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
Status of the Claims
Applicant’s remarks/amendments of claims 1-4, 6, 8-16, 18 and 20 in the reply filed on January 29th, 2026 are acknowledged. Claim 1, 12 and 13 have been amended. Claims 5, 7, 17 and 19 have been withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Action on merits of claims 1-4, 6, 8-16, 18 and 20 as follows.
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 1-4, 6, 8-16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2021/0249492, hereinafter as Choi ‘920) and further in view of Kang (US 2015/0123098, hereinafter as Kang ‘098).
Regarding Claim 1, Choi ‘492 teaches a display device comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 2A, (100); [0066]) defining a first display area (DA2; [0070]) including a first pixel area (P2; [0056]) and a transmission area (TA; [0071]) and a second display area (DA1; [0070]) including a second pixel area (P1; [0057]) and surrounding at least a portion of the first display area (see Fig. 3), wherein the substrate includes an adhesive layer (not shown, see para. [0068]) through which a first opening overlapping the transmission area is defined (see Fig. 7).
Choi ‘920 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “a buffer layer disposed on the substrate, wherein a second opening overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and light emitting diodes disposed on the buffer layer and overlapping the first and second pixel areas”.
Kim ‘102 teaches a buffer layer (Fig. 6, (120); [0091]) disposed on the substrate (100; [0091]), wherein a second opening (210; [0039]) overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and light emitting diodes (370; [0053]) disposed on the buffer layer (120) and overlapping the first and second pixel areas (see Fig. 6).
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 Choi ‘920 by having a buffer layer disposed on the substrate, wherein a second opening overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and light emitting diodes disposed on the buffer layer and overlapping the first and second pixel areas for the purpose of preventing moisture from penetrating into the organic light emitting element (see para. [0055] and [0060]) as suggested by Kim ‘102.
Choi ‘920 and Kim ‘102 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the substrate has a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers and a plurality of barrier layers are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer is disposed between an organic layer of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer adjacent to the organic layer in the thickness direction”.
Kang ‘098 teaches a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers (Fig. 8, (10/20); [0135]) and a plurality of barrier layers (12/14/16; [0101] and [0134]) are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer (18; [0129]) is disposed between an organic layer (20) of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer (16) adjacent to the organic layer (10) in the thickness direction.
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 Choi ‘920 and Kim ‘102 by having a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers and a plurality of barrier layers are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer is disposed between an organic layer of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer adjacent to the organic layer in the thickness direction for the purpose of preventing moisture or oxygen from entering the light emitting diode from outside (see para. [0057]) as suggested by Kang ‘098.
Regarding Claim 13, Choi ‘492 teaches a method of manufacturing a display device, the method comprising:
providing a substrate (Fig. 2A, (100); [0066]) defining a first display area (DA2; [0070]) including a first pixel area (P2; [0056]) and a transmission area (TA; [0071]) and a second display area (DA1; [0070]) including a second pixel area (P1; [0057]) and surrounding at least a portion of the first display area (see Fig. 3), wherein the substrate includes an adhesive layer (not shown, see para. [0068]) through which a first opening overlapping the transmission area is defined (see Fig. 7).
Choi ‘920 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “providing a buffer layer disposed on the substrate, wherein a second opening overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and providing light emitting diodes disposed on the buffer layer and overlapping the first and second pixel areas”.
Kim ‘102 teaches providing a buffer layer (Fig. 6, (120); [0091]) disposed on the substrate (100; [0091]), wherein a second opening (210; [0039]) overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and providing light emitting diodes (370; [0053]) disposed on the buffer layer (120) and overlapping the first and second pixel areas (see Fig. 6).
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 Choi ‘920 by providing a buffer layer disposed on the substrate, wherein a second opening overlapping the transmission area is defined through the buffer layer; and providing light emitting diodes disposed on the buffer layer and overlapping the first and second pixel areas for the purpose of preventing moisture from penetrating into the organic light emitting element (see para. [0055] and [0060]) as suggested by Kim ‘102.
Choi ‘920 and Kim ‘102 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the substrate has a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers and a plurality of barrier layers are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer is disposed between an organic layer of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer adjacent to the organic layer in the thickness direction”.
Kang ‘098 teaches a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers (Fig. 8, (10/20); [0135]) and a plurality of barrier layers (12/14/16; [0101] and [0134]) are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer (18; [0129]) is disposed between an organic layer (20) of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer (16) adjacent to the organic layer (10) in the thickness direction.
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 Choi ‘920 and Kim ‘102 by having a multi-layer structure in which a plurality of organic layers and a plurality of barrier layers are alternately stacked in a thickness direction, and the adhesive layer is disposed between an organic layer of the plurality of organic layers and a barrier layer adjacent to the organic layer in the thickness direction for the purpose of preventing moisture or oxygen from entering the light emitting diode from outside (see para. [0057]) as suggested by Kang ‘098.
PNG
media_image1.png
456
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2A (Choi ‘492)
PNG
media_image2.png
414
402
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 8 (Kang ‘098)
Regarding Claims 2 and 14, Choi ‘492, Kim ‘102 and Kang ‘098 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the adhesive layer includes amorphous silicon”.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select an amorphous silicon material for the adhesive layer on the basis of it suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See Yoon (US 2017/0047534; para. [0062]) as evidence. A person of ordinary skills in the art is motivated to select an amorphous silicon material for the adhesive layer when this improves the performance of the display device.
Regarding Claims 3 and 15, Choi ‘492 teaches a first organic layer (103; [0100]); a first barrier layer (104; [0100]) disposed on the first organic layer (103); a second organic layer (111) disposed on the first barrier layer (104); and a second barrier layer (112; [0104]) disposed on the second organic layer.
Regarding Claims 4 and 16, Choi ‘492 teaches each of the first organic layer and the second organic layer includes polyimide (see para. [0100] and [0103]).
Regarding Claims 6 and 18, Choi ‘492, Kim ‘102 and Kang ‘098 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the adhesive layer is disposed between the first barrier layer and the second organic layer”.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the adhesive layer that can be arranged in any order, thus the adhesive layer is disposed between the first barrier layer and the second organic layer involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. A person of ordinary skills in the art is motivated to perform the arrangement when this improves the performance of the display device.
Regarding Claim 8, Choi ‘492 teaches a functional module (Fig. 2B, (20); [0071]) disposed below the substrate and overlapping the transmission area.
Regarding Claim 9, Choi ‘492 teaches the first opening overlaps the functional module (20) (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 10, Choi ‘492 teaches at least one selected from a camera module, a face recognition sensor module, a pupil recognition sensor module, an acceleration sensor module, a proximity sensor module, an infrared sensor module and an illuminance sensor module (seepara. [0080]).
Regarding Claim 11, Choi ‘492 teaches the first opening overlaps the first display area (see Fig. 2A).
Choi ‘492, Kim ‘102 and Kang ‘098 are shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of explicitly the limitations: “the first opening overlaps the second display area”.
However, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select the first opening overlaps the second display area on the basis of it suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See Yoon (US 2017/0047534; para. [0062]) as evidence. A person of ordinary skills in the art is motivated to select an amorphous silicon material for the adhesive layer when this improves the performance of the display device.
Regarding Claim 12, Choi ‘492 teaches an encapsulation layer (300; [0066]) disposed on the light emitting diodes (OLED), and wherein the encapsulation layer contacts the substrate (see Fig. 7) through the second opening in the transmission area (TA; [0058]).
Regarding Claim 20, Choi ‘492 teaches providing a functional module (20) overlapping the transmission area below the substrate (100) (see Fig. 2A), and wherein the first opening overlaps the functional module (20) (see Fig. 7).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 6, 8-16, 18 and 20, filed on January 29th, 2026, have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
Interviews After Final
Applicants note that an interview after a final rejection is permitted in order to place the application in condition for allowance or to resolve issues prior to appeal. However, prior to the interview, the intended purpose and content of the interview should be presented briefly, preferably in writing. Upon review of the agenda, the Examiner may grant the interview if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations will be denied. See MPEP § 714.13
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Dzung 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, 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