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 .
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 1-4 and 21 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.; US 2021/0376291 A1; 03/2021 in view of Kim et al.; US 11,882,715 B2; 09/2020
Claim 1: Park discloses a display device comprising: a substrate ( Fig. 9 #10) comprising a light emitting area ( Fig. 9 first light emitting region LA1 ) including a light emitting element ( Fig. 9 first light transmitting region TA1 ) and a non-light emitting area ( Fig. 9 non-light emitting region NLA ) including a pixel defining layer ( Fig. 9: pixel defining layer 150 ); a low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70; [0069] In an embodiment, the filler #70 may include or be made of a material having a refractive index of about 1.7 or less ) disposed on the substrate ( Fig. 9 #10 ); a capping layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) disposed on the low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70 ) the capping layer comprising: a first layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) disposed on the low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70 ) and directly contacting an upper surface of the low refractive index layer ( as shown in Fig. 9 ); a second layer ( Fig. 9 #391 ) disposed on the first layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ); and a wavelength conversion layer ( Fig. 9 #330, #340 and #350 ) disposed on the second layer ( Fig. 9 #391 ) and having a refractive index higher than a refractive index of the low refractive index layer ( [0287] The first base resin #331 may include or be made of a material having a high light transmittance ), wherein a nitrogen atomic ratio of the first layer ( [0273] In one embodiment, for example, the second capping layer #391 may include silicon nitride, aluminum nitride, zirconium nitride, titanium nitride, hafnium nitride, tantalum nitride, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, titanium oxide, tin oxide, cerium oxide, or silicon oxynitride) is different from a nitrogen atomic ratio of the second layer ( [0324] In an embodiment, the third capping layer #393 may include or be made of the same material as the second capping layer #391 or may include at least one selected from the materials mentioned in the description of the second capping layer #391; #393 could select a different compound than the first capping layer #391 which would contain a different nitrogen atomic ratio ),
Park does not appear to disclose the first capping layer and the second capping layer are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area and the non-light emitting area.
However, Kim teaches the first capping layer ( Fig. 8B #171 ) and the second capping layer ( Fig. 8B #172 ) are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area ( as shown in Fig. 8B ) and the non-light emitting area ( as shown in Fig. 8B ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Kim with Park to implement the first capping layer and the second capping layer are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area and the non-light emitting area because this approach can prevent detachment between layers and protect the device from external moisture.
Claim 2: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 1 ( as discussed above).
Park teaches an oxygen atomic ratio ( [0273] In one embodiment, for example, the second capping layer #391 may include silicon nitride, aluminum nitride, zirconium nitride, titanium nitride, hafnium nitride, tantalum nitride, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, titanium oxide, tin oxide, cerium oxide, or silicon oxynitride ) of the second layer ( Fig. 9 #391) is different from an oxygen atomic ratio ( #393 picks a compound that has different oxygen atomic ratio from the list for #391 ) of the first layer ( Fig. 9 #393).
Claim 3: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 2 ( as discussed above ).
Park teaches the wavelength conversion layer ( Fig. 9 #330, #340, and #350 ) comprises a bank layer ( Fig. 9 #370 ) defining a plurality of openings ( as shown in Fig. 9 ), and the bank layer ( Fig. 9 #370 ) comprises an organic insulating material ( [0281] In an embodiment, the bank pattern #370 may include an organic material having photocurability ) and directly contacts a second surface of the second layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) facing the first surface ( as shown in Fig. 9 ) of the second layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ).
Claim 4: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 3 (as discussed above).
Park teaches the first layer ( Fig. 9 #391 ) and the second layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) comprise silicon oxynitride having different element ratios ( [0273] In one embodiment, for example, the second capping layer #391 may include silicon nitride, aluminum nitride, zirconium nitride, titanium nitride, hafnium nitride, tantalum nitride, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, titanium oxide, tin oxide, cerium oxide, or silicon oxynitride; [0324] In an embodiment, the third capping layer #393 may include or be made of the same material as the second capping layer #391 or may include at least one selected from the materials mentioned in the description of the second capping layer #391 ).
Claim 21: Park discloses an electronic device ( [0060] Referring to FIG. 1, an embodiment of the display device 1 may be applied to or included in various electronic devices including small and medium-sized electronic devices ) comprising: a display device ( Fig. 1 :display device 1 ) comprising: a substrate ( Fig. 1: substrate 30 ) comprising a light emitting area ( Fig. 9: light emitting regions LA1 to LA3 ) including a light emitting element ( Fig. 9: LA1 to LA3 ) and a non-light emitting area ( Fig. 9: non-light emitting NLA ) including a pixel defining layer ( Fig. 9: pixel defining layer 150 ); a low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70 ) disposed on the substrate ( Fig. 9: substrate 10) ; a capping layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) disposed on the low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70 ), the capping layer comprising: a first layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ) disposed on the low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70 ) and directly contacting an upper surface of the low refractive index layer ( as shown in Fig. 9 ); a second layer ( Fig. 9 #391 ) disposed on the first layer ( Fig. 9 #393 ); and a wavelength conversion layer ( Fig. 9 #330, #340, and #350 ) disposed on the second layer ( Fig. 9 #391 ) and having a refractive index higher than a refractive index of the low refractive index layer ( [0287] The first base resin #331 may include or be made of a material having a high light transmittance ), wherein a nitrogen atomic ratio of the first layer ( [0273] In one embodiment, for example, the second capping layer #391 may include silicon nitride, aluminum nitride, zirconium nitride, titanium nitride, hafnium nitride, tantalum nitride, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, titanium oxide, tin oxide, cerium oxide, or silicon oxynitride ) is different from a nitrogen atomic ratio of the second layer ( [0324] In an embodiment, the third capping layer #393 may include or be made of the same material as the second capping layer #391 or may include at least one selected from the materials mentioned in the description of the second capping layer #391; #393 could select a different compound than the first capping layer #391 which would contain a different nitrogen atomic ratio ).
Park does not appear to disclose the first capping layer and the second capping layer are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area and the non-light emitting area.
However, Kim teaches the first capping layer ( Fig. 8B #171 ) and the second capping layer ( Fig. 8B #172 ) are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area ( as shown in Fig. 8B ) and the non-light emitting area ( as shown in Fig. 8B ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Kim with Park to implement the first capping layer and the second capping layer are in contact with each other at a portion overlapping the light emitting area and the non-light emitting area because this prevents the layers from detaching and also blocks moisture from damaging the display device.
Claim 5 is rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.; US 2021/0376291 A1; 03/2021 in view of Kim et al.; US 11,882,715 B2; 09/2020 and further in view of Murata et al.; US 2010/0196685 A1; 09/2008
Claim 5: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 4 ( as discussed above).
Neither Park nor Kim appear to disclose the nitrogen atomic ratio of the first layer is about 10 percent to about 35 percent , and the nitrogen atomic ratio of the second layer is about 0.2 percent to about 10 percent.
However, Murata teaches the nitrogen atomic ratio of the first layer ( [0122] SiON (nitrogen 33 atom %), Si.sub.3N.sub.4, Sion (nitrogen 33 atom %), Si.sub.3N.sub.4 and SiON (nitrogen 9 atom %) were laminated in this order on the sapphire glass ) is about 10 percent to about 35 percent ( [0122] using SiON having a ratio of nitrogen to (oxygen+nitrogen) in the film of 33 atom % ) , and the nitrogen atomic ratio of the second layer ( as discussed above ) is about 0.2 percent to about 10 percent ( [0122] and SiON having a ratio of nitrogen to (oxygen+nitrogen) in the film of 9 atom %).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Murata with Park and Kim to implement the nitrogen atomic ratio of the first layer is about 10 percent to about 35 percent , and the nitrogen atomic ratio of the second layer is about 0.2 percent to about 10 percent because a high-nitrogen layer is typically deposited on a sensitive active layer and a low-nitrogen second layer is deposited on the first to optimize the transport of charge carriers toward a different part of the device.
Claim 6 is rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.; US 2021/0376291 A1; 03/2021 in view of Kim et al.; US 11,882,715 B2; 09/2020 and further in view of Wright et al.; US 7109101 B1; 05/2003
Claim 6: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 1 ( as discussed above), extending from a first surface of the first layer directly contacting the upper surface of the low refractive index layer ( Fig. 9 #70) toward the second surface of the first layer facing the first surface of the first layer ( Fig. 9 #393 )
Neither Park nor Kim appear to disclose the first layer comprises a plurality of pinholes, and the plurality of pinholes does not penetrate the first layer.
However, Wright teaches the first layer ( Fig. 1 #15 ) comprises a plurality of pinholes ( Col. 2 lines 12 – 15 Capping layers formed only of SiON in the PECVD plasma environment, however, have a tendency to develop pinholes ) and the plurality of pinholes does not penetrate ( Col. 2 lines 22 – 25 Another possible solution is to create a “capping stack” consisting of multiple layers of different materials including SiON, to thwart pinhole formation ) the first layer ( Fig. 1 #15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Wright with Park and Kim to implement the first layer comprises a plurality of pinholes, and the plurality of pinholes does not penetrate the first layer because the introduction of these defects allows for precise, controlled electronic tunneling while maintaining the protective properties of the layer.
Claim 8 is rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.; US 2021/0376291 A1; 03/2021 in view of Kim et al.; US 11,882,715 B2; 09/2020 and further in view of Sato et al.; US 2025/0321361 A1; 03/2022
Claim 8: Park and Kim disclose the display device of claim 1 ( as discussed above).
Neither Park nor Kim appear to disclose the low refractive index layer comprises a resin and a plurality of inorganic particles dispersed in the resin, and the upper surface of the low refractive index layer comprises steps due to the plurality of inorganic particles.
However, Sato teaches the low refractive index layer comprises a resin ( [0121 the first layer is usually a layer including resin, and the refractive index of general resin is approximately 1.5 ) and a plurality of inorganic particles dispersed in the resin ( [0132] The low refractive index particles may be either inorganic particles or organic particles ), and the upper surface of the low refractive index layer comprises steps due to the plurality of inorganic particles ( [0134] the low refractive index particles may be subjected to a surface treatment ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Sato with Park and Kim to implement the low refractive index layer comprises a resin and a plurality of inorganic particles dispersed in the resin, and the upper surface of the low refractive index layer comprises steps due to the plurality of inorganic particles because this configuration is used to enhance light extraction or trapping.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al.; US 2021/0376291 A1; 03/2021 in view of Kim et al.; US 11,882,715 B2; 09/2020 and Sato et al.; US 2025/0321361 A1; 03/2022 as it relates to claim 8 and further in view of Uchida et al; US 2023/0109576 A1; 03/2021
Claim 9: Park, Kim, and Sato disclose the display device of claim 8 ( as discussed above).
Neither Park nor Kim nor Sato appear to disclose pinholes of the plurality of pinholes are adjacent to the steps.
However, Uchida teaches pinholes of the plurality of pinholes ( Fig. 39 #15 ) are adjacent to the steps ( Fig. 39 #513 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Uchida with Sato, Park, and Kim to implement pinholes of the plurality of pinholes are adjacent to the steps because of poor step coverage during the deposition process.
Claim 10: Park, Kim, Sato and Uchida disclose the display device of claim 9 ( as discussed above).
Neither Park nor Kim nor Uchida appear to disclose the plurality of inorganic particles comprises one or more of silica, magnesium fluoride, and iron oxide.
However, Sato teaches the plurality of inorganic particles comprises one or more of silica, magnesium fluoride, and iron oxide ( [0132] the inorganic particles may include inorganic particles such as silicon dioxide (silica), magnesium fluoride, lithium fluoride, calcium fluoride and barium fluoride).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Uchida with Sato, Park and Kim to implement the plurality of inorganic particles comprises one or more of silica, magnesium fluoride, and iron oxide because each of the particles help to create a low-n layer.
Claim 11: Park, Kim, Sato and Uchida disclose the display device of claim 10 ( as discussed above).
Neither Park nor Kim nor Uchida appear to disclose each of the plurality of inorganic particles has a hollow.
However, Sato teaches each of the plurality of inorganic particles has a hollow ( [0133] the low refractive index particles may be any one of, for example, solid particles, hollow particles, and porous particles).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to utilize the teachings of Uchida with Sato, Park, and Kim to implement each of the plurality of inorganic particles has a hollow because the trapped air inside the hollow core has significantly lower refractive index.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 of remarks, filed 01/30/2026, with respect to Drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the drawings filed on 10/30/2025 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9 - 15 of remarks, filed 01/30/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Kim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 KIMBERLY N FREY whose telephone number is (571)272-5068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5 pm.
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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached at (571)272-2063. 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.
/K.N.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/MARLON T FLETCHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817