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 Arguments
Applicant's amendments and the accompanying arguments filed 01/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued Jo in view of Takata does not teach or render obvious the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view.
However, this naturally results from the modification of Jo in view of Takata to include the partition of Takata in Jo. Takata teaches the partition, 350 in Figure 1, where the sidewall surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole and the material filling the contact hole 330. While Takata differs from Applicant’s invention in that the material 330 filling the contact hole corresponds to the claimed rib and not a separate ‘filling material,’ Jo teaches the contact hole filled with a filling material, 156 in Figure 2, separate from the rib 166. Modification of Jo to include the partition as it is taught by Takata, would therefore result in the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view.
PNG
media_image1.png
580
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
276
287
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (The alignment of the side surface of the lower portion of the partition overlapping the contact hole and the material filling it, as shown in Figure 1 of Takata (upper);
suggests a similar alignment of the partition portion in combination with the device of Figure 2 of Jo (lower);
resulting in the side surface of the lower portion overlapping the contact hole and the filling material.)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]For at least these reasons, the combination of references is still proper and renders the invention as claimed obvious. The rejection is therefore maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 6, 11-14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069).
Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593), hereafter “Jo,” discloses a display device, with reference to Figure 2, comprising:
a substrate 101;
a pixel circuit provided above the substrate, paragraph 27;
an insulating layer 141 which covers the pixel circuit and comprises a contact hole 142, paragraph 47;
a lower electrode 150 provided above the insulating layer and connected to the pixel circuit through the contact hole, paragraph 54;
an upper electrode 169 facing the lower electrode;
an organic layer 167 which is located between the lower electrode and the upper electrode and emits light based on a potential difference between the lower electrode and the upper electrode, paragraph 91;
a rib 166 comprising an aperture overlapping the lower electrode, paragraph 79; and
a filling material 156 provided inside the contact hole, paragraph 70, wherein
the rib overlaps at least part of the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view,
at least part of the filling material 156 is located between the lower electrode 150 and the rib 166 in a thickness direction of the insulating layer, Figure 2.
Jo does not disclose the rib is formed of inorganic material
a partition provided above the rib;
the organic layer includes a first organic layer which is in contact with the lower electrode through the aperture, and a second organic layer located on the partition and spaced apart from the first organic layer, or
the partition overlaps at least part of the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view,
the partition includes a lower portion provided on the rib, and an upper portion provided on the lower portion and comprising an end portion protruding from a side surface of the lower portion, and
the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view.
Takata (US 2009/0009069), hereafter “Takata,” discloses a display device including teaching a rib, 330 in Figure 1, formed of inorganic material, paragraph 48.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio for the rib to be formed of inorganic material. To do so would have merely been a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, (2007), MPEP 2143 I. B. In this case, substituting the rib of Takata for that of Jo.
Takata further teaches a partition 350 provided above the rib, paragraph 41;
the organic layer 310 includes a first organic layer which is in contact with the lower electrode through the aperture, and a second organic layer located on the partition and spaced apart from the first organic layer, paragraph 54, and
the partition 350 overlaps at least part of the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view,
the partition includes a lower portion provided on the rib, and an upper portion provided on the lower portion and comprising an end portion protruding from a side surface of the lower portion, paragraphs 50-54, and
the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole as seen in plan view, Figure 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for a partition to be provided above the rib;
the organic layer to include a first organic layer which is in contact with the lower electrode through the aperture, and a second organic layer located on the partition and spaced apart from the first organic layer,
the partition to overlap at least part of the contact hole and the filling material as seen in plan view,
the partition includes a lower portion provided on the rib, and an upper portion provided on the lower portion and comprising an end portion protruding from a side surface of the lower portion, and
the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the contact hole as seen in plan view.
One would have been motivated to do so in order to separate pixels to prevent short circuiting between pixels, paragraph 55.
In reference to the side surface of the lower portion overlapping the filling material as seen in plan view, Jo discloses the contact hole including the filling material, and Takata discloses the side surface of the lower portion overlapping the contact hole, it results naturally from the modification of Jo in view of Takata to include the partition of Takata in Jo, that the side surface of the lower portion overlaps the filling material.
In reference to claim 6, Tanaka discloses the second organic layer is provided on the upper portion, paragraphs 50-54.
PNG
media_image5.png
554
402
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (protrusion)][AltContent: textbox (First side)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]In reference to claim 11, Jo discloses the lower electrode comprises a first side located between the contact hole and the aperture as seen in plan view, and a protrusion protruding from the first side and overlapping the contact hole as seen in plan view, see annotated Figure 2 below.
In reference to claim 12, Tanaka discloses the partition surrounds the aperture as seen in plan view, paragraphs 59-61.
In reference to claim 13, Tanaka disclose the second organic layer surrounds the aperture as seen in a plan view, implied by the second organic layer being formed on/by the partition and the partition surrounding the aperture, paragraphs 54 and 59-61.
PNG
media_image7.png
527
468
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Second organic layer overlaps the contact hole)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]In reference to claim 14, Tanaka discloses the second organic layer overlaps the contact hole as seen in plan view, see annotated Figure 1 below.
In reference to claim 16, Jo discloses first, second and third subpixels, Figure 1 and paragraph 19, each including the pixel circuit, the contact hole, the lower electrode, the upper electrode, the organic layer and the aperture, paragraph 27, wherein the first subpixel and the third subpixel are arranged in a first direction, the first subpixel and the second subpixel are arranged in a second direction intersecting with the first direction, and the partition comprises a first partition provided between the aperture of the first subpixel and the aperture of the second subpixel, and a second partition provided between the aperture of the first subpixel and the aperture of the third subpixel, paragraph 79 (“bank (or separation wall) 166 can be formed …along a boundary of each pixel region P and surround each pixel region P.”).
In reference to claim 18, Tanaka discloses the contact hole of the first subpixel overlaps the first partition as seen in plan view, Figure 1.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) as applied above and further in view of Song et al. (US 2022/0093894).
In reference to claim 8, Takata discloses the upper electrode, 320 in Figure 1, includes a first upper electrode covering the first organic layer 310, and a second upper electrode covering the second organic layer, paragraph 40, the first upper electrode is in contact with the side surface, Figure 1.
Jo in view of Takata does not disclose the second upper electrode spaced apart from the first upper electrode.
Song et al. (US 2022/0093894), hereafter “Song,” discloses a display device including teaching the upper electrode, 500 in Figure 1, includes a first upper electrode covering the first organic layer 400 (left pixel region 100a), and a second upper electrode covering the second organic layer (right pixel region 100a) and spaced apart from the first upper electrode, and the first upper electrode is in contact with the side surface 301a, paragraphs 49 and 50.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the second upper electrode to be spaced apart from the first upper electrode. To do so would have merely been a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results; KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, (2007), MPEP 2143 I. B. In this case, substituting one partition configuration for another.
In reference to claim 9, Takata discloses wherein the lower portion is conductive, paragraph 50.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) and Song et al. (US 2022/0093894) applied above and further in view of Kubota (US 2008/0197778).
In reference to claim 10, Jo in view of Takata does not disclose a sealing layer formed of an inorganic material and covering the first upper electrode, the side surface and the second upper electrode.
Kubota (US 2008/0197778) teaches a sealing layer, 80 in Figure 7, formed of an inorganic material and covering the first upper electrode 72, the side surface (of 150a) and the second upper electrode 72, paragraph 64. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for a sealing layer to be formed of an inorganic material and covering the first upper electrode, the side surface and the second upper electrode. One would have been motivated to do so in order to providing a seal with low gas permeability to protect the device, id.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) as applied above and further in view of Kim (US 2023/0180531).
Jo in view of Takata does not disclose a thickness of the rib is less than a thickness of the partition.
Kim (US 2023/0180531) discloses a display including teaching a thickness of the rib, 174 in Figure 3, is less than a thickness of the partition 200, Figure 3 and paragraphs 90 and 123. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for a thickness of the rib to be less than a thickness of the partition. One would have been motivated to do so in order to form a thick partition in order to create a disconnect film thereon, paragraph 123.
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) as applied above and further in view of Jung (US 2019/0131365).
In reference to claim 17, Jo does not disclose a width of the first partition in the second direction is greater than a width of the second partition in the first direction.
Jung (US 2019/0131365) hereafter “Jung,” discloses a display device including teaching a width of the first partition 200a in the second direction is greater than a width of the second partition 200b in the first direction Figure 2 and paragraphs 49 and 50, see also paragraph 52, 57, 59 and 60. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for a width of the first partition in the second direction to be greater than a width of the second partition in the first direction. One would have been motivated to do so in order to form partitions of different size to improve stress applied to the display, paragraph 50.
In reference to claim 20, Jo does not disclose the second organic layer of the first subpixel and the second organic layer of the second subpixel are located on the first partition and are spaced apart from each other in the second direction.
Jung teaches the second organic layer of the first subpixel, 630 on the left of 200c in Figure 6C, and the second organic layer of the second subpixel, 630 on the right of 200c, are located on the first partition 200c and are spaced apart from each other in the second direction (by 203), paragraphs 80 and 157. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the second organic layer of the first subpixel and the second organic layer of the second subpixel to be located on the first partition and spaced apart from each other in the second direction. One would have been motivated to do so in order to shape the partition to increase a frictional area with a coating layer, paragraph 157.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo et al. (US 2019/0198593) in view of Takata (US 2009/0009069) as applied above and further in view of Choi (US 2023/0157082).
In reference to claim 19, Jo discloses the contact hole of the second subpixel overlaps the partition as seen in plan view, Figure 2.
Jo is silent regarding the contact hole of the second subpixel overlaps the first partition as seen in plan view, and is adjacent to the contact hole of the first subpixel in the first direction.
Choi (US 2023/0157082) discloses a display device including teaching a first subpixel PXa and a second subpixel PXb are arranged in a second direction, y in Figure 2, and the contact hole H of the second subpixel is adjacent to the contact hole H of the first subpixel in the first direction, x direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio for the contact hole of the second subpixel to overlap the first partition as seen in plan view, and be adjacent to the contact hole of the first subpixel in the first direction. To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D. In this case, applying the partition of Jo in view of Tanaka to the pixel layout of Choi.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN R. JUNGE whose telephone number is (571)270-5717. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 CT.
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, Chad Dicke can be reached at (571)270-7996. 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.
/BRYAN R JUNGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897