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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C, claims 1, 2, 4, 8-12, and 18-20, in the reply filed on 12/3/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/3/2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 7-11 and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the first to third light control (sub light control) parts” should be changed to “the first light control (sub light control) part, the second light control (sub light control) part, and the third light control (sub light control) part.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 8-12, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 18, the limitation “in the direction” is unclear as to which previously recited direction the limitation refers, i.e. the thickness direction or the direction perpendicular thereto.
Regarding claims 1 and 18, the limitation “the bank (partition wall) is disposed between the first light control part, the second light control part, and the third light control part,” is unclear as to what element(s) the bank (partition wall) is required to be present “between.” Specifically, “between” is understood to indicate a position in a space separating two objects, however the limitation recites three elements.
Regarding claims 2 and 18, the limitation “the pixel defining film (partition wall) is disposed between the first sub light control part, the second sub light control part, and the third sub light control part,” is unclear as to what element(s) the bank (partition wall) is required to be present “between.” Specifically, “between” is understood to indicate a position in a space separating two objects, however the limitation recites three elements.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts are each disposed in a partition wall opening defined in the partition wall,” is unclear as which part(s) are formed in which opening(s). Specifically, the limitation appears to require a single opening and all six control parts disposed therein, which is not what is understood from the specification. Alternatively, the limitation might be interpreted as each control part being disposed in a corresponding opening, however this is also not is what is understood from the specification as it would result in six openings, each with a single light control part or a single sub light control part.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the limitation a sub-inorganic film disposed (directly) between the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts,” is unclear as to what element(s) the sub-inorganic film is required to be present “between.” Specifically, “between” is understood to indicate a position in a space separating two objects, however the limitation recites six elements.
Note the dependent claims necessarily inherit the indefiniteness of the claims on which they depend.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 20220037623; herein “Park”).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses in Fig. 10 and related text a display device comprising:
a circuit layer (e.g. PCL);
a light-emitting element layer (e.g. at least a portion of DPL) disposed above the circuit layer;
an inorganic encapsulation film (INS4, see [0132]) disposed above the light-emitting element layer;
a sub light control layer (e.g. a lower layer portion of layer including CCL1/CCL2/LSL; note that “layer” is interpreted as “a thickness of some material,” see Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary) disposed above the inorganic encapsulation film and including a first sub light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL1), a second sub light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL2), and a third sub light control part (e.g. a lower portion of LSL), each spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to a thickness direction;
a light control layer (e.g. an upper layer portion of layer including CCL1/CCL2/LSL) disposed above the sub light control layer and including a bank (e.g. upper portion of BNK2), first light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL1), a second light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL2), and a third light control part (e.g. a lower portion of LSL), the first to third light control parts spaced apart from each other in the direction;
a capping layer (e.g. CP1) disposed above the light control layer and covering the light control layer; and
a color filter layer (CFL, see [0106]) disposed above the capping layer and including a first filter (CF1), a second filter (CF2), and a third filter (CF3), wherein
the bank is disposed between the first light control part, the second light control part, and the third light control part,
the light-emitting element layer includes:
a pixel defining film (e.g. lower portion of BNK2) with a pixel opening defined therein;
a first electrode (e.g. ELT1, see [0076]) exposed in the pixel opening;
a second electrode (e.g. CNE1, see [0107]) disposed above the first electrode; and
a light-emitting layer (12 of LD, see [0044]) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, and
each of the sub light control layer and the light control layer includes quantum dots (see [0167]-[0168]).
Regarding claim 2, Park further discloses wherein the pixel defining film (bottom portion of BNK2) is disposed between the first sub light control part, the second sub light control part, and the third sub light control part (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4, Park further discloses a sub-inorganic film disposed directly between the sub light control layer and the light control layer.
Regarding claim 8, Park further discloses wherein the pixel defining film and the bank are integrated to form a partition wall (BNK2, see Fig. 10), and the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts are each disposed in a partition wall opening defined in the partition wall.
Regarding claim 14, Park further discloses wherein each of the sub light control layer and the light control layer further includes a scatterer (see [0173]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8-12 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Kim et al. (WO 2021251560, using US 20230263029 as English language equivalent; herein “Kim”)
Regarding claim 18, Park discloses in Fig. 10 and related text a display device comprising:
a light-emitting region (e.g. region of EMA) and a non-light-emitting region (e.g. region between adjacent EMA);
a light-emitting element layer (12 of LD, see [0044]);
an inorganic encapsulation film (INS4, see [0132]) disposed above the light-emitting element layer;
a light control layer (e.g. layer including CCL1/CCL2/LSL) including a first light control part, a second light control part, and a third light control part, each spaced apart from each other in the direction;
a capping layer (e.g. CP1) disposed above the light control layer and covering the light control layer;
disposed above the capping layer and including a first filter (CF1), a second filter (CF2), and a third filter (CF3); and
a partition wall (BNK2), wherein
the light-emitting element layer includes:
a first electrode (e.g. ELT1, see [0076]);
a second electrode (e.g. CNE1, see [0107]) disposed above the first electrode; and
a light-emitting layer (12 of LD, see [0044]) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, and
each of the sub light control layer and the light control layer includes quantum dots (see [0167]-[0168]),
the partition wall is disposed between the first sub light control part, the second sub light control part, and the third sub light control part (see Fig. 10), and
the partition wall is disposed between the first light control part, the second light control part, and the third light control part (see Fig. 10).
Park does not explicitly disclose
a sub light control layer disposed above the inorganic encapsulation film and including a first sub light control part, a second sub light control part, and a third sub light control part, each spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to a thickness direction;
the light control layer disposed above the sub light control layer;
a sub-inorganic film disposed between the sub light control layer and the light control layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches in Fig. 3 and related text a display device comprising
a sub light control layer (e.g. CCP-B1/CCP-G1/CCP-R1) disposed under a light control layer (CCP-B2/CCP-G2/CCP-R2) and including a first sub light control part, a second sub light control part, and a third sub light control part, each spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to a thickness direction;
the light control layer disposed above the sub light control layer.
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 invention of Park by having a sub light control layer disposed above a light control layer and including a first sub light control part, a second sub light control part, and a third sub light control part, each spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to a thickness direction, as taught by Kim, in order to improve pattern forming quality, increase bonding force, and improve reliability without deteriorating light efficiency (see Kim [0158]). The limitation “a sub light control layer disposed above the inorganic encapsulation film” is therefore taught by the combination of the light control layer being above the inorganic encapsulation film, as shown by Park, and the sub light control layer being below the light control layer, as shown by Kim.
Further, Park teaches using a sub-inorganic film disposed between optical layers for the purposes of sealing each layer, preventing permeation of impurities or contaminants to the layers (see [0194]-[0195]). Accordingly, 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 invention of Park and Kim by having a sub-inorganic film disposed between the sub light control layer and the light control layer in order to seal the sub light control layer and to prevent permeation of impurities or contaminants to the sub light control layer.
Regarding claim 19, the combined device shows wherein the sub-inorganic film (Park: layer analogous to CP1 disposed between the sub light control layer and the light control layer) is disposed between the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts in the light-emitting region, and the sub-inorganic film is disposed between the partition wall (BNK2) and the capping layer (CP1) in the non-light-emitting region.
Regarding claim 20, the combined device shows wherein the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts do not overlap the non-light-emitting region in the thickness direction (Park: see Fig. 10).
Regarding claims 1 (second interpretation), 8 and 9, Park discloses in Fig. 10 and related text a display device comprising:
a circuit layer (e.g. PCL);
a light-emitting element layer (e.g. at least a portion of DPL) disposed above the circuit layer;
an inorganic encapsulation film (INS4, see [0132]) disposed above the light-emitting element layer;
a light control layer (e.g. an upper layer portion of layer including CCL1/CCL2/LSL) disposed and including a bank (e.g. upper portion of BNK2), first light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL1), a second light control part (e.g. a lower portion of CCL2), and a third light control part (e.g. a lower portion of LSL), the first to third light control parts spaced apart from each other in the direction;
a capping layer (e.g. CP1) disposed above the light control layer and covering the light control layer; and
a color filter layer (CFL, see [0106]) disposed above the capping layer and including a first filter (CF1), a second filter (CF2), and a third filter (CF3), wherein
the bank is disposed between the first light control part, the second light control part, and the third light control part,
the light-emitting element layer includes:
a pixel defining film (e.g. lower portion of BNK2) with a pixel opening defined therein;
a first electrode (e.g. ELT1, see [0076]) exposed in the pixel opening;
a second electrode (e.g. CNE1, see [0107]) disposed above the first electrode; and
a light-emitting layer (12 of LD, see [0044]) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, and
each of the sub light control layer and the light control layer includes quantum dots (see [0167]-[0168]);
wherein the pixel defining film and the bank are integrated to form a partition wall (BNK2, see Fig. 10), and the first to third sub light control parts and the first to third light control parts are each disposed in a partition wall opening defined in the partition wall.
The remaining limitations are taught in substantially the same manner and for the same reasons as applied to claim 18 above.
Regarding claim 10, the combined device shows a minimum width of each of the first to third sub light control parts in the direction is substantially equal to a minimum width of each of the first to third light control parts in the direction in a cross-sectional view (Park: layer analogous to CP1 disposed between the sub light control layer and the light control layer in combination with the taper of the opening in BNK2 would result in widths substantially the same as claimed).
Additionally, note that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the widths to be a function of the taper and the thickness of the sub-inorganic film. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to change the taper angle of the opening, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component and because it is well-known in the art to change the angle to affect the reflection and extraction of the light. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP 2144.04. Further, it would have been an obvious matter to change the thickness of the sub-inorganic film because since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and it is well-known in the art that the thickness would affect the transparency as well as sealing properties of the layer. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 11, the combined device shows wherein a first height of the partition wall is greater than a second height of each of the first to third sub light control parts in a cross-sectional view, and each of the first height and the second height is defined as a maximum height in the thickness direction from a surface of the circuit layer (Park: in the instance where the partition wall is interpreted to further include to portions of INS4, CP1 and CP2 in regions over BNK2).
Regarding claim 12, the combined device shows wherein the partition wall is optically transparent (Park: in the instance where the partition wall is interpreted to further include to portions of INS4, CP1 and CP2 in regions over BNK2; INS4, CP1 and CP2 are optically transparent as evidenced by their presence over LD), and the color filter layer further includes a light blocking portion (BM, see [0190]) overlapping the partition wall in the thickness direction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lauren R Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-7199. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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.
/LAUREN R BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896 1/21/2026