 12.
Lee further discloses:
wherein the metal layer is in direct contact with the pixel defining layer. (See Fig. 2, [0053].)
Regarding claim 18, Lee as modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 12.
Lee further discloses:
wherein the insulating layer (Fig.2, second insulation layer 130 and planarization layer 140) comprises a first organic insulating layer (second insulating layer 130) and a second organic insulating layer. (planarization layer 140) ([0043]- [0044] second insulation layer 130 is made from SiOx and planarization layer 140 is formed of SiOx and may be considered an insulating layer consisting of a first insulating layer and a second insulating layer.)
Claims 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as modified by Choe as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Choung et al US 10396136 B2 (hereinafter Choung) and Tsujimura et al US 20200295290 A1 (hereinafter Tsujimura).
The following annotated Fig. 3 of Choung will be used in discussion.
PNG
media_image1.png
538
457
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Lee as modified by Choe appears to disclose all the elements of claim 1.
Lee further discloses, the metal layer (Lee, Fig. 2, mirror pattern MR) is disposed on the upper surface of the pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) and a side wall of the opening (See Fig. 2, the mirror pattern MR extends down onto the side wall of the pixel defining layer PDL). The metal layer (mirror pattern MR) is between the pixel defining layer PDL and the second electrode layer EL2.
However, neither Lee or Choe appear to disclose, “a first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer,” “the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer” or that the metal layer is disposed between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer.”
Choung which teaches an organic light emitting display (Choung, Abstract), discloses:
a first functional layer (Choung, Fig. 3, first intermediate layer 321) disposed between the first electrode (pixel electrodes 210) and the organic light-emitting layer (organic emission layer 322) in the opening (annotated Fig. 3, opening between two pixel defining layers 180) of the pixel defining layer, (pixel defining layer 180)
wherein the first functional layer (first intermediate layer 321) extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer, (pixel-defining film 180), (Fig. 3, The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.) and
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 Lee modified by Choe to have the first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer as taught by Choung for purposes of having hole injection layer. (Choung, Col. 7, lines, 42-51.) A hole injection layer is known to promote the injection of holes from the pixel electrode into the corresponding organic light-emitting layer as evidenced by Tsujimura et al. US 20200295290 A1. (Tsujimura, [0115].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the device of the combination of Lee as modified by Choe and Choung would by necessity result in the metal layer being between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer. Lee teaches that the metal layer (Lee, Fig. 2, mirror pattern MR) is deposited on the pixel defining layer (Lee, Fig. 2, pixel defining layer PDL) and Choung teaches the first functional layer. (Choung, Fig. 3, The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.) The result of the combination would have been predictable as each element merely performs the same function as it does separately and does not produce a ‘new’ or ‘different function.’ Those skilled in the art the use of the old elements in combination would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 14, Lee modified by Choe appears to disclose all the elements of claim 12.
Lee further discloses, the metal layer (Lee, Fig. 2, mirror pattern MR) is disposed on the upper surface of the pixel defining layer (pixel defining layer PDL) and a side wall of the opening (See Fig. 2, the mirror pattern MR extends down onto the side wall of the pixel defining layer PDL). The metal layer (mirror pattern MR) is between the pixel defining layer PDL and the second electrode layer EL2.
However, neither Lee or Choe appear to disclose, “a first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer,” “the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer” or that the metal layer is disposed between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer.”
Choung which teaches an organic light emitting display (Choung, Abstract), discloses:
a first functional layer (Choung, Fig. 3, first intermediate layer 321) disposed between the first electrode (pixel electrodes 210) and the organic light-emitting layer (organic emission layer 322) in the opening (annotated Fig. 3, opening between two pixel defining layers 180) of the pixel defining layer, (pixel defining layer 180)
wherein the first functional layer (first intermediate layer 321) extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer, (pixel-defining film 180), (Fig. 3, The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.) and
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 Lee modified by Choe to have the first functional layer disposed between the first electrode and the organic light-emitting layer in the opening of the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer extends to an upper surface of the pixel defining layer as taught by Choung for purposes of having hole injection layer. (Choung, Col. 7, lines, 42-51.) A hole injection layer is known to promote the injection of holes from the pixel electrode into the corresponding organic light-emitting layer as evidenced by Tsujimura et al. US 20200295290 A1. (Tsujimura, [0115].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the device of the combination of Lee as modified by Choe and Choung would by necessity result in the metal layer being between the pixel defining layer and the first functional layer. Lee teaches that the metal layer (Lee, Fig. 2, mirror pattern MR) is deposited on the pixel defining layer (Lee, Fig. 2, pixel defining layer PDL) and Choung teaches the first functional layer. (Choung, Fig. 3, The first intermediate layer 321 is a continuous layer over the pixel-defining layer 180.) The result of the combination would have been predictable as each element merely performs the same function as it does separately and does not produce a ‘new’ or ‘different function.’ Those skilled in the art the use of the old elements in combination would have been obvious.
Claims 9, 10, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee modified by Choe in view of Kim et al. KR 20180062253 A (hereinafter Kim, Google translation previously provided.)
Regarding claim 9, Lee modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Neither Lee or Choe 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 Lee modified by Choe 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, Lee modified by Choe discloses all of elements claim 1.
Lee does not appear to disclose “wherein a thickness of the metal layer is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A.”
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:
“wherein a thickness of the metal layer (Kim, Fig. 1, first outgassing barrier layer 500) is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A.” (Page 2/8 of the google translation of Kim, metal forming the first outgassing barrier and the thickness of the second outgassing barrier layer may be tween 10 Å to 50 Å. Which is within the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.)
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 Lee modified by Choe to have a thickness of the metal layer is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A 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 19, Lee modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 12.
Lee modified by Choe 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 Lee modified by Choe 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, Lee modified by Choe discloses all of elements claim 12.
Neither Lee nor Choe appear to disclose “wherein a thickness of the metal layer is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A.”
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:
“wherein a thickness of the metal layer is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A.” (Page 2/8 of the google translation of Kim, metal forming the first outgassing barrier and the thickness of the second outgassing barrier layer may be tween 10 Å to 50 Å. Which is within the range of 19 angstroms (Å) to about 1000 Å.)
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 Lee to have a thickness of the metal layer is about 19 angstroms (A) to about 1000 A 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.)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee modified by Choe in view of Kwon US 20170025483 A1 (hereinafter Kwon).
Regarding claim 11, Lee modified by Choe discloses all the elements of claim 1.
Lee does disclose the metal layer (Lee, Fig. 2, mirror pattern MR) which by necessity would have a shape that is defined by the top surface of the pixel defining layer (Fig. 2, pixel defining layer PDL) upon which it is 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.”
Choe discloses the auxiliary electrode 261 which has an island shape which is between the respective sub-pixels. (Choe, Fig.7, [0054].) However, it 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 Lee to have the pixel defining layer (and therefore the metal layer that is deposited on said pixel defining layer) with an octagonal shape in plain view as taught by Kwon for purposes improving manufacturing yield in a high resolution OLED display with a limited display area. (Kwon, [0016].)
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
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights