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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0279975 A1~ hereinafter “Jung”) of record in view of Li et al. (EP: 3,961,710~hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 1, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) a display device, comprising: a substrate (110) in which a plurality of sub-pixels (see at least fig. 1) is defined; a light emitting element ( 150) disposed in each of the plurality of sub-pixels; a first connection electrode (PE) adjacent to and electrically connected to a first semiconductor layer (153; see figs. 7 and 8B) disposed at a lower part of the light emitting element (150; see at least figs. 7 and 8B); a second connection electrode (CE) in contact with a top surface of the light emitting element (150; see fig. 7); a first planarization layer (115-1) disposed between the first connection electrode (PE) and the second connection electrode (CE; see fig. 7), and a top surface of the first planarization layer (115-1) is lower than a top surface of the first semiconductor layer (153; as evident by at least figs. 7 and 8B); and a second planarization layer (115-2) disposed between the first planarization layer (115-1) and the second connection electrode (CE).
Jung does not expressly disclose an uppermost part of the first connection electrode forms a continuous plane with the top surface of the first planarization layer.
However, it is well-known in the art to form a display device comprised of, in part, an uppermost part of the first connection electrode forms a continuous plane with the top surface of the first planarization layer as evident by Li at least fig. 8, which discloses “an uppermost part of the first connection electrode (ET1) forms a continuous plane with the top surface of the first planarization layer (PSV).”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Jung with the first connection electrode arrangement teaching of Li, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Jung Li discloses (in at least fig. 8 Li) an uppermost part of the first connection electrode (ET1) is disposed in the same plane as the top surface of the first planarization layer (PSV).
Regarding claim 3, Jung as modified by Li discloses (in at least fig. 8 Li) a side surface of the first connection electrode (141) is disposed in the same plane as a side surface of the first planarization layer PSV).
Regarding claim 4, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 7 and 8B) the light emitting element further includes: an emission layer (152) disposed on the first semiconductor layer (153); and a second semiconductor layer (151) disposed on the emission layer (152) and electrically connected to the second connection electrode (see figs. 7 and 8B), and the first semiconductor layer (153) protrudes to an outside of the second semiconductor layer (151) in a lateral direction.
Regarding claim 5, Jung as modified by Li does not expressly disclose a top surface of the second planarization layer is disposed equal to or lower than a top surface of the second semiconductor layer.
However, it well-known in the art to form a display device wherein a top surface of the second planarization layer (117) is disposed equal to or lower than a top surface of the second semiconductor layer (134) as evident by Beak et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0135971 A1~ hereinafter “Beak”) of record which discloses (in at least fig. 2) a top surface of the second planarization layer (117) is disposed equal to or lower than a top surface of the second semiconductor layer (134).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Jung as modified by Li with the arrangement teaching of Beak, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 6, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first semiconductor layer (153) protrudes to an outside of the second semiconductor layer (151) from all edges of the second semiconductor layer in a horizontal direction (see figs. 7 and 8B).
Regarding claim 7, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first connection electrode (PE) is electrically connected to a first electrode (E2) disposed on a top surface of the first semiconductor layer (153) exposed from the emission layer (152) and the second semiconductor layer (151).
Regarding claim 8, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first electrode (E2) is offset to the outside of the light emitting element (152) compared with a center of the top surface of the first semiconductor layer (153) exposed from the emission layer (152) and the second semiconductor layer (151).
Regarding claim 9, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first connection electrode (PE) is configured to electrically connect a driving transistor of the sub-pixel to the first semiconductor layer (see at least fig. 7).
Regarding claim 10, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first connection electrode (PE) is configured to surround the first semiconductor layer (153).
Regarding claim 11, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) an adhesive layer (114; [0115]) disposed under the light emitting element (150); and a power line (CPL) disposed under the adhesive layer (114; see fig. 7), wherein the adhesive layer (114) includes a first groove overlapping the power line (CPL) and a contact hole below and overlapping the first groove (see fig. 7).
Regarding claim 12, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) an edge of the first connection electrode (PE) corresponds to an edge of the first groove (see fig. 7), and an edge of the first planarization layer is disposed in the first groove.
Regarding claim 13, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) a passivation layer (113) disposed between the adhesive layer (114) and the power line (CPL); a first reflective electrode (PE; [0123]) disposed between the adhesive layer (114) and the passivation layer (113).
Regarding claim 14, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the first reflective electrode (PE) is configured to electrically connect the first connection electrode (see fig. 7) to a driving transistor of the sub-pixel.
Regarding claim 15, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) the second connection electrode (CE) is electrically connected to the power line (CPL).
Regarding claim 16, Jung discloses (in at least figs. 1-2, 7 and 8B) an insulating layer (112) surrounds a lower side surface of the light emitting element (150) under the first connection electrode (PE).
Regarding claim 17, Jung as modified by Li discloses (in at least fig. 8 Li) the light emitting element includes an undercut structure (see fig. 8; where item INP is formed) at a lower edge of the light emitting element (LD), filled with the insulating layer (INP).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights