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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A (Fig 8A) in the reply filed on 11/21/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10, 12-16 and 20 are presented for examination.
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 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) 1-3, 9-10, 12-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seo et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0126057 A1), hereafter referred to as Seo.
As to claim 1, Seo discloses a display device (fig 10C, display module DM-4) comprising:
a substrate (fig 10C, BL);
a display portion (EA/VA) disposed on the substrate (BL); and
a thin-film encapsulation layer (TFE) disposed on the display portion (EA) and configured to shield the display portion (EA) and including an organic encapsulation layer (OL),
wherein the display portion includes a valley portion (VA including PA) configured to control a flow of the organic encapsulation layer (OL), and
the valley portion includes:
a valley (VA) overlapping the organic encapsulation layer (OL);
a valley peak (PK) of which at least a portion is higher than a lower surface of the valley (VA); and
at least one control hole (fig 10C, hole between DAM and PK) configured to control a position of an end of the organic encapsulation layer (peripheral end surface of layer OL) such that the end of the organic encapsulation layer is disposed on the valley peak (PK).
As to claim 2, Seo discloses the display device of claim 1 (paragraphs above),
wherein the valley peak (PK and DAM) includes:
a first valley peak (PK); and
a second valley peak (DAM) of which at least a portion is formed to be higher than the first valley peak (PK).
As to claim 3, Seo discloses the display device of claim 2 (paragraphs above),
wherein the at least one control hole is defined in the first valley peak (PK defines hole formed between PK and DAM).
As to claim 9, Seo discloses the display device of claim 1 (paragraphs above),
wherein the display portion includes:
a first insulating layer (30) disposed on the substrate (BL);
a second insulating layer (40) disposed on the first insulating layer (30); and
a pixel-defining layer (PDL) disposed on the second insulating layer (40),
wherein the pixel-defining layer (PDL) is arranged in the valley (VA), and
the second insulating layer (40) and the pixel-defining layer (PDL) are arranged in the valley peak (PK).
As to claim 10, Seo discloses the display device of claim 9 (paragraphs above),
wherein the second insulating layer (40) is further arranged in the valley (VA).
As to claim 12, Seo discloses the display device of claim 1 (paragraphs above),
wherein the display portion includes:
a second insulating layer (40); and
a pixel-defining layer (PDL) disposed on the second insulating layer (40), and
wherein the at least one control hole (hole between DAM and PK) penetrates at least a portion of at least one of the second insulating layer (40) and the pixel-defining layer (PDL).
As to claim 13, Seo discloses a display device (fig 10C, DM-4) comprising:
a substrate (BL) including a display area and a non-display area (fig 10C);
a first insulating layer (20) disposed on the substrate (BL);
a second insulating layer (40) disposed on the first insulating layer (20);
a pixel-defining layer (PDL) disposed on the second insulating layer (40); and
a thin-film encapsulation layer (TFE) covering the pixel-defining layer (PDL) and including an organic encapsulation layer (OL),
wherein a portion of at least one of the second insulating layer (40) and the pixel-defining layer (PDL) is recessed to accommodate the organic encapsulation layer (OL), and the second insulating layer (40) and the pixel-defining layer (PDL) are arranged in the non-display area (VA),
at least one control hole is defined in an other portion of at least one of the second insulating layer and the pixel-defining layer (control hole between DAM and PK), and the other portion is higher than the recessed portion of at least one of the second insulating layer and the pixel-defining layer (portion VA), and
the at least one control hole is configured to control a position of an end of the organic encapsulation layer (end surface of OL on PK).
As to claim 15, Seo discloses the display device of claim 13 (paragraphs above),
wherein a cross-sectional shape of one control hole of the at least one control hole and a cross-sectional shape of an other one control hole of the at least one control hole are different from each other (fig 10C, shape of a first control hole between DAM and PK and second control hole between PK and region EA).
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.
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) 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo in view of Gong et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0207157 A1), hereafter referred to as Gong.
As to claim 4, Seo discloses the display device of claim 3 (paragraphs above).
Seo does not disclose wherein the second valley peak includes a peak surface having an uneven shape along a boundary with the first valley peak.
Nonetheless, Gong discloses wherein a second valley peak includes a peak surface having an uneven shape along a boundary with the first valley peak (fig 7, DDMP with BD and P).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to form the second valley peak of Seo with uneven shape along a boundary with the first valley peak as taught by Gong since this will more effectively block excess organic material.
As to claim 5, Seo in view of Gong disclose the display device of claim 4 (paragraphs above).
Gong further discloses wherein the peak surface includes at least one sawtooth shape in a plan view (fig 7, sawtooth shape created with BP and P).
As to claim 6, Seo in view of Gong disclose the display device of claim 5 (paragraphs above),
Gong further discloses wherein at least a portion of the at least one control hole is defined in an area between edges of two adjacent sawtooth shapes of the at least one sawtooth shape (fig 7 and fig 20 wherein DM1’ and DM2’ include sawtooth shapes with a control hole defined between the edges).
As to claim 7, Seo discloses the display device of claim 1 (paragraphs above),
Seo does not disclose wherein a plurality of the control hole are provided, and in a plan view, the plurality of control holes are spaced apart from each other in at least one of a first direction and a second direction.
Nonetheless, Gong discloses wherein a plurality of control hole are provided (fig 10, H), and in a plan view, the plurality of control holes are spaced apart from each other in at least one of a first direction and a second direction (fig 10, holes spaced apart in vertical and diagonal directions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to form a plurality of control holes in a first and second direction in the display of Seo as taught by Gong since this will further improve the blocking of the excessive overflow of the organic encapsulant material.
As to claim 8, Seo in view of Gong disclose the display device of claim 7 (paragraphs above),
Gong further discloses wherein the first direction and the second direction are not perpendicular to each other (fig 10, vertical and diagonal directions are not perpendicular to each other).
Claim(s) 14, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo in view of Woo et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0399262 A1), hereafter referred to as Woo.
As to claim 14, Seo discloses the display device of claim 13 (paragraphs above),
Seo does not disclose wherein a planar shape of one control hole of the at least one control hole and a planar shape of an other one control hole of the at least one control hole are different from each other.
Nonetheless, Woo disclose wherein a planar shape of one control hole of at least one control hole and a planar shape of an other one control hole of the at least one control hole are different from each other (fig 21; [0217]-[0218]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to form the control holes of Seo with different shapes as taught by Woo since this optimization would prevent the lotus effect from degrading and thus effectively control the overflow of the organic material.
As to claim 16, Seo discloses the display device of claim 13 (paragraphs above),
Seo does not disclose wherein a planar shape of the at least one control hole comprises one of a polygon, a circle, and an oval.
Nonetheless, Woo further discloses wherein a planar shape of the at least one control hole comprises one of a polygon, a circle, and an oval (fig 21; [0217]-[0218]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to form the control holes of Seo with different shapes as taught by Woo since this optimization would prevent the lotus effect from degrading and thus effectively control the overflow of the organic material.
As to claim 20, Seo discloses the display device of claim 13 (paragraphs above),
Seo does not disclose wherein a plurality of the control hole are provided, and in a plan view, the plurality of control holes are spaced apart from each other in a first direction and a second direction.
Nonetheless, Woo discloses wherein a plurality of the control hole are provided, and in a plan view, the plurality of control holes are spaced apart from each other in a first direction and a second direction (fig 21, H1 and H2; [0217]-[0218]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to form the control holes of Seo with different shapes and spacings as taught by Woo since this optimization would prevent the lotus effect from degrading and thus effectively control the overflow of the organic material.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent No. 10,978,671B2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAUN M CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3830. The examiner can normally be reached on MWFS: 7:30-6pm Thurs 1-2pm.
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, Purvis, Sue 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHAUN M CAMPBELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893 12/16/2025