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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) to foreign application JP2022-053327 filed on 03/29/2022. The foreign application is not in English. The certified copy of the foreign priority application JP2022-053327 and an English translation of the non-English language foreign application JP2022-053327 accompanied with a statement that the translation is accurate in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55 have been received.
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, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US Pub. 20230041252) in view of Takahashi et al. (US Pub. 20030082865).
Regarding claims 1-2, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4C-4F, 4I-4K a manufacturing method of a display device, comprising:
forming a first display element [104, 112, 114] on a substrate [102], the first display element including a first lower electrode [104], a first upper electrode [114] and a first organic layer [112] located between the first lower electrode [104] and the first upper electrode [114][Fig. 4D or Fig. 4I, paragraph [0053], [0057]];
forming a first sealing layer [116] which covers the first display element [Fig. 4D or Fig. 4I, paragraph [0053], [0057]];
forming a first resist [408 or 416] on the first sealing layer [116][Fig. 4E or Fig. 4J, paragraph [0054], [0058]]; and
removing, of the first sealing layer [116] and the first display element [104, 112, 114], a portion exposed from the first resist [408 or 416] by a first patterning process [Fig. 4F, Fig. 4J, paragraph [0054], [0058]].
Chen et al. fails to disclose
the first patterning process including washing of the substrate with a cleaning liquid containing water;
wherein the cleaning liquid is pure water.
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] a patterning process [wet etching of insulating film] including washing of the substrate with a cleaning liquid containing water.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Takahashi et al. into the method of Chen et al. to include the first patterning process including washing of the substrate with a cleaning liquid containing water; wherein the cleaning liquid is pure water. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chen et al. in the above manner for the purpose of washing away, from a wafer surface, a chemical solution after cleaning therewith or wet etching therewith, thereby making it clean [paragraph [0003] of Takahashi et al.]. Further, it would have been obvious to try one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 9, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4H- Fig. 4K
forming a second display element on the substrate [102] after the first patterning process, the second display element including a second lower electrode [104], a second upper electrode [114] and a second organic layer [112] located between the second lower electrode [104] and the second upper electrode [106][Fig. 4I];
forming a second sealing layer [116] which covers the second display element [Fig. 4I];
forming a second resist [416] on the second sealing layer [116][Fig. 4J]; and
removing, of the second sealing layer [116] and the second display element, a portion exposed from the second resist [416] by a second patterning process [Fig. 4K].
Chen et al. fails to disclose
wherein the second patterning process including washing of the substrate with the cleaning liquid.
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] a patterning process [wet etching of insulating film] including washing of the substrate with a cleaning liquid containing water.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Takahashi et al. into the method of Chen et al. to include the second patterning process including washing of the substrate with the cleaning liquid containing water. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chen et al. in the above manner for the purpose of washing away, from a wafer surface, a chemical solution after cleaning therewith or wet etching therewith, thereby making it clean [paragraph [0003] of Takahashi et al.]. Further, it would have been obvious to try one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 10, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 1A, Fig. 1B, Fig. 3, paragraph [0007], [0022], paragraph [0057]
forming a third display element on the substrate after the second patterning process, the third display element including a third lower electrode, a third upper electrode and a third organic layer located between the third lower electrode and the third upper electrode;
forming a third sealing layer which covers the third display element;
forming a third resist on the third sealing layer; and
removing, of the third sealing layer and the third display element, a portion exposed from the third resist by a third patterning process.
Chen et al. fails to disclose
wherein the third patterning process including washing of the substrate with the cleaning liquid.
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] a patterning process [wet etching of insulating film] including washing of the substrate with a cleaning liquid containing water.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Takahashi et al. into the method of Chen et al. to include the third patterning process including washing of the substrate with the cleaning liquid containing water. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chen et al. in the above manner for the purpose of washing away, from a wafer surface, a chemical solution after cleaning therewith or wet etching therewith, thereby making it clean [paragraph [0003] of Takahashi et al.]. Further, it would have been obvious to try one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US Pub. 20230041252) in view of Takahashi et al. (US Pub. 20030082865) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Hara et al. (20160204068).
Regarding claim 3, Chen et al. discloses
wherein the first patterning process includes:
removing, of the first sealing layer [116], a portion exposed from the first resist by a first etching.
Takahashi et al. suggests washing the substrate using the cleaning liquid after the first etching.
Chen et al. discloses in paragraph [0043] that the sealing layer includes insulating material.
Chen et al. and Takahashi et al. fails to disclose
wherein the first etching includes dry etching.
Hara et al. discloses in Fig. 2, paragraph [0006], [0009], [0030], [0044], [0058], [0060]
wherein the first etching of an insulating film [hard mask 20] includes dry etching.
Hara et al. further discloses washing the substrate using a cleaning liquid after the dry etching.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hara et al. into the method of Chen et al. and Takahashi et al. to include wherein the first etching includes dry etching; and washing the substrate using the cleaning liquid after the dry etching. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Chen et al. and Takahashi et al. in the above manner for the purpose of providing suitable alternative method for etching the first sealing layer including an insulating material. Further, it would have been obvious to try one of the known methods with a reasonable expectation of success. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 4, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4J-Fig. 4K, paragraph [0058]
wherein the first patterning process further includes removing, of the first upper electrode [114], a portion exposed from the first sealing layer [116] after the first etching by etching.
Hara et al. discloses the first etching is the dry etching and after the dry etching for the first sealing layer [20], the washing with a cleaning liquid is performed before the etching for the first upper electrode [19].
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] the washing with the cleaning liquid containing water is performed after the first etching for the first sealing layer (insulating layer).
Consequently, the combination of Chen et al., Takahashi et al. and Hara et al. discloses limitation of claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4J-Fig. 4K, paragraph [0034], [0058]
wherein the first display element further includes a first cap layer which is provided between the first upper electrode [114] and the first sealing layer [116] and which adjusts an optical property of the first display element,
the first patterning process further includes removing, of the first cap layer, a portion exposed from the first sealing layer [116] after the first etching by etching,
Hara et al. discloses the first etching is the dry etching and after the dry etching for the first sealing layer [20], the washing with a cleaning liquid is performed before the etching for the first cap layer [193].
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] the washing with the cleaning liquid containing water is performed after the first etching for the first sealing layer (insulating layer).
Consequently, the combination of Chen et al., Takahashi et al. and Hara et al. discloses limitation of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4H, paragraph [0037]
forming a partition [110] on the substrate [102] before forming the first display element, the partition [110] including a conductive lower portion [110A] and an upper portion [110B] which protrudes from a side surface of the lower portion [110A].
Regarding claim 7, Chen et al. discloses in Fig. 4K, the first patterning process exposes a part of the side surface of the lower portion [110A].
Takahashi et al. discloses in paragraph [0003], [0191] the patterning process [wet etching of insulating film] including washing exposed surface of the substrate with the cleaning liquid containing water.
Consequently, the combination of Chen et al. and Takahashi et al. would result to
“wherein a part of the side surface of the lower portion is washed by the cleaning liquid.”
Regarding claim 8, Hara et al. discloses in paragraph [0056]
wherein an etching gas containing fluorine is used for the dry etching for the first sealing layer [20],
Chen et al. discloses in paragraph [0029] the lower portion [110A] contains aluminum.
Consequently, the combination of Chen et al. Hara et al. and Takahashi et al. discloses limitation of claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments that “in light of the perfected claim to foreign priority, the effective filing date of the present claims is March 2022 (i.e., the filing date of JP 2022-05 3327). Therefore, Chen, which was not published until February 9, 2023, is not prior art with respect to the present application for the purpose of the cited rejections”, Examiner respectfully disagrees Chen was effectively filed on 08/04/2021 (the filing date of provisional application) which is before the effective filing date 03/09/2022 of the present claims. Therefore, Chen is qualified as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) with respect to the present application.
“If the issue date of the U.S. patent or publication date of the U.S. patent application publication or WIPO published application is not before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it may be applicable as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if it was "effectively filed" before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in question with respect to the subject matter relied upon to reject the claim… AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(d) sets forth the criteria to determine when subject matter described in a U.S. patent document was "effectively filed" for purposes of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).” See MPEP 2154.01.
AIA 35 U.S.C 102 (d) PATENTS AND PUBLISHED APPLICATIONS EFFECTIVE AS PRIOR ART.—For purposes of determining whether a patent or application for patent is prior art to a claimed invention under subsection (a)(2), such patent or application shall be considered to have been effectively filed, with respect to any subject matter described in the patent or application—
(1) if paragraph (2) does not apply, as of the actual filing date of the patent or the application for patent; or
(2) if the patent or application for patent is entitled to claim a right of priority under section 119, 365(a), 365(b), 386(a), or 386(b), or to claim the benefit of an earlier filing date under section 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) based upon 1 or more prior filed applications for patent, as of the filing date of the earliest such application that describes the subject matter.
Overall, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. The claims stand rejected and the Action is made FINAL.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SOPHIA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1686. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am -5:00 pm, Monday-Friday.
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, BRITT D HANLEY can be reached at (571)270-3042. 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.
/SOPHIA T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893