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
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed on 10/30/25. Claims 1, 2, 3, 16, 18 amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min US Publication No. 2015/0171379 cited in previous action in view of CHOI et al. US Publication US 20130301278 A cited in previous action.
Re Claim 1, Min discloses a display device, comprising: Min discloses a display device, comprising: a substrate including a first sub-pixel, a second sub-pixel, and a third sub-pixel (P39, PXL1 to PXL3), a first light resonance structure (RL1) ( a structure with a concave upper surface ) disposed in the first sub-pixel (P50, P51), a second light resonance structure (RL2) disposed in the second sub-pixel a third light resonance structure (RL3) disposed in the third sub-pixel (P33, P39, P50, P51, P78, P80; Figs. 3) )(P27, P28, P33, P34, P37, Fig. 3).
Min fails to specifically disclose the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel constituting a pixel; first to third optical resonant structures for emitting first light, second light, and third light by using first to third optical resonant modes are included and wherein the first light resonance structure includes a first light resonance mode generator; and a first light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, wherein the second light resonance structure includes a second light resonance mode generator, a second light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, and a first color converter on the second light generator.
However Min discloses first to third pixels (PXL1 to PXL3) output red light, green light, and blue light (P40) ; and a resonant mode is operated through a resonance control part (controlling a resonant distance) in each pixel (Abstract, P10, P35 P52, Fig. 3).
Given the teachings of Min it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Min with the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel constituting a pixel; first to third optical resonant structures for emitting first light, second light, and third light by using first to third optical resonant modes are included.
Doing so would increase the intensity of light to be outputted from the pixel .
Min discloses all of the claimed limitations from above except for wherein the first light resonance structure includes a first light resonance mode generator; and a first light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, wherein the second light resonance structure includes a second light resonance mode generator, a second light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, and a first color converter on the second light generator.
However Choi discloses a first light resonance mode generator; and a first light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, wherein the second light resonance structure includes a second light resonance mode generator, a second light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, and a first color converter on the second light generator (P37).
Given the teachings of CHOI it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Min with a first light resonance mode generator; and a first light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, wherein the second light resonance structure includes a second light resonance mode generator, a second light generator in the first light resonance mode generator, and a first color converter on the second light generator.
Doing so would improve light extraction efficiency and viewing angle characteristics of a sub-pixel of a predetermined color (P37).
Re Claim 2, Mims and CHOI discloses the display device of claim .
CHOI discloses, wherein the first light resonance mode generator comprises: a 1-1 reflective layer on the substrate (50) ; and a 1-2 reflective layer on the 1-1 reflective layer, and wherein the first light generator is disposed between the 1-1 reflective layer and the 1-2 reflective layer (P37), .
Re Claim 20, Min and CHOI discloses the display device of claim 1, and Min discloses wherein the first light includes blue light, the second light includes green light, and the third light includes red light (P49, Min discloses that the first -third pixels output red light, green light, and blue light ; Figs. 3).
Claim(s)18, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min US Publication No. 2015/0171379 cited in previous action in view of CHOI et al. US Publication US 20130301278 cited in previous action as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of IROBE et al JP 2020113384 cited in previous action.
Re Claim 18, Min and CHO discloses the display device of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a high refractive region located at a center thereof .
However IROBE discloses wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a high refractive region located at a center thereof (Paragraphs 5, 44, 45 and 60) .
Given the teachings of IROBE it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Min and CHOI disclose with wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a high refractive region located at ta center thereof .
As suggested by IROBE a display panel having the above configuration can improve the light extraction efficiency (P44).
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Min US Publication No. 2015/0171379 cited in previous action in view of CHOI et al. US Publication US 20130301278 cited in previous action as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of YOO et al KR 20200013884 A cited in previous action.
Re Claim 19, Min and CHOI discloses the display device of claim 1.
Min and CHOI fails to disclose wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a total reflection layer located on a side portion thereof .
YOO discloses wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a total reflection layer located on a side portion thereof (P19, 73, 97, 100 and Fig. 3).
Given the teachings of Yoo it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Min and CHOI with wherein the first light resonance structure, the second light resonance structure, and the third light resonance structure include a total reflection layer located on a side portion thereof.
Doing so would provide a high light emission efficiency due to the micro cavity effect (P97).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter in Re Claim 3 : The prior art of record, fails to disclose, teach or fairly suggest at least wherein the second light resonance mode generator comprises: a 2-1 reflective layer on the substrate; and a 2-2 reflective layer on the 2-1 reflective layer, wherein the second light generator is disposed between the 2-1 reflective layer and the 2- 2 reflective layer, and wherein the first color converter is disposed between the second light generator and the 2- 2 reflective layer.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/30/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued that to the extent claim 1 now recites some features of claim 2 and some features of allowable claim 3, it is respectfully submitted that claim 1 is allowable over the applied references.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees . As stated above the dependent upon a rejected base claim, is allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Applicant amended the claims with new limitations which necessitated new search and consideration. Therefore this action is made final.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONJI N JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5266. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-9pm.
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 Paik can be reached at 5712722404. 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.
SONJI N. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/SONJI N JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights