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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed March 31, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-7, 10-17, and 19-21 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Drawings have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed December 19, 2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 4-5, 10, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Joo teaches a light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]), comprising: a first base substrate (Fig 5 substrate 100, [0089]); a plurality of light emitting devices (Fig 5 organic light-emitting diode OLED, [0104]) on the first base substrate (Fig 5 substrate 100, [0089]), wherein the plurality of light emitting devices (Fig 5 organic light-emitting diode OLED, [0104]) comprise a first light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), a second light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) and a third light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]), each of the plurality of light emitting devices (Fig 5 organic light-emitting diode OLED, [0104]) comprises a first electrode layer (Fig 1 pixel electrode 310, [0105]), a light emitting functional layer (Fig 1 intermediate layer 320, [0109]) and a second electrode layer (Fig 1 opposite electrode 330, [0112]) which are stacked, the light emitting functional layer (Fig 1 intermediate layer 320, [0109]) comprises an emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer, [0109]), the emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer, [0109]) comprises a first emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P3, [0109]) in the first light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), a second emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P1, [0109]) in the second light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) and a third emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P2, [0109]) in the third light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]); wherein the first emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P3, [0109]) corresponds to a blue sub-pixel area (P3 implements blue light, [0084]), the second emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P1, [0109]) corresponds to a red sub-pixel area (P1 implements red light, [0084]), the third emitting layer (Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P2, [0109]) corresponds to a green sub-pixel area (P1 implements green light, [0084]).
Joo fails to teach a material of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is different from a material of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and a material of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is different from a material of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area, a photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer comprises a first main peak and a first shoulder peak, a photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer comprises a second main peak and a second shoulder peak, and a photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer comprises a third main peak and a third shoulder peak, wherein a Full Width At Half-Maximum (FWHM) of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is narrower than a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is different from a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area.
Regarding the choice of having a material of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area being different from a material of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and a material of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area being different from a material of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area, this particular arrangement would have been obvious to try. Levermore teaches it was known in the arts that blue light emitted must be highly saturated for an extended color gamut ([0011]). Further, Levermore teaches it was known in the arts that the blue light emitted and converted should be optimized to match the absorption of the color conversion materials ([0011]). In addition, Levermore teaches at least one emissive unit may emit deeper blue light and at least one emissive unit may emit lighter blue light ([0012] and [0016]; See note below). Stossel teaches that the material used for the emitting layer can be used for different colors (different compounds have different photoluminescence spectra, Fig 1, [0226]). In pursuing this arrangement in the device of Joo, there are only two configurations to achieve this result: by having the configuration of Levermore (Figs 21 and 22 having multiple emissive units for each pixel) or having single emissive units optimized for color conversion materials in red and green pixel spaces and having a single emissive unit optimized for color saturation in the blue pixel space. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the optimization of color saturation and color conversion material taught by Levermore would be achieved equally, regardless of which of these two configurations is chosen. That is, "a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421.
Examiner interprets the teachings of Levermore, wherein the light blue and deeper blue emissive layers being individually addressed, would have suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that having one set of blue optimized for color conversion materials and another set of blue for color saturation would reduce the circuitry needed to address the different emissive layers and reduce the material costs.
In modifying Joo with Levermore and Stossel, there would be a material of the first emitting layer (Joo: Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P3, [0109]) of the blue sub-pixel area (Joo: P3 implements blue light, [0084]) is different from a material of the second emitting layer (Joo: Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P1, [0109]) of the red sub-pixel area (Joo: P1 implements red light, [0084]), and a material of the first emitting layer (Joo: Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P3, [0109]) of the blue sub-pixel area (Joo: P3 implements blue light, [0084]) is different from a material of the third emitting layer (Joo: Fig 5 unlabeled emission layer for pixel P2, [0109]) of the green sub-pixel area (Joo: P1 implements green light, [0084]).
Joo, Levermore, and Stossel fail to teach a photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer comprises a second main peak and a second shoulder peak, and a photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer comprises a third main peak and a third shoulder peak, wherein a Full Width At Half-Maximum (FWHM) of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is narrower than a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is different from a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area.
However, Stoessel teaches a photoluminescence spectrum (Fig 1) of a material (host material and emitting dopant invention, [0311]) used in an emitting layer (not shown emitting layer EML, [0311]) comprises a main peak (Fig 1 main peak, [0303]) and a shoulder peak (Fig 1 shoulder peak, [0303]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Joo and Levermore to incorporate the teachings of Stoessel by using the emitting materials of Stoessel. This would allow for color purity and favorable low viewing angle dependence ([0217]-[0218]).
In doing so there would a photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer comprising a first main peak and a first shoulder peak (for the first color), a photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer comprising a second main peak and a second shoulder peak (for the second color), and a photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer comprising a third main peak and a third shoulder peak (for the third color).
Joo, Levermore, and Stossel fail to teach a Full Width At Half-Maximum (FWHM) of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is narrower than a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area is different from a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area.
However, Stoessel teaches low FWHM values lead to pure color emissions ([0303]). The FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum as Stoessel has identified the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a Full Width At Half-Maximum (FWHM) of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area being narrower than a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer of the red sub-pixel area, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer of the blue sub-pixel area being different from a FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer of the green sub-pixel area, in order to achieve the desired balance between color purity and materials cost, as taught by Stoessel. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed FWHM relationship is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed FWHM relationships).
Regarding claim 4, Joo as modified in claim 1 fails to teach a ratio of the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 0.6:1 to 0.85:1, and a ratio of the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 0.6:1 to 0.85:1.
However, Stoessel teaches FWHM of the electroluminescence spectrum of the different emitter materials ([0309]-[0357]). Examiner notes that Stoessel teaches FWHM of the electroluminescence spectrum for better comparability over the entire spectral range ([0309]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that once light exits the emission layer the spectra is independent of the triggering mechanism. Further, Stoessel teaches different emitter and host combinations have different FWHM (Tables 3-8). The ratio of the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second or third emitting layer is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the materials used in the emission layer to affect the FWHM ratios as Stoessel has identified the FWHM ratios as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a ratio of the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 0.6:1 to 0.85:1, and a ratio of the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 0.6:1 to 0.85:1, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color purity and the materials used, as taught by Stoessel. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed ratios are for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed ratios).
Regarding claim 5, Joo as modified in claim 4 fails to teach the FWHM of a photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer is 20 +2nm, the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 28 +2nm, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 28 +2nm.
However, Stoessel teaches FWHM of the electroluminescence spectrum of the different emitter materials ([0309]-[0357]). Examiner notes that Stoessel teaches FWHM of the electroluminescence spectrum for better comparability over the entire spectral range ([0309]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that once light exits the emission layer the spectra is independent of the triggering mechanism. Further, Stoessel teaches different emitter and host combinations have different FWHM (Tables 3-8). The FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the emitting layers is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the materials used in the emission layer to affect the FWHM as Stoessel has identified the FWHM as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the FWHM of a photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer is 20 +2nm, the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 28 +2nm, and the FWHM of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 28 +2nm, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color purity and the materials used, as taught by Stoessel. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed FWHM of the emitting layers are for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed FWHMs).
Regarding claim 10, Joo as modified in claim 1 fails to teach the material of the first emitting layer, the material of the second emitting layer, and the material of the third emitting layer may each independently comprises any one or more of oxadiazole and its derivative light emitting materials, triazole and its derivative light emitting materials, rhodamine and its derivative light emitting materials, 1, 8-naphthalimide and its derivative light emitting materials, pyrazoline and its derivative light emitting materials, triphenylamine and its derivative light emitting materials, porphyrin and its derivative light emitting materials, carbazole and its derivative light emitting materials, pyrazine and its derivative light emitting materials, thiazole and its derivative light emitting materials, perylene and its derivative light emitting materials, silole and its derivative light emitting materials, tetraphenylethylene and its derivatives light emitting materials, polyphenylene ethylene and its derivative light emitting materials, polythiophene and its derivative light emitting materials, polyfluorene and its derivative light emitting materials, polyacetylene and its derivative light emitting materials, polycarbazole and its derivative light emitting materials, polypyridine and its derivative light emitting materials.
However, Stoessel teaches the material of the first emitting layer, the material of the second emitting layer, and the material of the third emitting layer may each independently comprises any one or more of oxadiazole and its derivative light emitting materials, triazole and its derivative light emitting materials ([0037]), rhodamine and its derivative light emitting materials, 1, 8-naphthalimide and its derivative light emitting materials, pyrazoline and its derivative light emitting materials, triphenylamine and its derivative light emitting materials, porphyrin and its derivative light emitting materials, carbazole and its derivative light emitting materials, pyrazine and its derivative light emitting materials, thiazole and its derivative light emitting materials, perylene and its derivative light emitting materials, silole and its derivative light emitting materials, tetraphenylethylene and its derivatives light emitting materials, polyphenylene ethylene and its derivative light emitting materials, polythiophene and its derivative light emitting materials, polyfluorene and its derivative light emitting materials, polyacetylene and its derivative light emitting materials, polycarbazole and its derivative light emitting materials, polypyridine and its derivative light emitting materials.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim to incorporate the teachings of Stoessel by having the materials of the light emitting layers comprised of certain heteroaromatic ring systems, in this case triazole and its derivative light emitting materials. This would allow for the substitution of the heteroaromatic ring systems in the compounds used for electroluminescent devices to improve lifetime and color purity of the devices ([0013]).
Regarding claim 20, Joo as modified in claim 1 teaches a display panel (Fig 1 not labeled display apparatus comprising substrate 100 and substrate 200, [0049]), has a plurality of repeated pixel units (Fig 1 pixels P, [0050]), and at least one pixel unit (Fig 1 pixel P, [0052]) comprises a first sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), a second sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]), and a third sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]) displaying different colors ([0084]), wherein the display panel (Fig 1 not labeled display apparatus comprising substrate 100 and substrate 200, [0049]) comprises the light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]) according to claim 1, a thin film encapsulation layer (Fig 5 thin-film encapsulation layer 400, [0059]), a color conversion layer (Fig 5 layer with quantum conversion layers QD1 and QD2, [0085] and transmission layer TW, [0086]) and a color filter layer (Fig 5 layer with color filter layers CF1, CF2, and CF3, [0130]); wherein, the first light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]) of the light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]) is located in the first sub- pixel (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), the second light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) of the light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]) is located in the second sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]), and the third light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]) of the light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]) is located in the third sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]); the thin film encapsulation layer (Fig 5 thin-film encapsulation layer 400, [0059]) is disposed at a side of the light emitting substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]) away from the first base substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]); the color conversion layer (Fig 5 layer with quantum conversion layers QD1 and QD2, [0085] and transmission layer TW, [0086]) is disposed at a side of the thin film encapsulation layer (Fig 5 thin-film encapsulation layer 400, [0059]) away from the first base substrate (Fig 1 substrate 100, [0049]), the color conversion layer (Fig 5 layer with quantum conversion layers QD1 and QD2, [0085] and transmission layer TW, [0086]) comprises a transmission pattern (Fig 5 transmission layer TW, [0086]), a first color conversion pattern (Fig 5 quantum conversion layer QD2, [0085]) and a second color conversion pattern (Fig 5 quantum conversion layer QD1, [0085]), the transmission pattern (Fig 5 transmission layer TW, [0086]) is located in the first sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), the first color conversion pattern (Fig 5 quantum conversion layer QD1, [0085]) is located in the second sub- pixel (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]), and the second color conversion pattern (Fig 5 quantum conversion layer QD2, [0085]) is located in the third sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]); the color filter layer (Fig 5 layer with color filter layers CF1, CF2, and CF3, [0130]) is positioned at a side of the color conversion layer (Fig 5 layer with quantum conversion layers QD1 and QD2, [0085] and transmission layer TW, [0086]) away from (Fig 5) the first base substrate (Fig 5 substrate 100, [0049] corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B substrate 100, [0069]) and at least comprises a first light shielding pattern (Fig 5 light blocking pattern 205, [0131]), a first color filter pattern (Fig 5 color filter layer CF2, [0130]) and a second color filter pattern (Fig 5 color filter layer CF1, [0130]), the first light shielding pattern (Fig 5 light blocking pattern 205, [0131]) defines a plurality of light transmitting areas (Fig 5 emission area EA, [0083]), and the light transmitting areas (Fig 5 emission area EA, [0083]) comprise a first light transmitting area (Fig 5 emission area EA, [0083]) corresponding to the first sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), a second light transmitting area (Fig 5 emission area EA, [0083]) corresponding to the second sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) and a third light transmitting area (Fig 5 emission area EA, [0083]) corresponding to the third sub-pixel (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]).
Regarding claim 21, Joo as modified in claim 20 teaches a drive integrated circuit (Fig 1 data driving circuit 60, [0058]), and a power supply circuit (Fig 1 first power supply line 10 and second power supply line 20, [0057]).
Claims 6-7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, , in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1), in further view of Kim et. al. (US 20210074945 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claims 6, Joo as modified in claim 1 fails to teach a ratio of a proportion of an area of the first shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to a proportion of an area of the second shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 0.5:1 to 0.9:1, and a ratio of the proportion of the area of the first shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to a proportion of an area of the third shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 0.5:1 to 0.9:1.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). Kim further teaches changing the cavity properties from fully constructive interference to fully destructive interference ([0103]). Kim teaches changing the interference type changes the shoulder peak (Fig 4, [0110]) and transmittance of the light emitting substrate (Fig 3, [0108]-[0109]). The shoulder peak and subsequent proportion of the area of the shoulder peak is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the interference type and ultimately the shoulder peak as Kim has identified the shoulder as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a ratio of a proportion of an area of the first shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to a proportion of an area of the second shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer is 0.5:1 to 0.9:1, and a ratio of the proportion of the area of the first shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer to a proportion of an area of the third shoulder peak in the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer is 0.5:1 to 0.9:1, in order to achieve the desired balance between light transmission and ease of manufacturing, as taught by Kim. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed ratio is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed dimensions).
Regarding claim 7, Joo as modified in claim 6 fails to teach the area of the first shoulder peak accounts for 23%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer, the area of the second shoulder peak accounts for 34%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer, and the area of the third shoulder peak accounts for 34%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). Kim further teaches changing the cavity properties from fully constructive interference to fully destructive interference ([0103]). Kim teaches changing the interference type changes the shoulder peak (Fig 4, [0110]) and transmittance of the light emitting substrate (Fig 3, [0108]-[0109]). The shoulder peak and subsequent area percentage of the spectrum is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the interference type and ultimately the shoulder peak as Kim has identified the shoulder as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the area of the first shoulder peak accounts for 23%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the first emitting layer, the area of the second shoulder peak accounts for 34%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the second emitting layer, and the area of the third shoulder peak accounts for 34%±4% of the area of the photoluminescence spectrum of the third emitting layer, in order to achieve the desired balance between light transmission and ease of manufacturing, as taught by Kim. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed area percentage is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed dimensions).
Regarding claim 11, Joo as modified in claim 1 fails to teach a difference between a thickness of the first emitting layer and a thickness of the second emitting layer is 10nm to 20nm, and a difference between the thickness of the first emitting layer and a thickness of the third emitting layer is 10nm to 20nm.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). Kim further teaches capping layers to further improve the cavity effect in conjunction with the cavity formed between the electrodes ([0077]). One having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the claimed invention would know that one of the parameters that can be changed in order to form a cavity is the light emitting layer thickness. The thickness of the light emitting layers is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the thickness of the light emitting layers as Ran has identified the thickness as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a difference between a thickness of the first emitting layer and a thickness of the second emitting layer is 10nm to 20nm, and a difference between the thickness of the first emitting layer and a thickness of the third emitting layer is 10nm to 20nm, in order to achieve the desired balance between improving light emission efficiency and ease of manufacturing, as taught by Kim. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed difference in thicknesses is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed dimensions).
Regarding claim 12, Joo as modified in claim 11 fails to teach the thickness of the first emitting layer is 15nm to 25nm, the thickness of the second emitting layer is 15nm to 35nm, and the thickness of the third emitting layer is 15nm to 35nm.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). One having ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the claimed invention would know that one of the parameters that can be changed in order to form a cavity is the light emitting layer thickness. The thickness of the light emitting layers is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the thickness of the light emitting layers as Ran has identified the thickness as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the thickness of the first emitting layer is 15nm to 25nm, the thickness of the second emitting layer is 15nm to 35nm, and the thickness of the third emitting layer is 15nm to 35nm, in order to achieve the desired balance between improving light emission efficiency and ease of manufacturing, as taught by Kim. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed difference in thicknesses is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed dimensions).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1), in further view of Cheng et.al. (CN106784354A), hereinafter Cheng.
Joo as modified In claim 1 teaches a hole transport layer (not labeled hole transport layer, [0109]), and the hole transport layer (not labeled hole transport layer, [0109]) comprises a first hole transport layer (not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]) located in the first light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), a second hole transport layer (not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]) located in the second light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) and a third hole transport layer (not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]) located in the third light emitting device (Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]);
Joo as modified in claim 1 fails to teach a thickness of the first hole transport layer is less than a thickness of the second hole transport layer, and the thickness of the first hole transport layer is less than a thickness of the third hole transport layer.
However, Cheng teaches a thickness (115nm-125nm, [0058] of translation) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 3B first functional layer 140 in B corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]) is less than a thickness (140nm-155nm, [0058] of translation) of the second hole transport layer (Fig 3B first functional layer 140 in R corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]), and the thickness (185nm-200nm, [0058] of translation) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 3B first functional layer 140 in B corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]) is less than a thickness (140nm-155nm, [0058] of translation) of the third hole transport layer (Fig 3B first functional layer 140 in G corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Joo, Stoessel, and Levermore to incorporate the teachings of Cheng by having a thickness of the first hole transport layer is less than a thickness of the second hole transport layer, and the thickness of the first hole transport layer is less than a thickness of the third hole transport layer. This would allow for the optimization of the microcavity for each respective color ([0059] of translation).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1), in further view of Kim et. al. (US 20210074945 A1), hereinafter Kim, in further view of Cheng et.al. (CN106784354A), hereinafter Cheng.
Joo as modified in claim 13 fails to teach the thickness of the first hole transport layer is 10nm to 30nm less than the thickness of the second hole transport layer, and the thickness of the first hole transport layer is 10nm to 30nm less than the thickness of the third hole transport layer.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). Cheng teaches the thickness parameters of the hole transport layer include but are not limited to the ranges listed, and when the organic light-emitting display device includes a pixel area of any luminous color, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can set the thickness of the hole transport layer and the electron transport layer according to product requirements ([0059] of translation). The thickness of the first, second, and third hole transport layers is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the thickness of the first, second, and third hole transport layers as Cheng has identified the thickness as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the thickness of the first hole transport layer being 10nm to 30nm less than the thickness of the second hole transport layer, and the thickness of the first hole transport layer being 10nm to 30nm less than the thickness of the third hole transport layer, in order to tune the cavity effect, as taught by Kim and Cheng. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed difference in thicknesses is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed dimensions).
Claims 15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1), in further view of Cheng et.al. (CN106784354A), hereinafter Chen, in further view of Mizusaki et. al. (US 20220158111 A1), hereinafter Mizusaki.
Regarding claim 15, Joo as modified in claim 13 fails to teach the hole transport layer comprises a first sub-hole transport layer and a second sub-hole transport layer which are stacked, the first sub-hole transport layer is disposed between the first electrode layer and the light emitting functional layer, the second sub-hole transport layer is disposed between the first sub-hole transport layer and the light emitting functional layer, the first sub-hole transport layer comprises a first sub-layer of the first hole transport layer, a first sub-layer of the second hole transport layer and a first sub-layer of the third hole transport layer respectively located in the first light emitting device, the second light emitting device and the third light emitting device, the second sub-hole transport layer comprises a second sub-layer of the first hole transport layer, a second sub-layer of the second hole transport layer and a second sub-layer of the third hole transport layer respectively located in the first light emitting device, the second light emitting device and the third light emitting device, the first sub-layer of the first hole transport layer and a the second sub-layer of the first hole transport layer constitute the first hole transport layer, the first sub-layer of the second hole transport layer and the second sub-layer of the second hole transport layer constitute the second hole transport layer, and the first sub-layer of the third hole transport layer and the second sub-layer of the third hole transport layer constitute the third hole transport layer.
However, Mizusaki teaches the hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer, [0109]) comprises a first sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) and a second sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) which are stacked (Fig 1), the first sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) is disposed between the first electrode layer (Fig 2B reflective electrode structure 111, [0069]) and the light emitting functional layer (Fig 1 layer comprising second hole transport layer 12 and light emitting layer 14 corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B OLED structure, [0069]), the second sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) is disposed between the first sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) and the light emitting functional layer (Fig 1 layer comprising light emitting layer 14 corresponds to Joo: Fig 1 intermediate layer 320, [0109]), the first sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) comprises a first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]), a first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6R, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]) and a first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]) respectively located in the first light emitting device (Fig 1 6B corresponds to Joo: Fig 5 pixel P3, [0111]), the second light emitting device (Fig 1 6R corresponds to Joo: Fig 5 pixel P1, [0111]) and the third light emitting device (Fig 1 6G corresponds to Joo: Fig 5 pixel P2, [0111]), the second sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) comprises a second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B first common layer 131 in E1), a second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6R, [0037] corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B first common layer 131 in E2) and a second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B first common layer 131 in E3) respectively located in the first light emitting device (Fig 1 6B corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B emission portion E1, [0069]), the second light emitting device (Fig 1 6R corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B emission portion E2, [0069]) and the third light emitting device (Fig 1 6G corresponds to Kim: Fig 2B emission portion E3, [0069]), the first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]) and a the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]) constitute the first hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]), the first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6R, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]) and the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6R, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]) constitute the second hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6R, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]), and the first sub-layer (Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]) and the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]) constitute the third hole transport layer (Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Joo, Stoessel, Levermore, and Cheng to incorporate the teachings of Mizusaki by having a transport layer comprised of a first and second sub-hole transport layer. This would improve the luminous efficiency ([0006]).
Regarding claim 17, Joo as modified in claim 15 teaches a difference (Mizusaki: E4, [0044]) between a band gap (Mizusaki: Figs 4-7) of the second sub-hole transport layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) and a band gap (Mizusaki: Figs 4-7) of the first sub-hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) does not exceed 0.25 eV (Mizusaki: Table 1); and/or (optional so not considered) a refractive index of the second sub-hole transport layer is less than a refractive index of the first sub-hole transport layer and a refractive index of the emitting layer.
Regarding claim 19, Joo as modified in claim 13 fails to teach a material of the hole transport layer comprises any one or more of a poly (p-phenylene vinylene) hole transport material, a polythiophene hole transport material, a polysilane hole transport material, a triphenylmethane hole transport material, a triarylamine hole transport material, a hydrazone hole transport material, a pyrazoline hole transport material, a chewazole hole transport material, a carbazole hole transport material and a butadiene hole transport material.
However, Mizusaki teaches a material of the hole transport layer comprises any one or more of a poly (p-phenylene vinylene) hole transport material, a polythiophene hole transport material, a polysilane hole transport material, a triphenylmethane hole transport material, a triarylamine hole transport material, a hydrazone hole transport material, a pyrazoline hole transport material, a chewazole hole transport material, a carbazole hole transport material ([0091]) and a butadiene hole transport material.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Joo, Stoessel, Levermore, and Cheng to incorporate the teachings of Mizusaki by have the material of the hole transport layer comprising a carbazole hole transport material. This would ensure carriers are transported more efficiently ([0006]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joo et. al. (US 20210328172 A1), hereinafter Joo, in view of Stoessel (US 20240101560 A1), in further view of Levermore (US 20240057366 A1), in further view of Cheng et.al. (CN106784354A), hereinafter Cheng, in further view of Mizusaki et. al. (US 20220158111 A1), hereinafter Mizusaki), in further view of Kim et. al. (US 20210074945 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Joo as modified in claim 15 teaches thicknesses of the first sub-layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]), the first sub-layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6R, [0037]) corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]) and the first sub-layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 first hole transport layer 10, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6G, [0037]) corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]) are all the same (Mizusaki: Fig 1 formed in common, [022]), and a thickness H12 (Mizusaki: Fig 1 12B) of the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the first hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6B, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P3, [0109]), thickness H22 (Mizusaki: Fig 1 12R) of the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the second hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6R, [0037]) corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P1, [0109]), and a thickness H32 (Mizusaki: Fig 1 12G) of the second sub-layer (Fig 1 second hole transport layer 12, [0037]) of the third hole transport layer (Mizusaki: Fig 1 layer comprised of first hole transport layer 10 and second hole transport layer 12 in 6G, [0037] corresponds to Joo: not labeled hole transport layer for pixel P2, [0109]).
Joo, Stoessel, Levermore, Cheng and Mizusaki fail to teach H12<H22, H12<H32, 0≤H12<50nm, 0<H22≤50nm, 0<H32≤50nm.
However, Kim teaches using a resonant cavity tuned for a wavelength ([0008]). Cheng teaches the thickness parameters of the hole transport layer include but are not limited to the ranges listed, and when the organic light-emitting display device includes a pixel area of any luminous color, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can set the thickness of the hole transport layer and the electron transport layer according to product requirements ([0059] of translation). The thickness of the second sub-layer of the hole transport layers is therefore a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the thickness of the second sub-layer of the hole transport layers as Cheng has identified the thickness as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at thickness of the second sub-layer of the hole transport layers satisfying the conditions of H12<H22, H12<H32, 0≤H12<50nm, 0<H22≤50nm, 0<H32≤50nm, in order to meet the product requirements as taught by Kim and Cheng. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed conditions for thicknesses is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed conditions).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section beginning with “First” on page 12, filed March 31, 2026, with respect to the usage of different materials for emitting layers in Kim or Stoessel, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes that, as Applicant points out in Sotessel, the emission layer consist of at least one matrix material and emitting dopant. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that different combinations of matrix material and emitting dopant would result in different colors. Thus, in order to get different colors, different materials would need to be used. Further, Fig 1 of Stoessel shows different wavelengths as a result of compounds used.
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section beginning with “Second” on page 12, filed March 31, 2026, with respect to the relationship among FWHMs for emitting layers in Kim or Stoessel, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Stoessel teaches, as an example, different FWHMs for differing emitting compounds (Fig 1, [0301]-[0303]). Further, Stoessel teaches different colors and their associated EL-FWHMs (Table 2). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the EL-FWHM and PL-FWHM are related and their FWHMs would have similar narrow bands. Further, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be able to combine the different colors of Stoessel with the teachings of Levermore, as noted in the rejection for claim 1 above.
Conclusion
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN L LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm (ET).
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, STEVEN GAUTHIER can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/ALVIN L LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights