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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 09/03/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to paragraphs [0062 – 0063] and [0077] correct typographical errors previously present. The objection to the specification is withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 7 – 9 to correct typographical errors is acknowledged. The objection to claims 7 – 9 is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, and 7 - 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 107086226 A hereinafter Lee.
For claim 1, Lee teaches “A display panel (fig. 15), comprising a plurality of pixel units, wherein a pixel unit of the plurality of pixel units comprises at least three color subpixels (fig. 8 numeral C1, C2, and C3) are packed into one pixel unit by a passivation layer (fig. 8 numeral 34), each subpixel in the at least three subpixels of the pixel unit is connected to a respective first electrode (fig. 8 numeral 24), and all subpixels in the at least three subpixels of the pixel unit are connected to a same second electrode (fig. 8 numeral 28; fig. 11 numeral 28), wherein the pixel unit comprises an LED layer (fig. 8 numeral 13, 15, and 17) and a color function layer disposed above the LED layer (fig. 8 numeral 51), and in two adjacent sub-pixels of the pixel unit, there is a light-shielding partition between the color functional layer of one of the sub-pixels and the color functional layer of the other of the two adjacent sub-pixels, and the light shielding partition is integral from the color functional layer to the LED layer in a depth direction of the pixel unit, wherein the light-shielding partition is disposed above the LED layer and the color functional layer is disposed above the light-shielding partition disposed above the LED layer (fig. 8 numeral 45 shows a light-shielding partition in spaced labeled W1, W2, and W3 above the LED layers and the color functional layer 51 is above parts of the light-shielding partition 45, while the light-shielding partition 45 is integral from the color functional layer 51 to the top surface of the LED layer 13).”
For claim 7, Lee teaches “The display panel according to claim 1, wherein the pixel unit further comprises a reflection layer on a side of the LED layer, that is away from the color function layer (fig. 8 numeral 21).”
For claim 8, Lee teaches “The display according to claim 1, wherein the pixel unit further comprises a distributed Bragg reflector layer on a side, of the LED layer, that faces the color function layer (fig. 8 numeral 21, Par. [0054]; “In some example embodiments, insulator 21 may have a distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) structure, wherein alternately stacking a plurality of insulating layers having different respective refractive index”).
For claim 9, Lee teaches “A display apparatus, comprising a middle frame (fig. 15 numeral 210), a rear housing (fig. 15 numeral 201), a printed circuit board, and the display panel according to claim 1, wherein the middle frame is configured to carry the printed circuit board and the display panel (Par. [0122 – 0124]; “…as shown in FIG. 15 display panel 200 may include the circuit board 201 and located on the circuit board and a plurality of LED light source modules 201 on the 50. display panel 200 also comprises a circuit 210 on base plate 201. base 210 can be used as the guide mounting area defines a plurality of LED light source modules 50. substrate 210 can be opaque and light absorbing black matrix. The purpose or use of the product, it can use other colored matrix, e.g., white substrate or a green substrate, according to need, basal body formed by transparent material may also be used as the substrate 210.”), the printed circuit board and the display panel are disposed on two side of the middle frame (fig. 15 shows display panel 50 disposed on the middle frame 210, the board within 210 having to be disposed on a side of the frame 210 resulting in two sides being occupied by the display panel and the board), and the rear housing is mounted on a side, of the printed circuit board, that is away from the middle frame (fig. 15 shows rear housing 201 mounted away from the middle frame).”
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) 3 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 107086226 A hereinafter Lee.
For claim 3, Lee teaches all of claim 1. Lee also teaches the subpixels include at least a red subpixel and a green subpixel (“first sub-pixel is a blue sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel is a green sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel is a red sub-pixel…”). Lee does not explicitly state that the quantity of red subpixels is greater than a quantity of green subpixels. Lee does teach that the active layers can be formed to emit wavelengths of different colors (“…an active layer of the first to third LED cells C1, C2 and C3 15 may be formed as a light (e.g., emitting light having the same wavelength and/or the same spectrum) emission color”) and that the sub-pixels can be tuned to emit different colors depending on the desired color mixture and output of the device (“first to third light control portions 51, 52, and 53 may control the first to third LED cells C1, C2 and C3 the light emitted to the light into light having different colors.”; “As described herein, in addition to blue sub-pixels of the sub-pixel may include a tuning wavelength conversion material, such as the red and green sub-pixels R, G of the invention. tuning wavelength conversion material can be emitted from the LED unit of the pixel CA of light into the color outside the color (e.g., to green G conversion sub-pixel is red or blue, or, for a red sub-pixel R is converted into green or blue).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention that the subpixels in Lee includes embodiments wherein there are more red subpixels than green subpixels, as Lee teaches forming each subpixel to emit different colors, including red, depending on the desired produced color of the device (“first to third light control portions 51, 52, and 53 may control the first to third LED cells C1, C2 and C3 the light emitted to the light into light having different colors.”) and that the different subpixels can be tuned to emit light of the same wavelength (“In some example embodiments, the third light control portion 53 of tuning wavelength conversion material may include a green phosphor to produce a second peak of green, and green phosphor, the green phosphor can be mixed with the second light control part 52 P2 the same (e.g., have the same composition) the amount of green phosphor in such a case, the third light control portion 53 of tuning wavelength conversion material of the PT in an amount of the green phosphor P2 is lower than the second light control part 52. peak from the second third LED unit C3 emits green light) of the wavelength can be from a peak intensity of light emitted by the second LED unit C2 in the wavelength of 20nm and/or 10nm, and/or may be substantially the same as the peak intensity of the light emitted by the second LED unit C2 of the wavelength.”). One of ordinary skill in the art would be driven to include more red subpixels than green subpixels in the display panel if the desired wavelength of light to be produced was a wavelength of red or a wavelength adjacent to red or a wavelength of color that includes a mixture of red and other colors.
For claim 6, Lee teaches all of claim 1. Lee also teaches the LED layer comprises an N-type region layer (fig. 8 numeral 13), a multi-quantum-well layer (fig. 8 numeral 15; Par. [0143] describing the use of quantum well layers as an active layer; “… For example, the second conductive type semiconductor layer 125c may be implemented as a single-layer structure, such as in the exemplary embodiment, may have a multi-layer structure comprising a different composition. can has alternately stacked quantum well layer and a quantum barrier layer of the active layer 125b of multiple quantum well (MQW) structure. For example, the quantum well layer and the quantum barrier layer can comprise different groups respectively InxAlyGa1-x-yN layer (0≤x≤1, 0≤y≤1, 0≤x + ≤ 1). In some example embodiments, the quantum well layer may include a composition of InxGa1-xN (0<x≤1), and the quantum barrier layer may comprise GaN or AlGaN. an active layer 125b not limited to MQW structure, and may have a single quantum well (SQW) structure.”; Par. [0176] and Par. [0045 – 0049] teach the various embodiments as modifiable and can be combined or mixed) and a P-type region layer (fig. 8 numeral 17) that are sequentially arranged, wherein in adjacent subpixels of the at least three subpixels of the pixel unit, there is a second light shielding barrier between the multi-quantum-well layer and the P-type region layer (fig. 8 numeral 21, Par. [0055]; “…reflective insulation 21 and side wall 45 can be connected with each other. side wall 45 may be formed as vertically extending from insulator 21. Because the reflective insulation 21 and side wall 45 arranged to have around each of first to third LED cells C1, C2 and C3, and each of the structure first to third light control portions 51, 52, and 53, can effectively prevent the optical interference between first to third LED units C1, C2, and C3. Accordingly, the entire light path from first to third LED cells C1, C2 and C3 of light generated can be effectively isolated.”). Figure 8 of Lee does not show the N-type layer being an integrated layer. However, Lee does teach the n-type layer being an integrated layer (fig. 19B numeral 135a).
I would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the immediate invention to combine the light-shielding partitions in one embodiment in Lee with the integrated n-type layer in Lee, as Lee teaches the embodiments as modifiable and can be combined or mixed (Par. [0176]; Par. [0045 – 0049]) and to achieve both optical isolation for the sub-pixels (Par. [0055]) while also reducing contact resistance and improve current flow (Par. [0147 - 0148]; “connecting electrode 137a may be surrounded by the insulating layer 133 so that the active layer 135b and the second conductive type semiconductor layer 135c electrically isolated from each other. connecting electrode 137a may be arranged on the etched region of the semiconductor stack 135. can be properly connecting electrode 137a in the number, shape, spacing or on the contact area of the first conductive type semiconductor layer 135a, so as to reduce contact resistance. Moreover, the connection electrode 137a can be arranged to form rows and columns on the semiconductor stack 135, to improve current flow.”).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 107086226 A hereinafter Lee in further view of CN 107359176 A hereinafter Huo.
For claim 2, Lee teaches all of claim 1. Lee is silent regarding the subpixel comprises at least two sub-subpixels that are arranged in parallel. Lee does teach arranging each of the subpixels in parallel (Lee, fig. 16).
Huo teaches A display device (Huo, fig. 1) including pixels (fig. 2 numeral 101) comprised of subpixels (fig. 2 numeral 104) and wherein each sub-pixel is further dived into two sub-subpixels (fig. 3 and 4 numeral 1041; Par. [0055], “As shown in FIG. 3, each lighting area 104 comprises three light emitting unit having the same color 1041, each light emitting region 104 in the light emitting unit 1041 two by two adjacent…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the sub-subpixels in Huo with the pixel arrangement and parallel wiring in Lee in order to improve the luminosity and uniformity of the device and to better produce the desired color from the device (Huo, Par. [0055]; “light emitting unit 1041 is the small display unit, each of the lighting units 1041 are independent of the pixel electrode, can independently emit light, and will have specific lighting colour by luminescent material and design period corresponding structure, a light-emitting unit. 1041 two by two adjacent light emitting units, so that each of the lighting units 1041 can be adjacent to the other light-emitting unit, so as to form a display unit. normal display unit comprises luminous unit with different three colors, by controlling the ratio of the intensity of the at least three light-emitting units emitting, a display unit capable of displaying any desired color.”; “dividing manner such that three area of the light emitting unit are substantially the same, improve the luminous uniformity of the display panel.”).
Claim(s) 4 – 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 107086226 A hereinafter Lee in further view of JP 2020013948 A hereinafter Miyamoto.
For claim 4, Lee teaches all of claim 1. Lee also teaches a light shielding barrier disposed on peripheries of respective subpixels of the at least three color subpixels (Lee, fig. 8 numeral 45). Lee is silent regarding the light shielding barrier being made out of aluminum.
Miyamoto teaches a display device (Miyamoto, fig. 6B) comprising subpixels (fig. 6B numeral 12) and a light shielding barrier is disposed on the peripheries of the respective subpixels (fig. 6B numeral 14). The light shielding barrier is aluminum (Par. [0048]; “the wire 14 is formed of, for example, gold, aluminum, copper, an alloy thereof, or a combination of two or more thereof.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the aluminum light shielding barrier in Miyamoto with the subpixels in Lee in order to minimize light leakage while maintaining efficient light reflection (Miyamoto, Par. [0021] “By setting such a distance, the covering member 13 and the wire 14, which will be described later, minimize light leakage and reduce the distance between adjacent light emitting elements while realizing efficient light reflection. As a result, a good luminance distribution can be ensured, and a light emitting device of a surface light source with high light emission quality with less light emission unevenness can be obtained.”).
For claim 5, Lee and Miyamoto teach all of claim 4. Miyamoto also teaches the aluminum light shielding barrier being connected to the respective electrodes of each subpixel (Miyamoto, fig. 6B shows light shielding barrier 14 connected to respective electrodes 15).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1 focuses on the prior art (Lee) not teaching the a light-shielding partition layer being between the adjacent color functional layers and LED layers. This is not persuasive, as Lee does appear to teach a light-shielding partition present in between the adjacent sub-pixels and the light-shielding partition is above the LED layers while also having portions below the color-functional layer (see the rejection above). Claim 1 does not appear to require the entirety of each layer to be above or below the other layers. As such, Lee appears to teach all limitations of claim 1 and the rejection is maintained.
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 JACOB T NELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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.
/J.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2815
/MONICA D HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights