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 August 12,2026, has been entered. Claims 10-11, 13, and 16-29 remain pending in the application.
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 10-11, 13-14, 16-18, and 21-23, and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et.al. (US 20180374409 A1), hereinafter Lee, in view of Takiguchi et. al (US 20220199695 A1), hereinafter Takiguchi.
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches a light emitting base plate (Fig 8 display apparatus, [0055]), wherein the light emitting base plate (Fig 8 display apparatus, [0055]) comprises: a first substrate base plate (Fig 9 not shown substrate that TFTs are provided on, [0103]); a plurality of switch elements (Fig 9 not shown TFTs on TFT substrate 1, [0103]; this embodiment shows the TFTs) provided on the first substrate base plate (Fig 9 not shown substrate that TFTs are provided on, [0103]); and a plurality of light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) that are connected to the switch elements (Fig 9 electrodes 10, [0104; switch elements would be used to drive the OLEDs), wherein each of the light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) comprises: a first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]); a second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode(Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]); and at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]) provided in stack (Fig 8) between the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) and the second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]), wherein the at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]) comprises: a first luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) for emitting a first light ray (Fig 8 blue, [0104]) when driven by a current (Fig 21 shows current efficiency, [0068]) or voltage: and a second luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]) for emitting a second light ray (Fig 8 green, [0104]) when driven by a current (Fig 21 shows current efficiency, [0068]) or voltage: wherein a color of the first light ray Fig 8 blue, [0104]) and a color of the second light ray (Fig 8 green, [0104]) are different; wherein the light emitting base plate (Fig 8 display apparatus, [0055]) further comprises: a color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]), provided on a light exiting side (Fig 8 top side) of the plurality of the light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]), for receiving an incident light ray (Fig 8 not shown light rays from light emitting units 20/30/40), and emitting a light ray (Fig 8 arrows for R/B/G/C, [0101]) whose color is different from a color of the incident light ray (Fig 8 not shown light rays from light emitting units 20/30/40), wherein the incident light ray (Fig 8 not shown light rays from light emitting units 20/30/40) is a light ray emitted by the plurality of the light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]); wherein the incident light ray comprises a blue-color light ray (Fig 8 blue from light-emitting units 20/40, [0104]) and a first green-color light ray (Fig 8 green from light-emitting unit 30, [0104]), the light emitting base plate (Fig 8 display apparatus, [0055]) comprises a plurality of pixels (not shown, but would be obvious for a display), each of the pixels (not shown, but would be obvious for a display) comprises a red-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 R sub-pixel, [0096]), a blue-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 B sub-pixel, [0096]) and at least one green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 G sub-pixel, [0096]), and the at least one green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 G sub-pixel, [0096]) includes a first green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 G sub-pixel, [0096]) and a second green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 C sub-pixel, [0096]; cyan has green and blue components); and the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]) comprises: a first color converting pattern (Fig 8 color control element 70b, [0091]), located at the red-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 R sub-pixel, [0096]), for emitting a red-color light ray (Fig 8 arrow for R, [0101]) when excited by the incident light ray (Fig 8 not shown light rays from light emitting units 20/30/40); and a second color converting pattern (Fig 8 color control element 70a, [0091]), located at the first green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 G sub-pixel, [0096]), for emitting a second green-color light ray (Fig 8 arrow for G, [0101]) when excited by the incident light ray (Fig 8 not shown light rays from light emitting units 20/30/40); wherein the first color converting pattern (Fig 8 color control element 70b, [0091]) is doped by a first scattering particle (not shown, scattering agents for element 70b, [0091]), and the second color converting pattern (Fig 8 color control element 70a, [0091]) is doped by a second scattering particle (not shown, scattering agents for 70a, [0091]), wherein the first light ray (Fig 8 blue, [0104]) is a blue-color light ray (Fig 8 blue, [0104]).
Lee fails to teach a thickness of the second color converting pattern is less than a thickness of the first color converting pattern; a doping proportion of the first scattering particle in the first color converting pattern is greater than or equal to a doping proportion of the second scattering particle in the second color converting pattern; wherein the first light ray is a blue-color light ray; and a brightness of the first light ray emitted by the light emitting device is a first brightness, and a brightness of a total light ray emitted by the light emitting device is a second brightness, wherein a ratio of the first brightness to the second brightness is greater than or equal to 14%.
However, Takiguchi teaches a relationship between the ratio of the color of light being emitted from a conversion layer, concentration of color converting material, and the thickness of the color converting layer ([0093]-[0094]). Further, Takiguchi teaches that the ratio of light being emitted from the color conversion layer can be controlled by adjusting the thickness of the color conversion layer ([0094]). The thickness of the color converting pattern 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 color converting patterns as Takiguchi has identified the thickness of the color converting patterns 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 thickness of the second color converting pattern being less than a thickness of the first color converting pattern, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color balance of the light emitting base plate and the material costs, as taught by Takiguchi. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed thickness 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 relationship).
Takiguchi fails to teach a doping proportion of the first scattering particle in the first color converting pattern is greater than or equal to a doping proportion of the second scattering particle in the second color converting pattern.
However, Lee teaches a scattering agent improves color balance ([0091]). Further, Lee teaches scattering agents aid in smoothing the output curve ([00205]). The doping proportion relationship between the color converting patterns 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 doping proportion relationship between the color converting patterns as Lee has identified the doping proportion relationship between the color converting patterns 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 doping proportion of the first scattering particle in the first color converting pattern is greater than or equal to a doping proportion of the second scattering particle in the second color converting pattern, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color balance of the light emitting base plate and the material costs, as taught by Lee. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed doping proportion 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 relationship).
Lee fails to teach the first light ray is a blue-color light ray; and a brightness of the first light ray emitted by the light emitting device is a first brightness, and a brightness of a total light ray emitted by the light emitting device is a second brightness, wherein a ratio of the first brightness to the second brightness is greater than or equal to 14%.
However, as disclosed above, Takiguchi teaches a relationship between the ratio of the color of light being emitted from a conversion layer, concentration of color converting material, and the thickness of the color converting layer ([0093]-[0094]). Further, Takiguchi teaches that the ratio of light being emitted from the color conversion layer can be controlled by adjusting the thickness of the color conversion layer ([0094]). The brightness ratio of the first light ray to the total light ray 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 brightness ratio of the first light ray to the total light ray as Takiguchi has identified the brightness ratio 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 first brightness to the second brightness is greater than or equal to 14%, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color balance of the light emitting base plate and the material costs, as taught by Takiguchi. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed ratio 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 relationship).
Regarding claim 11, Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches a thin-film packaging layer (Fig 9 protection layer 60, [0104]) provided on one side of the plurality of the light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) that is opposite to the first substrate base plate (Fig 9 not shown substrate that TFTs are provided on, [0103]), wherein an orthographic projection (one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize the orthographic projection would show the protection layer 60 would cover the substrate) of the thin-film packaging layer (Fig 9 protection layer 60, [0104]) on the first substrate base plate (Fig 9 not shown substrate that TFTs are provided on, [0103]) covers (Fig 9) the first substrate base plate (Fig 9 not shown substrate that TFTs are provided on, [0103]).
Regarding claim 13, Lee as modified in claim 11 teaches the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]) comprises at least one of: a first transmitting pattern (Fig 8 scattering element 71d, [0100]), located at the second green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 C sub-pixel, [0096]; cyan has green and blue components), for transmitting the incident light ray; and a second transmitting pattern (Fig 8 scattering element 71c, [0098]), located at the blue-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 B sub-pixel, [0096]), for transmitting the incident light ray.
Regarding claim 16, Lee as modified in claim 11 fails to teach an absolute value of a difference between a central wavelength (optional so not considered) of the first green-color light ray and a central wavelength (optional so not considered) of the second green-color light ray is less than or equal to 5 nanometers; and/or an absolute value of a difference between a peak wavelength of the first green-color light ray and a peak wavelength of the second green-color light ray is less than or equal to 5 nanometers.
However, Lee teaches the wavelengths of the light emitting devices (Fig 14, [0198]; the green peak corresponding to the first green-color light ray since the light is not filtered and transmitted out, as shown in Fig 8 for cyan). Further, Lee teaches the wavelength of the green light after passing through the green color converter (Fig 15, [0199]; the green wavelength is strengthened). The wavelengths of the green color light rays 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 green color converter as Lee has identified the wavelength of the two different green lights as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at an absolute value of a difference between a peak wavelength of the first green-color light ray and a peak wavelength of the second green-color light ray being less than or equal to 5 nanometers, in order to achieve the desired balance between the color fidelity and the strengthening of the green color, as taught by Lee. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed difference 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 difference).
Regarding claim 17, Lee as modified in claim 11 teaches the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]) comprises a color converting material (quantum dots, [0083]), and the color converting material comprises at least one of a quantum dot (quantum dots, [0083]), a rare-earth material, a fluorescent material and an organic dye.
Regarding claim 18, Lee as modified in claim 11 teaches a color filtering layer (Fig 8 color filters 75a, 75b, 75c, [0095]) provided on a light exiting side (Fig 8 top side) of the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]), wherein the color filtering layer (Fig 8 color filters 75a, 75b, 75c, [0095]) comprises: a first color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75b, [0095]), located at the red-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 R sub-pixel, [0096]), for transmitting a red-color light ray (Fig 8 light exiting converting pattern under arrow for R, [0101]) entering the first color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75b, [0095]); a second color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75a, [0095]), located at the at least one green-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 G sub-pixel, [0096]), for transmitting a green-color light ray (Fig 8 light exiting converting pattern under arrow for G, [0101]) entering the second color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75a, [0095]); and a third color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75c, [0095]), located at the blue-color sub-pixel (Fig 8 B sub-pixel, [0096]), for transmitting a blue-color light ray (Fig 8 light exiting light emitting device under arrow for B, [0101]) entering the third color filtering pattern (Fig 8 color filter 75c, [0095]).
Regarding claim 21, Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches a wavelength of the first light ray (Fig 8 blue, [0104]) is greater than or equal to 440 nanometers (Fig 14 blue greater than about 440 nm, [0080]), and less than or equal to 490 nanometers (Fig 14 blue peak is less than about 500nm, [0080]).
Regarding claim 22, Lee as modified in claim 21 teaches a wavelength of the second light ray (Fig 8 green, [0104]) is greater than or equal to 500 nanometers (Fig 14 green is greater than about 500nm, [0080]), and less than or equal to 650 nanometers (Fig 14 green is less than about 550nm, [0080]).
Regarding claim 23, Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches the at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]) includes at least one first luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) and at least one second luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]); the at least one first luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) comprises the first luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]); and the at least one second luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]) comprises the second luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]), or the at least one second luminescent layer (optional so not considered) comprises the first luminescent material and the second luminescent material.
Regarding claim 28, Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches a spectral intensity (Fig 14 peak of radiance of blue wavelength) of the first light ray (Fig 8 blue, [0104]) emitted by the light emitting device (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) is a first intensity (Fig 14 peak of radiance of blue wavelength), and a spectral intensity (Fig 14 peak of radiance of green wavelength) of the second light ray (Fig 8 green, [0104]) emitted by the light emitting device (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) is a second intensity (Fig 14 peak of radiance of green wavelength), and the second intensity (Fig 14 peak of radiance of green wavelength) is greater than 0 (Fig 14 peak of radiance of green wavelength is greater than zero) at the peak of the second light ray (Fig 8 green, [0104]).
Lee fails to teach the first intensity is greater than or equal to the second intensity.
However, Lee teaches the lifespan of the blue emitting units may be shorter than that of the green emitting units ([0081]). Further, Lee teaches the configuration of the light emitting device may be changed ([0081]). The number of blue emitting units and therefore the intensity of the light emitting units 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 number of blue and green light emitting units as Lee has identified the number of units 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 number of blue and green units such that the first intensity (blue) is greater than or equal to the second intensity (green), in order to achieve the desired balance between color emission and the materials cost for units, as taught by Lee. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed intensity 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 intensity relationship).
Regarding claim 29, Lee as modified in claim 10 fails to teach
(
γ
B
G
*
x
%
+
1
-
x
%
*
γ
G
1
>
1
-
x
%
*
γ
G
2
)
,wherein x% is a proportion of the blue-color light ray in the incident light ray, 1-x% is a proportion of the first green-color light ray in the incident light ray,
γ
B
G
is a conversion rate when the blue-color light ray passes through the first green-color sub-pixel and is converted into the second green-color light ray,
γ
G
1
is a transmittance when the first green-color light ray passes through the first green-color sub-pixel, and
γ
G
2
is a transmittance when the first green-color light ray passes through the second green-color sub-pixel.
However, Lee teaches the transmittance of the sub-pixels can be controlled by controlling the configuration of the color filter ([0203]). The transmittance through the sub-pixels 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 transmittance through the sub-pixels with different configurations as Lee has identified the transmittance through the sub-pixels 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 inequation
(
γ
B
G
*
x
%
+
1
-
x
%
*
γ
G
1
>
1
-
x
%
*
γ
G
2
)
, in order to achieve the desired balance between transmittance of the sub-pixels and the processing time of the sub-pixels for the configuration desired, as taught by Lee. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed inequation 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 inequation).
Claim 19 and 24-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et.al. (US 20180374409 A1), hereinafter Lee, in view of Han et. al. (US 20230329100 A1), hereinafter Han.
Regarding claim 19, Lee as modified in claim 18 teaches the thin-film packaging layer (Fig 9 protection layer 60, [0104]) is located between the light emitting devices (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) and the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]).
Lee as modified in claim 18 fails to teach a second substrate base plate provided on one side of the color filtering layer that is opposite to the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]); and a packing layer, provided between the thin-film packaging layer and the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]), for adhesively bonding the thin-film packaging layer and the color converting layer (Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]).
However, Han teaches a second substrate base plate (Fig 9 base substrate BL, [0220]) provided on one side (Fig 9, [0220]) of the color filtering layer (Fig 9 color filter layer CFL, [0216]) that is opposite to the color converting layer (Fig 9 light control layer CCL, [0201] corresponds to Lee: Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]); and a packing layer (Fig 9 barrier layer BFL1, [0215]), provided between the thin-film packaging layer (Fig 9 encapsulation layer TFE, [0076] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 protection layer 60, [0104]) and the color converting layer (Fig 9 light control layer CCL, [0201] corresponds to Lee: Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]), for adhesively bonding (the barrier layer can act to bond the layers) the thin-film packaging layer (Fig 9 protection layer 60, [0104]) and the color converting layer (Fig 9 light control layer CCL, [0201] corresponds to Lee: Fig 8 color controller 203a, [0096]);.
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 Lee to incorporate the teachings of Han by having a second base substrate and a packing layer. The second base substrate would provide a more rigid substrate for the light emitting base plate ([0220]). The packing layer would act to provide protection from the environment during manufacturing ([0214]).
Regarding claim 24, Lee as modified in claim 23 teaches and the first luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) is located on one side of the second luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]) that is closer to the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]).
Lee as modified in claim 23 fails to teach the first electrode is a reflection-type electrode, and the second electrode facing the first electrode is a transmission-type electrode or a semi- transmission-type electrode.
However, Han teaches the first electrode (Fig 9 first electrode EL1, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) is a reflection-type electrode (Han: reflective, [0096]), and the second electrode (Han: Fig 9 second electrode EL2, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 first electrode EL1, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) is a transmission-type electrode (transmissive, [0176]) or a semi- transmission-type electrode (optional so not examined).
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 Lee to incorporate the teachings of Han by having a first electrode be reflective and a second electrode being a transmission type. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize the material properties of the electrode are dependent on the emission direction (top or bottom) of the light emitting device.
Regarding claim 25, Lee as modified in claim 24 teaches the at least one first luminescent layer (Lee: Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) is located on one side of the at least one second luminescent layer (Lee: Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]) that is closer to the first electrode (Lee: Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]).
Regarding claim 26, Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) is an anode (anode, [0104]), the second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) is a cathode (cathode, [0104]), and the light emitting device (Fig 8 OLED substrate 100a with R/B/G/C sub-pixels, [0101]) further comprises at least one of: a first hole injection layer (not shown hole injection layer, [0108]), a first hole transporting layer (Fig 10 hole transport layer HTL1, [0108]) that are arranged in stack (One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would understand the stacking order) between the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) and the at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]), wherein the first hole injection layer (not shown hole injection layer, [0108]) is closer to the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]); a first electron transporting layer (Fig 10 electron transport layer ETL1, [0108]), an electric-charge generating layer (Fig 10 charge generation layer 25, [0108]), a second hole injection layer (not shown hole injection layer, [0108]) and a second hole transporting layer (Fig 10 hole transport layer HTL2, [0108]) that are arranged in stack between two neighboring instances of the at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]); a second electron transporting layer (Fig 10 electron transport layer ETL1, [0108]) and an electron injection layer (not shown electron injection layer, [0108]) that are arranged in stack between the at least one luminescent layer (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 30, 40, [0104]) and the second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]), wherein the electron injection layer (not shown electron injection layer, [0108]) is closer to the second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]).
Lee fails to teach electron blocking layers, hole blocking layers, and an optical-extraction layer provided on one side of the second electrode (Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) that is opposite to the first electrode (Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]).
However, Han teaches electron blocking layers (Fig 5 electron blocking layer EBL, [0095]), hole blocking layers (Fig 5 hole blocking layer HBL, [0095]), and an optical-extraction layer (Fig 9 capping layer CPL, [0235]) provided on one side of the second electrode (Fig 9 second electrode EL2, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 50, [0104]) facing the first electrode (Fig 9 first electrode EL1, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]) that is opposite to the first electrode (Fig 9 first electrode EL1, [0232] corresponds to Lee: Fig 9 electrode 10, [0104]).
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 Lee to incorporate the teachings of Han by electron and hole blocking layers and an optical extraction layer. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to use blocking layers and the optical extraction layer (capping layer, [0235]) to improve luminous efficiency of the light emitting base plate.
Examiner notes that Han demonstrates the stacking order of injection, transport, and blocking layers as was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have known the order of stacking that was not taught in Lee.
Regarding claim 27, Lee as modified in claim 10 fails to teach both of the first luminescent material and the second luminescent material comprise at least one of an organic electroluminescent material and a quantum dot.
However, Han teaches the luminescent material (emission layer EML, [0116]) comprise at least one of an organic electroluminescent material (list of materials, [0116]) and a quantum dot (quantum dot material in emission layer EML, [0149]).
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 Lee to incorporate the teachings of Han by having the luminescent materials comprise an organic electroluminescent material and a quantum dot. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated recognize to use quantum dots as a dopant to improve the color purity of the emission layers. In modifying Lee with the teachings of Han, both of the first luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 20, 40, [0104]) and the second luminescent material (Fig 8 light-emitting units 30, [0104]) would comprise at least one of an organic electroluminescent material and a quantum dot.
Examiner notes that Lee teaches the green emission layer is an organic material with a dopant ([0028]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et.al. (US 20180374409 A1), hereinafter Lee, in view of Kwon et. al. (US 20230209959 A1), hereinafter Kwon.
Lee as modified in claim 10 teaches the light emitting base plate Fig 8 display apparatus, [0055] according to claim 10.
Lee as modified in claim 10 fails to teach a light emitting apparatus, wherein the light emitting apparatus comprises: a driving integrated circuit configured for providing a driving signal to the light emitting base plate; and a power supply circuit configured for providing an electric power supply to the light emitting base plate.
However, Kwon teaches a light emitting apparatus (Fig 2 display device 1, [0058]), wherein the light emitting apparatus (Fig 2 display device 1, [0058]) comprises: a driving integrated circuit (Fig 2 flexible circuit boards FPC, [0084]) configured for providing a driving signal (signals, [0084]) to the light emitting base plate (Fig 1 device including display substrate 10 and the color conversion substrate 30 corresponds to Han: Fig 9 display device DD-c, [0232]); and a power supply circuit (Fig 2 flexible circuit boards FPC, [0084]) configured for providing an electric power supply (power, [0084]) to the light emitting base plate (Fig 1 device including display substrate 10 and the color conversion substrate 30 corresponds to Han: Fig 9 display device DD-c, [0232]).
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 Lee to incorporate the teachings of Kwon by having the light emitting apparatus comprise: a driving integrated circuit configured for providing a driving signal to the light emitting base plate; and a power supply circuit configured for providing an electric power supply to the light emitting base plate. This would allow for operation of the light emitting base plate, as is known in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see 35 USC §112 section on page 10, filed August 12, 2026, with respect to arguments regarding claim 19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC §112 rejection of claim 19 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section starting on page 11, filed August 12, 2026, with
respect to the first argument of the 35 USC §103 rejection of claim 10, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes Applicant’s rebuttal regarding scattering particles. [0093] of Takiguchi discloses the absorption coefficient is standardized by the film thickness and is substantially proportional to the concentration of quantum dots. Even though the absorption coefficient is substantially proportional to the concentration of quantum dots, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize the other components, such as the light scattering particles, of the color conversion layer also have a role in light extraction. Further, Takiguchi in Fig 21 also shows light extraction efficiency based on thickness of the color conversion layer.
Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section starting on page 12, filed August 12, 2026, with
respect to the second argument of the 35 USC §103 rejection of claim 10, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner notes, in relation to the previous rebuttal, that Takiguchi teaches it is possible to adjust the ratio between the amount of different emitted lights in the light emitting device (last sentence in [0094]), thus the amendment as been rejected, as outlined in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Further, in relation to the unexpected results,” Applicants can rebut a prima facie case of obviousness by showing the criticality of the range.” Further, “A difference of degree is not as persuasive as a difference in kind – i.e., if the range produces ‘a new property dissimilar to the known property,’ rather than producing a predictable result but to an unexpected extent.” MPEP 2144.05(III)(A)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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