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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11, 15-16, 20-24, and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bok (US 2022/0209187).
Regarding independent claim 1, Bok teaches a display device (Fig. 16, Element 10; ¶ [0067]) comprising a base layer (Fig. 16, Element 100; ¶ [0082]); a circuit layer (Fig. 6, Element 200; ¶ [0136]) on the base layer, and comprising a pixel circuit (Fig. 6, Element PC; ¶ [0084]); an element layer (Fig. 6, Element OLED; ¶ [0107]) on the circuit layer, and comprising a light emitting element electrically connected with the pixel circuit; and an encapsulation layer (Fig. 6, Element 300; ¶ [0133]) covering the element layer, wherein at least one of the base layer or the circuit layer has a groove (Fig. 16, Element G2; ¶ [0102]) defined therein, wherein the encapsulation layer covers the groove, and wherein a plurality of spaces (Fig. 16; “spaces” occupied by functional layers 222a/222c and electrode 223 shown beneath the encapsulation layer 310 in groove G2) are defined in the groove, each of the plurality of spaces being completely surrounded by the encapsulation layer.
Regarding claim 2, Bok teaches the groove comprising a sidewall portion comprising a first sidewall (Fig. 20; e.g., side of sub-layer 612); a first tip (Fig. 16; e.g., tip of sub-layer 621) protruding from the first sidewall; a second sidewall (Fig. 20; e.g., side of sub-layer 622) on the first tip; and a second tip (Fig. 16; e.g., tip of sub-layer 623) protruding from the second sidewall.
Regarding claim 3, Bok teaches a first width (Fig. 20; width formed by the lower portion of sub-layer 612) of the groove at the first sidewall smaller than a second width (Fig. 20; width formed by the upper portion of sub-layer 622) of the groove at the second sidewall.
Regarding claim 4, Bok teaches the circuit layer comprising a plurality of inorganic insulating layers (Fig. 16, e.g., Elements 203, 205, 207; ¶s [0110], [0114], [0116])); a first intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 610; ¶ [0199]); a first organic layer (Fig. 16, Element 211; ¶ [0124]) on the plurality of inorganic insulating layers, and covering the first intermediate conductive layer; and a second intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 620; ¶ [0200]) on the first organic layer, wherein the first intermediate conductive layer comprises a first conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 611; ¶ [0199]), a second conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 612; ¶ [0199]), and a third conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 613; ¶ [0199]) sequentially stacked one above another, wherein the second intermediate conductive layer comprises a fourth conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 621; ¶ [0200]), a fifth conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 622; ¶ [0200]), and a sixth conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 623; ¶ [0200]) sequentially stacked one above another, and wherein the first sidewall is defined in at least a portion of the second conductive layer; the first tip is defined by the third conductive layer and the fourth conductive layer; the second sidewall is defined in the fifth conductive layer; and the second tip is defined by the sixth conductive layer (Figs. 16 and 20).
Regarding claim 5, Bok teaches the first conductive layer, the third conductive layer, the fourth conductive layer, and the sixth conductive layer comprise titanium, and wherein the second conductive layer and the fifth conductive layer comprise aluminum (¶s [0199]-[0200]).
Regarding claim 6, Bok teaches the plurality of spaces comprising a first space facing the first sidewall; and a second space facing the second sidewall (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 7, Bok teaches, in a cross-sectional view, a maximum width of the first space being greater than a maximum width of the second space (Fig. 16; the space occupied by functional layer 222a has a maximum width greater than a maximum width of the space occupied by electrode 223).
Regarding claim 8, Bok teaches a slope of a direction of the maximum width of the first space being greater than a slope of a direction of the maximum width of the second space (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 9, Bok teaches the groove comprising a third sidewall (Fig. 20; e.g., side of sub-layer 632) on the second tip, and a third tip (Fig. 20; e.g., tip of sub-layer 633) protruding from the third sidewall.
Regarding claim 10, Bok teaches the plurality of spaces comprises a first space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by functional layer 222a) facing the first sidewall; a second space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by functional layer 222c) facing the second sidewall; and a third space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by electrode 223) facing the third sidewall, and wherein, in a cross-sectional view, a first maximum width of the first space is greater than a second maximum width of the second space, and the second maximum width of the second space is greater than a third maximum width of the third space (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 11, Bok teaches a direction of the first maximum width of the first space, a direction of the second maximum width of the second space, and a direction of the third maximum width of the third space being different from one another (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 15, Bok teaches the circuit layer comprising a plurality of inorganic insulating layers (Fig. 16, e.g., Elements 203, 205, 207; ¶s [0110], [0114], [0116])); a first intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 610; ¶ [0199]); a first organic layer (Fig. 16, Element 211; ¶ [0124]) on the plurality of inorganic insulating layers, and covering the first intermediate conductive layer; and a second intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 620; ¶ [0200]) on the first organic layer, and wherein the plurality of inorganic insulating layers have a tip portion protruding more than a sidewall of the base layer defining the groove (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 16, Bok teaches the circuit layer comprising a plurality of inorganic insulating layers (Fig. 16, e.g., Elements 203, 205, 207; ¶s [0110], [0114], [0116])); a first intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 610; ¶ [0199]); a first organic layer (Fig. 16, Element 211; ¶ [0124]) on the plurality of inorganic insulating layers, and covering the first intermediate conductive layer; and a second intermediate conductive layer (Fig. 20, Element 620; ¶ [0200]) on the first organic layer, and wherein the groove is defined in the first organic layer, and the second intermediate conductive layer defines a tip portion protruding more than a sidewall of the first organic layer defining the groove (Fig. 20).
Regarding claim 20, Bok teaches the encapsulation layer comprising a first inorganic encapsulation layer (Fig. 16, Element 310; ¶ [0133]) on the element layer; an organic encapsulation layer (Fig. 16, Element 320; ¶ [0133]) on the first inorganic encapsulation layer; and a second inorganic encapsulation layer (Fig. 16, Element 330; ¶ [0133]) on the organic encapsulation layer, and wherein each of the plurality of spaces is surrounded by the first inorganic encapsulation layer (Fig. 16).
Regarding independent claim 21, Bok teaches a display device comprising a base layer (Fig. 16, Element 100; ¶ [0082]) having a hole (Fig. 16, Element G2; ¶ [0102]) defined therein; a pixel on the base layer and comprising a first electrode (Fig. 6, Element 221; ¶ [0127]), an intermediate layer (Fig. 6, Element 222; ¶ [0129]), and a second electrode (Fig. 6, Element 223; ¶ [0130]); a protrusion (Fig. 16, Element PW; ¶ [0144]) on the base layer between the pixel and the hole, and comprising a first sidewall (Fig. 16; e.g., side of insulating layer 213); a first tip (Fig. 16; e.g., tip of insulating layer 211) protruding from the first sidewall; a second sidewall (Fig. 16; e.g., side of insulating layer 205) on the first tip; and a second tip (Fig. 16; e.g., tip of insulating layer 203) protruding from the second sidewall; an encapsulation layer (Fig. 16, Element 310; ¶ [0133]) covering the pixel and the protrusion; and a space (Fig. 16; the “space” occupied by functional layers 222a/222c and electrode 223 shown beneath the encapsulation layer 310 in groove G2) completely surrounded by the encapsulation layer, wherein the space faces at least one of the first sidewall or the second sidewall of the protrusion (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 22, Bok teaches the plurality of spaces comprising a first space facing the first sidewall; and a second space facing the second sidewall (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 23, Bok teaches, in a cross-sectional view, a maximum width of the first space being greater than a maximum width of the second space (Fig. 16; the space occupied by functional layer 222a has a maximum width greater than a maximum width of the space occupied by electrode 223).
Regarding claim 24, Bok teaches a slope of a direction of the maximum width of the first space being greater than a slope of a direction of the maximum width of the second space (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 31, Bok teaches the protrusion comprising a third sidewall (Fig. 16; e.g., side of buffer layer 201) on the second tip, and a third tip (Fig. 16, Element PT2; ¶ [0162]) protruding from the third sidewall.
Regarding claim 32, Bok teaches the plurality of spaces comprises a first space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by functional layer 222a) facing the first sidewall; a second space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by functional layer 222c) facing the second sidewall; and a third space (Fig. 16; “space” occupied by electrode 223) facing the third sidewall, and wherein, in a cross-sectional view, a first maximum width of the first space is greater than a second maximum width of the second space, and the second maximum width of the second space is greater than a third maximum width of the third space (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 33, Bok teaches a direction of the first maximum width of the first space, a direction of the second maximum width of the second space, and a direction of the third maximum width of the third space being different from one another (Fig. 16).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 12-14, 30, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bok (US 2022/0209187).
Regarding claim 12, Bok teaches the limitations of claim 2 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify a thickness of the first tip being greater than a thickness of the second tip.
It would have been an obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display device of Bok with a thickness of the first tip is greater than a thickness of the second tip, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 13, Bok teaches the limitations of claim 2 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify each of a portion defining the first sidewall and a portion defining the second sidewall has a thickness of 1 micrometer or less.
It would have been an obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display device of Bok with each of a portion defining the first sidewall and a portion defining the second sidewall having a thickness of 1 micrometer or less, since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 14, Bok teaches the limitations of independent claim 1 discussed earlier. Bok also teaches the groove defined in the base layer (Fig. 16) but fails to exemplify the groove having a depth of 1 micrometer or less.
It would have been an obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display device of Bok with the groove having a depth of 1 micrometer or less, since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 30, Bok teaches the limitations of independent claim 21 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify a thickness of the first tip being greater than a thickness of the second tip.
It would have been an obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display device of Bok with a thickness of the first tip is greater than a thickness of the second tip, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 34, Bok teaches the limitations of independent claim 21 discussed earlier but fails to exemplify each of a portion defining the first sidewall and a portion defining the second sidewall has a thickness of 1 micrometer or less.
It would have been an obvious choice of design to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the display device of Bok with each of a portion defining the first sidewall and a portion defining the second sidewall having a thickness of 1 micrometer or less, since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 and 25-29 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 17, the prior art of record neither shows or suggests a display device comprising, in addition to other limitations of the claim, a crack dam spaced from comprising a first layer comprising the same material as that of the first organic layer; and a second layer comprising the same material as that of the second intermediate conductive layer, wherein the second layer protrudes more than the first layer, wherein the encapsulation layer covers the crack dam, and wherein a space completely surrounded by the encapsulation layer is further defined in a portion facing the first layer.
Due to their dependencies upon claim 17, claims 18-19 are also allowable.
Regarding claim 25, the prior art of record neither shows or suggests a display device comprising, in addition to other limitations of the claim, a protrusion comprising a first conductive portion comprising a first conductive layer, a second conductive layer, and a third conductive layer sequentially stacked one above another; and a second conductive portion comprising a fourth conductive layer, a fifth conductive layer, and a sixth conductive layer sequentially stacked one above another, and wherein the first sidewall is defined in at least a portion of the second conductive layer; the first tip is defined by the third conductive layer and the fourth conductive layer; the second sidewall is defined in the fifth conductive layer; and the second tip is defined by the sixth conductive layer.
Due to their dependencies upon claim 25, claims 26-29 are also allowable
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee (US 2022/0199946) teaches a display panel with encapsulation layer including an organic layer and an inorganic layer. Seon (US 2020/0403050) teaches a display panel with a groove defined in a multi-layer. Lee (US 2020/0303677) teaches a display panel with a multi-layered film including an organic layer and an inorganic layer. Choi (US 2020/0287164) teaches a display panel with planarization layer disposed over a groove.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Quarterman whose telephone number is (571)272-2461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10am-6pm.
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 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.
/Kevin Quarterman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875 25 March 2026
Prosecution Insights