DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/24/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12/24/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. In regard to the amended claim 1, applicant argues Ju et al. (KR102028925BI; hereinafter Ju), and further in view of Sakajiri et al. (US 2016/0007456 Al), Chen et al. (US 2018/0067579 Al; hereinafter "Chen"), Kim et al. (US 2021/0217923 Al; hereinafter "Kim") and J. Choi et al., "Junction-Free Electrospun Ag Fiber Electrodes for Flexible Organic Light Emitting Diodes," Small, 2017, 1702567, 1-7; hereinafter "Choi2017" fail to teach the following:
“wherein each of the first fibrous electrode and the second fibrous electrode has a thickness in a thickness direction of the first electrode or the second electrode, and the thickness of the first fibrous electrode is substantially equal to the thickness of the second fibrous electrode in the thickness direction” (emphasis added).
Specifically the applicant asserts Choi2017 “does not disclose, teach, or suggest an embodiment where a thickness of a first fibrous electrode is substantially equal to a thickness of a second fibrous electrode in the thickness direction” (see page 9 of applicants arguments/remarks). The examiner respectfully disagrees with this assertion. As described in Choi2017 the Ag fibers are made from Ag films having the thickness of 40, 80, or 160 nm (pages 2-3, Section 2.1 Junction-Free Ag Fiber Electrodes via Electrospinning). As the Ag fibers are made from the Ag films through a process that uses Ps fibers as a mask and an etchant, the resulting first and second fibrous electrodes would have substantially similar thicknesses (Fig. 1, Fig. 3a and Section 2.1 Junction-Free Ag Fiber Electrodes via Electrospinning).
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 1-2, 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ju et al. (KR102028925B1; hereinafter “Ju”), and further in view of Sakajiri et al. (US 2016/0007456 A1), Chen et al. (US 2018/0067579 A1; hereinafter “Chen”) and Kim et al. (US 2021/0217923 A1; hereinafter “Kim”) and J. Choi et al., " Junction-Free Electrospun Ag Fiber Electrodes for Flexible Organic Light Emitting Diodes," Small, 2017, 1702567, 1-7; hereinafter “Choi2017”.
In regard to claim 1, Ju teaches a light emitting element (structure shown in Fig. 12) (Fig. 12 and paragraph 20), comprising:
a first electrode (an electrode 21) (Fig. 12 and paragraph 47);
a second electrode (a second electrode 60) facing the first electrode (Fig. 12 and paragraph 71); and
a plurality of functional layers (layers that comprise an organic light emitting layer 50) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode (Fig. 12 and paragraph 66), wherein
at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode includes a plurality of fibrous electrodes, which are randomly disposed (the electrode 21 is shown containing fibrous electrodes in Fig. 10) (Fig. 10 and paragraph 24)
wherein each of the first fibrous electrode and the second fibrous electrode has a thickness in a thickness direction of the first electrode or the second electrode (the first and second fibrous electrodes are shown extending in a thickness direction in Fig. 9).
However, Ju doesn’t explicitly teach the plurality of fibrous electrodes includes: a first fibrous electrode having a first width in a plan view; and a second fibrous electrode having a second width different from the first width in a plan view, wherein the first width of the first fibrous electrode is in a range of about 300 nm to about 500 nm, and the second width of the second fibrous electrode is in a range of about 2 um to about 3 um, and wherein at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode, which comprises a plurality of fibrous electrodes, has a sheet resistance of less than or equal to 19 Ω/sq, and
the thickness of the first fibrous electrode is substantially equal to the thickness of the second fibrous electrode in the thickness direction.
Sakajiri teaches the manufacture of transparent electrodes in display devices (paragraph 2);
a plurality of fibrous electrodes (a conductive nanowire network of a transparent electrode) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 13), includes:
a first fibrous electrode having a first width in a plan view (the fibers in the conductive nanowire network have a mean fiber size which indicates there are fibers with thicker and thinner fiber sizes) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 28); and
a second fibrous electrode having a second width different from the first width in a plan view (the fibers in the conductive nanowire network have a mean fiber size which indicates there are fibers with thicker and thinner fiber sizes) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 28).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Ju with Sakajiri to have the plurality of fibrous electrodes include a first fibrous electrode having a first width in a plan view, and a second fibrous electrode having a second width different from the first width in a plan view since these thickness are determined by the electrodes intended use as taught by Sakajiri (paragraph 23).
Chen teaches the manufacture of transparent conductive films in display devices (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 5-8), wherein a first width of the first fibrous electrode is in a range of about 300 nm to about 500 nm (a metallic core wire 121 has a diameter ranged from 5 nm to 500 nm) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 26).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Ju in view of Sakajiri with the teachings of Chen to have the first width of the first fibrous electrode is in a range of about 300 nm to about 500 nm since this allows for the manufacture of an electrode that can filter blue light from white light as taught by Chen (paragraph 6). Further it is known amongst those skilled in the art the thickness of the fibrous electrode is considered to be a manufacturing constraint determined by the functions of the device as taught by Sakajiri (paragraph 14).
Kim teaches a transparent electrode produced used in a display device, wherein a second width of the second fibrous electrode is in a range of about 2 μm to about 3 μm (the metallic fiber may have a diameter of an order of about 100 nm to 10 μm) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 50-51), and
wherein at least one of first electrode and second electrode, which comprises a plurality of fibrous electrodes (a transparent electrode including a conductive network which is formed of metal nanowire) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 71), has a sheet resistance of less than or equal to 19 Ω/sq (the transparent electrode may have a sheet resistance of 1.9 Ω/sq. or less) (paragraph 22).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Ju in view of Sakajiri with the teachings of Kim to have the second width of the second fibrous electrode be in a range of about 2 μm to about 3 μm, and at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode, which is comprised of a plurality of fibrous electrodes, have a sheet resistance of less than or equal to 19 Ω/sq, since this allows the manufacture of a flexible electrode which hardly causes deterioration of electrical properties even with repeated deformation while having excellent flexibility as taught by Kim (paragraph 35). Further it is known amongst those skilled in the art the thickness of the fibrous electrode is considered to be a manufacturing constraint determined by the functions of the device as taught by Sakajiri (paragraph 14).
Choi2017 teaches a thickness of a first fibrous electrode (a portion of Ag fiber electrodes) is substantially equal to a thickness of a second fibrous electrode (a different portion of the Ag fiber electrodes) in the thickness direction (the Ag fiber electrodes produced by depositing the PS fibers on AG films will have a thickness of 20, 40, 80, or 160 nm, based on the thickness of the Ag film used prior to etching) (Fig. 1, Fig. 3a, and [pages 2-3, sections 2.1 and 2.2]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, and Kim with the teachings of Choi2017 to have the thickness of the first fibrous electrode is substantially equal to the thickness of the second fibrous electrode in the thickness direction since this prevents device failures due to unwanted shorts as taught by Choi2017 (2.2. Ag Fiber Electrodes Characterization, lns 2-4).
In regard to claim 2, Ju teaches wherein first fibrous electrode and second fibrous electrode are integral with each other (the first and second fibrous electrodes as shown in Fig. 9 below are also shown to be integral in Fig. 10).
PNG
media_image1.png
295
765
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 5, Ju teaches wherein the first fibrous electrode and the second fibrous electrode each independently comprises silver (Ag), gold (Au), platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), copper (Cu), tin (Sn), gallium (Ga), indium (In), nickel (Ni), or a combination thereof (the conductive layer which forms the electrode 21 may include at least one of silver (Ag), gold (Au),platinum (Pt), aluminum (Al), copper (Cu), tin (Sn), gallium (Ga), indium (In), and nickel (Ni)) (paragraph 12).
In regard to claim 11, Ju teaches wherein the plurality of functional layers comprises:
a hole transport region (a hole transport layer 51) disposed on the first electrode (Fig. 12 and paragraph 66);
an emission layer (a light emitting layer 52) disposed on the hole transport region (Fig. 12 and paragraph 66); and
an electron transport region (an electron transport layer 53) disposed on the emission layer (Fig. 12 and paragraph 66).
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi et al. ("Ag fiber/IZO Composite Electrodes: Improved Chemical and Thermal Stability and Uniform Light Emission in Flexible Organic Light Emitting Diodes", Scientific Reports, January 24, 2019, Vol. 9:738; hereinafter “Choi2019”).
In regard to claim 6, Ju in view of Sakajiri doesn’t explicitly teach wherein at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode further comprises: a buffer layer disposed on the plurality of fibrous electrodes and includes a transparent conductive oxide.
Choi2019 teaches wherein at least one of a first electrode (an Ag fiber electrode) and the second electrode further comprises: a buffer layer (an IZO buffer layer) disposed on the plurality of fibrous electrodes and includes a transparent conductive oxide (the IZO forms a buffer layer on the Ag fiber electrode) (Fig. 1 and Introduction, lns 31-33).
It would’ve been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time to combine the teachings of Ju in view of Sakajiri with the teachings of Choi2019 to have at least one of the first electrode and the second electrode further comprise a buffer layer disposed on the plurality of fibrous electrodes and include a transparent conductive oxide since this allows for increased chemical and thermal stability of the device as well as uniform light emissions as taught by Choi2019 (Introduction, lns 33-36).
In regard to claim 7, Ju teaches wherein a buffer layer (the conductive organic material 40) covers the plurality of fibrous electrodes (the conductive organic material 40 covers the first electrode 21) (Fig. 12 and paragraph 61).
In regard to claim 8, Ju teaches wherein the buffer layer has an upper surface parallel to an upper surface of the first electrode or the second electrode (the conductive organic material 40 has an upper surface that is parallel to the upper surfaces of the first electrode 21 in Fig. 12).
In regard to claim 9, Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, Kim and Choi2019 wherein the buffer layer comprises indium zinc oxide (the IZO forms a buffer layer on the Ag fiber electrode) (Choi2019 Fig. 1 and Introduction, lns 31-33).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, Kim and Choi2019 as applied to claim 6, and further in view Yang et al. (US 2014/0084266 A1; hereinafter “Yang”).
In regard to claim 10, Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, Kim and Choi2019 teach a first buffer layer disposed on the plurality of fibrous electrodes and including the transparent conductive oxide (the IZO forms a buffer layer on the Ag fiber electrode) (Choi2019 Fig. 1 and Introduction, lns. 31-33).
However, Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, Kim, and Choi2019 don’t explicitly teach a second buffer layer disposed on the first buffer layer and includes a conductive polymer.
Yang teaches a light emitting element (an electro-optic device as shown in Fig. 4) (Fig. 4 and paragraph 50), a second buffer layer (buffer layer 2) disposed on a first buffer layer (buffer layer 1) and includes a conductive polymer (the buffer layer 2 can contain PEDOT:PSS which is a known conductive polymer) (Fig. 4 and paragraph 51).
It would’ve known to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Ju in view of Sakajiri, Chen, Kim, and Choi2019 with the teachings of Yang to have a second buffer layer disposed on the first buffer layer and including a conductive polymer since this layout prevents damage to lower layers during the formation of a top electrode as taught by Yang (paragraph 50).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-20 are allowed as previously indicated in the non-final office action mailed 05/29/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEYON ALI-SIMAH PUNCHBEDDELL whose telephone number is (571)270-0078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur: 7:30AM-3:30 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, Sue Purvis can be reached at (571) 272-1236. 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.
/SEYON ALI-SIMAH PUNCHBEDDELL/ Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893