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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II, claims 11-20 in the reply filed on January 15, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Euijin (KR 2019-0071295 A) in view of Han et al. (US 2020/0106045 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Eujin discloses a display device comprising: a substrate (S1); a light-emitting element (210) disposed on the substrate and comprising a pixel electrode (212), an emissive layer (213) and a common electrode (213); a capping layer (¶[0055]) disposed on the common electrode (213) of the light-emitting element; and a thin-film encapsulation layer (310) comprising first inorganic encapsulation layer (311) disposed on the capping layer, a first organic encapsulation layer (312) disposed on the first inorganic encapsulation layer, a buffer layer (313a313/b, Fig. 3a) disposed on the first organic encapsulation layer (312), and a second inorganic encapsulation layer (313c) disposed on the buffer layer, wherein the buffer layer comprises an inorganic material and has a multilayer structure including a first buffer layer (313a) and a second buffer layer (313b) having different refractive indices from each other (¶s[0095]). Eujin fails to exemplify a support layer disposed on the capping layer.
Han discloses a display device comprising: a substrate (101); a light-emitting element (OLED) disposed on the substrate and comprising a pixel electrode (212), an emissive layer (222) and a common electrode (223); a capping layer (225) disposed on the common electrode (223) of the light-emitting element; a support layer (¶[0113]) disposed on the capping layer; and a thin-film encapsulation layer (300) comprising first inorganic encapsulation layer (310) disposed on the support layer, a first organic encapsulation layer (320) disposed on the first inorganic encapsulation layer, and second inorganic encapsulation layer (330) disposed on the first organic encapsulation layer, the support layer prevents or minimizes damage to layers below the inorganic barrier layer, where the damage may be caused by high energy of oxygen radicals generated in a process of forming a first inorganic encapsulation layer. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the support layer disclosed by Han in the display device of Eujin in order to prevent or minimize damage to layers below the inorganic barrier layer, where the damage may be caused by high energy of oxygen radicals generated in a process of forming a first inorganic encapsulation layer.
Regarding claim 12, Eujin discloses a display device wherein the first buffer layer (313a, RI between 1.6-1.84, ¶[0082]) has a refractive index greater than a refractive index of the first organic encapsulation layer (312, RI of 1.5, ¶[0092]), and the second buffer layer (313b) has a refractive index greater than the refractive index of the first buffer layer (313a, ¶[0095]).
Regarding claim 13, Eujin discloses a display device wherein the first organic encapsulation layer (312) has a refractive index of about 1.50 to about 1.60 (RI of 1.5, ¶[0092]), wherein the first buffer layer (313a) has a refractive index of about 1.60 to about 1.70 (RI between 1.6-1.84, ¶[0082]), wherein the second buffer layer (313b) has a refractive index of about 1.70 to about 1.80 (RI between 1.75-1.84, ¶[0085]), and wherein the second inorganic encapsulation layer (313c) has a refractive index of about 1.85 to about 1.95 (RI of 1.85, ¶[0095]).
Regarding claim 14, Eujin discloses a display device wherein the second inorganic encapsulation layer comprises silicon nitride (SiNx) (¶[0095]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-20 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim(s) 15, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 15, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second inorganic encapsulation layer has a thickness of about 6,000 A to about 8,000 A, and the buffer layer has a thickness of about 1,400 A to about 1,600 A.
Regarding claim(s) 16 and 19, claims(s) 16 and 19 is/are allowable for the reasons given in claim(s) 15 because of its/their dependency status from claim(s) 15.
Regarding claim(s) 17, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 17, and specifically comprising the limitation of the second inorganic encapsulation layer has a thickness of about 6,000 A to about 8,000 A, and the buffer layer has a thickness of about 2,650 A to about 2,850 A.
Regarding claim(s) 18, claims(s) 18 is/are allowable for the reasons given in claim(s) 17 because of its/their dependency status from claim(s) 17.
Regarding claim(s) 20, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 20, and specifically comprising the limitation of the first inorganic encapsulation layer has a refractive index of about 1.5, and the capping layer has a refractive index of about 2.0.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ebisuno et al. (US 2022/0069045 A1) discloses a display apparatus comprising a substrate including a first base layer, a first barrier layer, and a second barrier layer sequentially stacked on one another, a buffer layer on the second barrier layer, main display elements on the substrate of the main display area, and auxiliary display elements on the substrate of the component area.
Kim et al. (CN 114078941 A) discloses a display device including: a first substrate having a display region; a light emitting element located on the first substrate; and a packaging layer located on the light emitting element, the packaging layer including: a first inorganic layer; an organic layer on the first inorganic layer; and a second inorganic layer on the organic layer.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 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, Jessica Han, can be reached on (571) 272-2078. 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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879