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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the opening" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 8-10, 12, 16, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi et al. (US 2016/0104869 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (111); a display element (70) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (190) overlapping the first layer and including a first sub-light- blocking layer (192, ¶[0061]), a first inorganic layer (194, ¶[0060]), a second sub-light-blocking layer (192, ¶[0061]), and a second inorganic layer (194, ¶[0060]), wherein the first inorganic layer (194) is disposed on the first sub-light-blocking layer (192), the second sub-light-blocking layer (192) is disposed on the first inorganic layer (194), and the second inorganic layer (194) is disposed on the second sub-light-blocking layer (192, Fig. 2); and a reflection-adjusting layer (210) disposed on the light-blocking layer, wherein a thickness of the light-blocking layer (190) is equal to or greater than about 100 nanometers (nm) and equal to or less than about 500 nm (¶s[0060-0061]).
Regarding claim 2, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the reflection-adjusting layer (210) is in contact with an upper surface of the light-blocking layer (190).
Regarding claim 4, Choi discloses a display apparatus further comprising a filling layer disposed on the first layer.
Regarding claim 8, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein a thickness of the second sub- light-blocking layer is equal to or greater than 8 nm and equal to or less than 11 nm (¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 9, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first sub-light- blocking layer and the second sub-light-blocking layer includes metal (¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 10, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first sub-light- blocking layer and the second sub-light-blocking layer includes at least one of tungsten (W), molybdenum (Mo), and chromium (Cr) (¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 12, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first inorganic layer and the second inorganic layer includes at least one of silicon nitride (SiNx), silicon oxynitride (SiON), and silicon oxide (SiOx) (¶[0060]).
Regarding claim 16, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein a thickness of the first inorganic layer is the same as a thickness of the second inorganic layer (¶[0060], Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Choi discloses a display apparatus further comprising a second substrate (230) disposed on the reflection-adjusting layer (210).
Regarding claim 19, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the reflection-adjusting layer includes dye, pigment, or a combination thereof (¶[0068]).
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) 1, 3-5, 9-10, 17, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yim et al. (US 2015/0241736 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2017/0104182 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yim discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (200); a display element (EL) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (221) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (750) overlapping the first layer and including a first sub-light- blocking layer, a first inorganic layer, a second sub-light-blocking layer, and a second inorganic layer (¶[0093], light blocking layer 750 comprises layers 753 and 751, each formed by a multilayer in which metal layer, i.e., light blocking layer, is disposed between metal oxide layer, i.e., inorganic layer), wherein the first inorganic layer is disposed on the first sub-light-blocking layer, the second sub-light-blocking layer is disposed on the first inorganic layer, and the second inorganic layer is disposed on the second sub-light-blocking layer (¶s[0093], light blocking layer 750 comprises layers 753 and 751, each formed by a multilayer in which metal layer, i.e., light blocking layer, is disposed between metal oxide layer, i.e., inorganic layer); wherein a thickness of the light-blocking layer (750) is equal to or greater than about 100 nanometers (nm) and equal to or less than about 500 nm (¶[0094]). Yim fails to exemplify a reflection-adjusting layer disposed on the light-blocking layer.
Kim discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (110); a display element (Fig. 10) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (190) overlapping the first layer; and a reflection-adjusting layer (210) disposed on the light-blocking layer in order to transmit a portion of light and reflect a remaining portion of the light (¶[0089]). 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 reflection-adjusting layer disclosed by Kim in the display apparatus of Yim in order to selectively transmit a portion of light and reflect a remaining portion of the light.
Regarding claim 3, Yim discloses a display apparatus wherein the light-blocking layer (750) defines an opening therein passing through the first sub-light-blocking layer, the first inorganic layer, the second sub-light-blocking layer, and the second inorganic layer, wherein the opening corresponds to the emission area in a plan view (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 4, Yim discloses a display apparatus further comprising a filling layer disposed on the first layer (¶[0051]).
Regarding claim 5, Yim discloses a display apparatus wherein the filling layer fills an opening passing through the first sub-light-blocking layer, the first inorganic layer, the second sub- light-blocking layer, and the second inorganic layer (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 9, Yim discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first sub-light- blocking layer and the second sub-light-blocking layer includes metal (¶[0093]).
Regarding claim 10, Yim discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first sub-light- blocking layer and the second sub-light-blocking layer includes at least one of tungsten (W), molybdenum (Mo), and chromium (Cr) (¶[0093]).
Regarding claim 17, Yim in view of Kim discloses a display apparatus further comprising a second substrate (350) disposed on the reflection-adjusting layer (390).
Regarding claim 18, Yim discloses a display apparatus further comprising a sealing member (500) disposed between the first substrate (200) and the second substrate (400) along an outer circumference of the first substrate and the second substrate in a plan view.
Regarding claim 20, Yim discloses a display apparatus wherein the first layer (221) includes at least one of ytterbium (Yb), bismuth (Bi), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), indium (In), molybdenum dioxide (MoO2), molybdenum trioxide (MoO3), tungsten trioxide (WO3), indium tin oxide (ITO), and zinc oxide (ZnO) (¶[0063]).
Claim(s) 7 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2016/0104869 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Choi fails to state wherein a thickness of the first sub-light- blocking layer is equal to or greater than 100 nm and equal to or less than 200 nm. One skilled in the art would have reasonable contemplate adjusting the thickness of first sub-light- blocking layer within claimed range in order to adjust the absorption and reflection of light incident from the outside, so that the light rays may undergo destructive interference, as an obvious matter of design engineering. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the thickness of the second inorganic layer within the claimed ranges in order to adjust the absorption and reflection of light incident from the outside, so that the light rays may undergo destructive interference, since optimization of workable ranges is considered within the skill of the art.
Regarding claims 13-15, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein the second inorganic layer includes silicon nitride (SiNx), silicon oxynitride (SiON), or silicon oxide (SiOx) (¶[0060]), but fails to state the thickness of the second inorganic layer is equal to or greater than about 50 nm and equal to or less than about 60 nm for silicon nitride (SiNx), equal to or greater than about 30 nm and equal to or less than about 50 nm for silicon oxynitride (SiON) and equal to or greater than about 150 nm and equal to or less than about 170 nm for silicon oxide (SiOx). One skilled in the art would have reasonable contemplate adjusting the thickness of the second inorganic layer within claimed ranges in order to adjust or correct the phases of light reflected from the light blocking layers, so that the light rays may destructively interfere with each other and cancel each other out, as an obvious matter of design engineering. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the thickness of the second inorganic layer within the claimed ranges in order to adjust or correct the phases of light reflected from the light blocking layers, so that the light rays may destructively interfere with each other and cancel each other out, since optimization of workable ranges is considered within the skill of the art.
Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2016/0104869 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 2014/0077183 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Choi discloses a display apparatus wherein each of the first inorganic layer and the second inorganic layer includes at least one of silicon nitride (SiNx), silicon oxynitride (SiON), and silicon oxide (SiOx) (¶[0060]), however, fails to state wherein a refractive index of each of the first inorganic layer and the second inorganic layer is equal to or greater than about 1.45 and equal to or less than about 1.65.
Lee discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (100); a display element (70) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (300) overlapping the first layer and including a multilayer of metal layers and dielectric layer alternatively layered (¶0061]), wherein the dielectric layer includes at least silicon oxide having a low refractive index of about 1.6 (¶s[0063-0064]) in order to reduce or block inflow of undesired external light to the display device, and allow light emitted from the light emitting element to be emitted to the outside, rather than being reflected. 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 dielectric layer having a low refractive index of about 1.6 as disclosed by Lee in the display apparatus of Choi in order to reduce or block inflow of undesired external light to the display device, and allow light emitted from the light emitting element to be emitted to the outside, rather than being reflected.
Regarding claim 20, Choi fails to explicitly state wherein the first layer includes at least one of ytterbium (Yb), bismuth (Bi), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), indium (In), molybdenum dioxide (MoO2), molybdenum trioxide (MoO3), tungsten trioxide (WO3), indium tin oxide (ITO), and zinc oxide (ZnO). Lee discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (100); a display element (70) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (300) overlapping the first layer, wherein the first layer includes at least one of ytterbium (Yb), bismuth (Bi), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), indium (In), molybdenum dioxide (MoO2), molybdenum trioxide (MoO3), tungsten trioxide (WO3), indium tin oxide (ITO), and zinc oxide (ZnO) (¶s[0091-0093]). It is considered within the capabilities of one skilled in the art the selection of a material based on its known suitability for an intended application as an obvious matter of design engineering. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to have the first layer includes at least one of ytterbium (Yb), bismuth (Bi), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), indium (In), molybdenum dioxide (MoO2), molybdenum trioxide (MoO3), tungsten trioxide (WO3), indium tin oxide (ITO), and zinc oxide (ZnO) as disclosed by Lee in the display apparatus of Choi, since the selection of known materials for a known purpose is within the skill of the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim(s) 6, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 6, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the first sub-light- blocking layer is greater than a thickness of the second sub-light-blocking layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 2016/00494443 A1) discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (111); a display element (70) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (500) overlapping the first layer and including a first sub-light- blocking layer (400), a first inorganic layer (510), a second sub-light-blocking layer (520), and a second inorganic layer (510), wherein the first inorganic layer (510) is disposed on the first sub-light-blocking layer (400), the second sub-light-blocking layer (520) is disposed on the first inorganic layer (510), and the second inorganic layer (510) is disposed on the second sub-light-blocking layer (520, Fig. 4F).
Kim et al. (US 2015/0243930 A1) discloses a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (111); a display element (70) disposed over the first substrate and configured to implement an emission area; a first layer (730) including a metal or a metal oxide disposed on the first substrate; a light-blocking layer (190) overlapping the first layer and including a first sub-light- blocking layer (1902), a first inorganic layer (1903), a second sub-light-blocking layer (1904), and a second inorganic layer (1905), wherein the first inorganic layer (1903) is disposed on the first sub-light-blocking layer (1902), the second sub-light-blocking layer (1905) is disposed on the first inorganic layer (1903), and the second inorganic layer (1905) is disposed on the second sub-light-blocking layer (1904, Fig. 1).
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