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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The examiner proposes DISPLAY WITH ETCH STOP AND SEALING LAYERS OVER RIB
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.
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, US 2023/0263014 A1, in view of Toyoda, US 2010/0007272 A1.
Claim 13: Lin discloses:
a substrate (102);
a first lower electrode, a second lower electrode and a third lower electrode (104) provided above the substrate;
Note: there are many subpixels 108 in the device (FIGS. 1A, 1C, 1D). Each electrode corresponds to one of the subpixels.
a rib (126) comprising 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 (opening over subpixel 108, FIG. 1A for three different subpixels);
a partition (110) comprising a lower portion (110A) provided on the rib and an upper portion (110B) provided on the lower portion and protruding from a side surface of the lower portion (FIG. 1A);
a first organic layer (112) provided on the first lower electrode in the first aperture and including a first light emitting layer;
a first etching stopper layer (114) which is provided on the rib and the first organic layer and is in contact with the partition;
See claim 18; the upper electrode can be the etching stopper layer.
a first sealing layer (116) which is provided on the first etching stopper layer and is in contact with the partition;
a second organic layer (112) provided on the second lower electrode in the second aperture and including a second light emitting layer;
a second etching stopper layer (114) which is provided on the rib and the second organic layer and is in contact with the partition;
a second sealing layer (116) which is provided on the second etching stopper layer and is in contact with the partition;
a third organic layer (112) provided on the third lower electrode in the third aperture and including a third light emitting layer;
a third etching stopper layer (114) which is provided on the rib and the third organic layer and is in contact with the partition;
and a third sealing layer (116) which is provided on the third etching stopper layer and is in contact with the partition.
PNG
media_image1.png
300
860
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note the term “etching stopper layer” is a product-by-process term that is only limiting on the claim scope as to the resulting structure. MPEP 2113. That is, anything that could serve as an etching stopper layer would qualify. The present application notes that the upper electrode can be used as an etching stopper layer (claim 18). Note that the present
Lin does not disclose that a thickness of each of the first etching stopper layer and the second etching stopper layer is greater than a thickness of the third etching stopper layer. However, see Toyoda, which discloses that it is advantage of having a thinner blue upper electrode: “the respective film thicknesses of the respective upper electrodes 17 for the green pixel 17G and the red pixel 17R, in which transmittance is not so much deteriorated even when the film thickness of the upper electrode 15 gets larger, are formed thicker and that the film thickness of the upper electrode 15 for the blue pixel 17B, in which transmittance is much affected by the film thickness, is not formed thick. This can avoid the shading while suppressing the deterioration in brightness.” [0064]
PNG
media_image2.png
406
704
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to have had a thinner blue (third) electrode in Lin to avoid the shading while suppressing the deterioration in brightness.
Claim 14: Toyoda discloses that “as illustrated in FIG. 4, the transmittance of the upper electrode 15 is greater in the short wavelength region. Therefore, from the view point of properties, it is the most rational to make the upper electrode 15 for the red pixel 17R thicker than the upper electrode 15 for the green pixel 17G.” [0076]. Thus it would have been advantageous to have the thickness of the first (red) etching stopper layer be greater than the thickness of the second (green) etching stopper layer.
Claim 15: the third light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a blue wavelength range. See the analysis of claim 13 above.
Claim 16: the first light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a red wavelength range, the second light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a green wavelength range, and the third light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a blue wavelength range. See the analysis of claims 13 and 14 above.
Claim 17: the first light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a green wavelength range, the second light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a red wavelength range, and the third light emitting layer is formed of a material which emits light in a blue wavelength range. See the analysis of claim 13 above to show that the third light emitting layer is blue; as no distinction between the first and second subpixels is made in claim 13, either can be red or green.
Claim 18: a first upper electrode (114) provided on the first organic layer; a first transparent layer (first capping layer) provided on the first upper electrode; and a first inorganic layer (second capping layer) provided on the first transparent layer, wherein at least one of the first upper electrode (114) and the first inorganic layer is the first etching stopper layer: “a first capping layer and a second capping layer are disposed between the cathode 114 and the encapsulation layer 116.” [0042].
Lin does not explicitly state that the first capping layer is transparent. However, Lin discloses at [0003] that there are both top and bottom emission devices. It would have been obvious to make either of these are known and desirable in different cases; in making a top emission device, all the top layers, including the first capping layer, would need to be transparent.
Claim 19: the first upper electrode is formed of an alloy of magnesium and silver. “The cathode 114 includes a conductive material, such as a metal. E.g., the cathode 114 includes, but is not limited to, silver, magnesium, chromium, titanium, aluminum, ITO, or a combination thereof.” [0065].
Claim 20: the first inorganic layer is formed of lithium fluoride or silicon oxide. “The second capping layer may include an inorganic material, such as lithium fluoride.” [0042].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Takeda, US 2023/0371344 A1, which discloses many of the claimed elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-1596. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Jacob Choi can be reached at 469.295.9060. 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.
/PETER BRADFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights