DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This Office Action is in response to Amendments/Remarks filed on May 13, 2026.
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.
Claims 1-3, 8-15, and 17 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. As to claims 1 and 14, the limitation “the light emitting element” fails to refer to which of the plural “light emitting elements” is directed to. Further, the limitation “the side surfaces of the connection portion” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. Further in claim 14, the limitation “the reflective portion” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. Thus, the limitations render the claims indefinite and clarification is required.
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, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0365669 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) and evidenced by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0353690 A1 to Choi et al. (“Choi”). As to claim 1, Kim discloses a display device comprising: a substrate (SUB); pixel electrodes (D) on the substrate (SUB); light emitting elements (EL) on the pixel electrodes (D) and extending in a thickness direction of the substrate (SUB); a first insulating layer (BANK) on and extending around sides of each of the light emitting elements (EL); a connection electrode (E1) between one of the pixel electrodes (D) and a corresponding one of the light emitting elements (EL), the connection electrode (E1) comprising: a connection portion (A1) bonding the pixel electrode (D) to the light emitting element (EL); and a reflection portion (A2) integral with the connection portion (A1) and extending around the sides of the light emitting element (EL) on the first insulating layer (BANK); a common electrode (E2) on the light emitting elements (EL); and a second insulating layer (CPL) on an upper surface and sides of the reflection portion (A2) and sides of the connection portion (A1), wherein the common electrode (E2) extends on the second insulating layer (CPL) along the upper surface and side surfaces of the reflection portion (A2) and along the side surfaces of the connection portion (A1) (See Fig. 3, Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 15, ¶ 0091-¶ 0093, ¶ 0101-¶ 0103, ¶ 0109, ¶ 0116-¶ 0123, ¶ 0131-¶ 0134, ¶ 0137, ¶ 0139, ¶ 0225-¶ 0236) (Notes: the recited “pixel electrodes” are met by the connection to the drain as taught by ¶ 0041 of Choi).
As to claim 2, Kim further discloses wherein the connection portion (A1) and the reflection portion (A2) comprise the same material (See Fig. 15).
As to claim 8, Kim discloses further comprising a planarization layer (PAS) between the pixel electrodes (D), wherein the second insulating layer (CPL) is on the planarization layer (PAS) (See Fig. 3, Fig. 4, ¶ 0109). As to claim 14, Kim discloses a display device comprising: a substrate (SUB); pixel electrodes (D) on the substrate (SUB); light emitting elements (EL) on the pixel electrodes (D) and extending in a thickness direction of the substrate (SUB); a first insulating layer (BANK) on and extending around sides of each of the light emitting elements (EL); a connection electrode (E1) between one of the pixel electrodes (D) and a corresponding one of the light emitting elements (EL), the connection electrode (E1) having a connection portion (A1) bonding the pixel electrode (D) to the light emitting element (EL) and a reflection portion (A2) comprising the same material as the connection portion (A1) and extending around the sides of the light emitting element (EL) on the first insulating layer (BANK); a common electrode (E2) on the light emitting elements (EL); and a second insulating layer (CPL) on an upper surface and sides of the reflection portion (A2) and sides of the connection portion (A1), wherein the common electrode (E2) extends on the second insulating layer (CPL) along the upper surface and side surfaces of the reflective portion and along the side surfaces of the connection portion (A1) (See Fig. 3, Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 15, ¶ 0091-¶ 0093, ¶ 0101-¶ 0103, ¶ 0109, ¶ 0116-¶ 0123, ¶ 0131-¶ 0134, ¶ 0137, ¶ 0139, ¶ 0225-¶ 0236) (Notes: the recited “pixel electrodes” are met by the connection to the drain as taught by ¶ 0041 of Choi).
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) 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0365669 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) as applied to claims 2 and 14 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0159064 A1 to Sakariya et al. (“Sakariya”). The teaching of Kim has been discussed above. As to claims 3 and 15, although Kim does not further disclose wherein the connection portion and the reflection portion comprise gold, Sakariya does disclose wherein the connection portion (on 116) and the reflection portion (on 114) comprise gold (See ¶ 0124). In view of the teaching of Sakariya, it would have been obvious to one for ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kim to have wherein the connection portion and the reflection portion comprise gold because gold along with other metallic materials are known reflective materials applicable in the industry (See ¶ 0124).
Claim(s) 9-12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0365669 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0105980 A1 to Sim et al. (“Sim”). The teaching of Kim has been discussed above. As to claim 9, although Kim does not disclose further comprising: partition walls partitioning light emission areas and a non-light emission area; and a wavelength conversion layer between the partition walls and overlapping the light emitting elements in the light emission areas, Kim in view of Sim discloses further comprising: partition walls (124) partitioning light emission areas (adjacent at EL/110) and a non-light emission area (adjacent 110); and a wavelength conversion layer (128, 130, 132) between the partition walls (124) and overlapping the light emitting elements (EL/110) in the light emission areas (adjacent at EL/110) (See Kim Fig. 4 and Sim Fig. 2, ¶ 0019, ¶ 0020, ¶ 0032, ¶ 0033, ¶ 0034, ¶ 0036, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0038, ¶ 0042) such that multicolor is obtained while preventing optical interference and improving light extraction efficiency. As to claim 10, Kim in view of Sim discloses further comprising: a third insulating layer (127) between the wavelength conversion layer (128, 130, 132) and the common electrode (E2); and a reflective film (404) between the wavelength conversion layer (128, 130, 132) and the partition walls (124) (See Kim Fig. 4 and Sim Fig. 2, ¶ 0032, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0038). As to claim 11, Kim in view of Sim further discloses wherein the reflective film (404) comprises a reflective metal (See Sim ¶ 0038). As to claim 12, Kim in view of Sim discloses further comprising: a light blocking member (127, 404) on the partition walls (124); and color filters (¶ 0033) on the wavelength conversion layer (128, 130, 132) (See Kim Fig. 4, Sim Fig. 2, ¶ 0033, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0038). As to claim 17, although Kim does not disclose further comprising: partition walls partitioning light emission areas and a non-light emission area; and a wavelength conversion layer between the partition walls and overlapping the light emitting elements, Kim in view of Sim discloses further comprising: partition walls (124) partitioning light emission areas (at EL/110) and a non-light emission area (adjacent at EL/110); and a wavelength conversion layer (128, 130, 132) between the partition walls (124) and overlapping the light emitting elements (EL/110) (See Kim Fig. 4 and Sim Fig. 2, ¶ 0019, ¶ 0020, ¶ 0032, ¶ 0033, ¶ 0034, ¶ 0036, ¶ 0037, ¶ 0038, ¶ 0042) such that multicolor is obtained while preventing optical interference and improving light extraction efficiency.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0365669 A1 to Kim et al. (“Kim”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,923,630 B1 to Pynn et al. (“Pynn”). The teaching of Kim has been discussed above. As to claim 13, although Kim does not further disclose wherein the light emitting elements comprise a first semiconductor layer, an electron blocking layer, an active layer, a superlattice layer, and a second semiconductor layer that are sequentially stacked in the thickness direction of the substrate, Kim in view of Pynn further discloses wherein the light emitting elements (EL/1000) comprise a first semiconductor layer (1040), an electron blocking layer (1035), an active layer (1030), a superlattice layer (1025), and a second semiconductor layer (1020) that are sequentially stacked in the thickness direction of the substrate (SUB) (See Kim Fig. 4 and Pynn Fig. 10, Column 26, lines 21-52) such that the light emitting elements having reduced electron leakage current and improved efficiency are obtained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 and 14 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 DAVID CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7438. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12-6.
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.
/DAVID CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights