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 .
Request for Continued Examination
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/05/2026 has been entered.
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 13-14 have been withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-14 are pending.
Action on merits of claims 1-12 as follows.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on January 05th 2026 and April 30th, 2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 12/08/2023 are acceptable.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (US 2016/01900508, hereinafter as Naka ‘508) in view of Hiroki (US 2012/0252150, hereinafter as Hiro ‘150) and further in view of Katsushi (US 2022/0069263, hereinafter as Kats ‘263).
Regarding Claim 1, Naka ‘508 teaches a method of manufacturing a display device, the method comprising:
preparing a processing substrate by forming a first lower electrode (Fig. 2A, (142); [0035]) of a first sub-pixel, a second lower electrode (Fig. 2A, (142); [0035]) of a second sub-pixel, and a third lower electrode of a third sub-pixel, and by forming a rib (Fig. 2A, (143a); [0038]) having a first aperture overlapping the first lower electrode, a second aperture overlapping the second lower electrode, and a third aperture overlapping the third lower electrode;
forming a first thin film including a first light emitting layer (160; [0038]) over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel; forming a second thin film including a second light emitting layer (160) over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel (see Fig. 2A).
Naka 508 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “forming a first resist that exposes the first thin film in the second sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel and covers the first thin film in the first sub-pixel; removing the first thin film in the second sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel using the first resist as a mask, remaining the first thin film in the first sub- pixel, exposing the second lower electrode from the second aperture, and exposing the third lower electrode from the third aperture; removing the first resist; forming a second thin film including a second light emitting layer over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel; forming a second resist that exposes the second thin film in the first sub-pixel and the third sub- pixel and covers the second thin film in the second sub-pixel; removing the second thin film in the first sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel using the second resist as a mask, remaining the second thin film in the second sub-pixel, and exposing the third lower electrode from the third aperture; and removing the second resist, wherein an area of the first aperture is larger than an area of the second aperture”.
Hiro ‘150 teaches forming a first resist (Fig. 7B, (21); [0068]) that exposes the first thin film (Fig. 7C, (2b/2c); [0048]) in the second sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel and covers the first thin film in the first sub-pixel; removing the first thin film in the second sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel (2b/2c; [0164]) using the first resist (21) as a mask, remaining the first thin film in the first sub- pixel, exposing the second lower electrode (11b; [0164]) from the second aperture, and exposing the third lower electrode (11c; [0164]) from the third aperture (see Fig. 7C));
removing the first resist (see Fig. 7E);
forming a second thin film including a second light emitting layer over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel; forming a second resist that exposes the second thin film in the first sub-pixel and the third sub- pixel and covers the second thin film in the second sub-pixel; removing the second thin film in the first sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel using the second resist as a mask, remaining the second thin film in the second sub-pixel, and exposing the third lower electrode from the third aperture; and removing the second resist (Through sequential formation of the green organic compound layer 2b and the red organic compound layer 2c in a similar way, the organic compound layer (2a, 2b, and 2c) corresponding to pixels of the respective colors could be left in the pixels of the respective colors as illustrated in FIG. 7D; see para. [0164]),
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Naka ‘508 by having forming a first resist that exposes the first thin film in the second sub-pixel and the third sub-pixel and covers the first thin film in the first sub-pixel; removing the first thin film in the second sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel using the first resist as a mask, remaining the first thin film in the first sub- pixel, exposing the second lower electrode from the second aperture, and exposing the third lower electrode from the third aperture; removing the first resist; forming a second thin film including a second light emitting layer over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel; forming a second resist that exposes the second thin film in the first sub-pixel and the third sub- pixel and covers the second thin film in the second sub-pixel; removing the second thin film in the first sub- pixel and the third sub-pixel using the second resist as a mask, remaining the second thin film in the second sub-pixel, and exposing the third lower electrode from the third aperture; and removing the second resist for obtaining a highly efficient high-definition organic EL display device (see para. [0010]) as suggested by Hiro ‘150.
Naka 508 and Hiro ‘150 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “an area of the first aperture is larger than an area of the second aperture”.
Kats ‘263 teaches an area of the first aperture (LA3; [0046]) is larger than an area of the second aperture (LA2; [0046]) (see Figs. 1 and 2; [0048]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Naka ‘508 and Hiro ‘150 by having an area of the first aperture is larger than an area of the second aperture in order to suppress or mitigate deterioration of the light-emitting characteristics of each color by separately designing the shape of each color sub-pixel in consideration of the allowable flatness of each color sub-pixel without a special planarization process (see para. [0031]) as suggested by Kats ‘263.
Regarding Claim 2, Hiro ‘150 teaches after the second resist is removed: forming a third thin film including a third light emitting layer over the first sub-pixel, the second sub-pixel, and the third sub-pixel; forming a third resist that exposes the third thin film in the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel and covers the third thin film in the third sub-pixel; removing the third thin film in the first sub- pixel and the second sub-pixel using the third resist as a mask, and remaining the third thin film in the third sub-pixel; and removing the third resist (Through sequential formation of the green organic compound layer 2b and the red organic compound layer 2c in a similar way, the organic compound layer (2a, 2b, and 2c) corresponding to pixels of the respective colors could be left in the pixels of the respective colors as illustrated in FIG. 7D; see para. [0164]),
Kats ‘263 teaches the area of the second aperture (LA2) is larger than an area of the third aperture (LA1) (see Figs. 1 and 2; [0048]).
Regarding Claim 3, Kats ‘263 teaches the first light emitting layer (OEL; [0077]) is formed of a material that emits light in a blue wavelength range (13; [0041]).
Regarding Claim 4, Kats ‘263 teaches the first light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a blue wavelength range (13), the second light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a green wavelength range (12), and the third light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a red wavelength range (11) (see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Kats ‘263 teaches the first light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a blue wavelength range (13), the second light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a green wavelength range (12), and the third light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a red wavelength range (11) (see Fig. 1; [0048]).
Naka 508 teaches the second light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a red wavelength range (190R), and the third light emitting layer is formed of a material that emits light in a green wavelength range (190G).
Regarding Claim 6, Naka ‘508 teaches a partition including a lower portion (143b; [0038]) located on the rib (143a) and an upper portion (150; [0041]) located on the lower portion (143b) and protruding from a side surface of the lower portion is further formed.
Claims 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naka ‘508, Hiro ‘150 and Kats ‘263 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Tan (US 2021/0184157, hereinafter as Tan ‘157).
Regarding Claim 7, Naka 508, Hiro ‘150 and Kats ‘263 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the lower portion of the partition is formed of a conductive material”.
Tan ‘157 teaches the lower portion of the partition (Fig. 1, (310); [0053]) is formed of a conductive material.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Naka ‘508 and Hiro ‘150 by having the lower portion of the partition is formed of a conductive material in order to reducing the power supply voltage drop of the display panel, and ensuring the brightness uniformity of the display panel (see para. [0034]) as suggested by Tan ‘157.
Regarding Claim 8, Naka 508 teaches a first organic layer including the first light emitting layer (160; [0038]) is formed on each of the first lower electrode, the second lower electrode, and the third lower electrode (142; [0035]), a first upper electrode (170; [0041]) is formed on the first organic layer (160) and is in contact with the lower portion of the partition (143b), a first cap layer (180; [0046]) is formed on the first upper electrode (170), and a first sealing layer (210; [0049]) is formed on the first cap layer (180).
Regarding Claim 9, Naka 508 teaches a second organic layer including the second light emitting layer (160; [0038]) is formed on the second lower electrode, the third lower electrode (142; [0035]), and the first sealing layer in the first sub-pixel, a second upper electrode is formed on the second organic layer and is in contact with the lower portion of the partition (143b), a second cap layer (180) is formed on the second upper electrode (170), and a second sealing layer (210) is formed on the second cap layer (see Fig. 2A).
Hiro ‘150 teaches forming the second thin film (2b) (see Fig. 7D).
Regarding Claim 10, Naka 508 teaches a third organic layer including the third light emitting layer (160; [0038]) is formed on the third lower electrode (142; [0035]), the first sealing layer in the first sub-pixel, and the second sealing layer in the second sub-pixel, a third upper electrode is formed on the third organic layer and is in contact with the lower portion of the partition, a third cap layer is formed on the third upper electrode, and a third sealing layer (210) is formed on the third cap layer (180) (see Fig. 2A).
Hiro ‘150 teaches forming the third thin film (2c) (see Fig. 7D).
Regarding Claim 11, Naka 508 teaches the first sealing layer, the second sealing layer, and the third sealing layer (210) are formed of the same inorganic insulating material (glass; [0049]).
Regarding Claim 12, Naka 508 teaches the rib (143a; [0038]), the first sealing layer, the second sealing layer, and the third sealing layer (210; [0049]) are formed of an inorganic material.
Naka 508, Hiro ‘150 and Kats ‘263 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the rib, the first sealing layer, the second sealing layer, and the third sealing layer are formed of silicon nitride”.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a silicon nitride material for the rib, the first sealing layer, the second sealing layer, and the third sealing layer on the basis of it suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. A person of ordinary skills in the art is motivated to select a silicon nitride material for the rib, the first sealing layer, the second sealing layer, and the third sealing layer in order to allow a good flow with the other steps in the fabrication process.
Examiner’s Note
Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicants' definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims. See MPEP 2111, 2123, 2125, 2141.02 VI, and 2182.
Examiner has cited particular paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following patents are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to semiconductor devices:
Choung et al. (US 2022/0077257 A1)
Zhao et al. (US 2019/0237525 A1)
Bae et al. (US 2019/0348482 A1)
Lee et al. (US 2019/0334112 A1)
Bang et al. (US 2018/0366524 A1)
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DZUNG T TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3911. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sue Purvis can be reached on (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.
/DZUNG TRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights