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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) based upon application PCT/CN2022/102457 filed in the COUNTRY OF CHINA on 06/29/2022.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of “Species III (claims 1-17 and 20-21)” in the reply filed on December 22, 2025, is acknowledged. Applicant’s arguments are persuasive and species restriction is hereby withdrawn; therefore, claims 1-18 and 20-21 remain pending. Claim 19 remain as previously canceled.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “spx1” has been used to designate both “KK3” and “KK1”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-10, 17-18 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 2024/0298509 A1; Gong et al.; 09/2024; (“509”) in view of US 2020/0066809 A1; Liu et al.; 02/2020; (“809”).
Regarding Claim 1. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel comprising:
a base substrate (item 1), comprising a plurality of pixels (items 3); and
a pixel defining layer (item 2), located on the base substrate (item 2 is located on item 1) and provided with a plurality of pixel openings (layer item 2 is provided with a plurality of items 22), wherein the plurality of pixels are in one-to-one correspondence with the plurality of pixel openings (items 3 are in one-to-one correspondence with items 22); wherein
the plurality of pixels comprise first color pixels (center pixel item 3) and second color pixels (left pixel item 3).
509 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
a decay rate of viewing angle brightness of pixel openings of the first color pixels in unit area is a first decay rate, and a decay rate of viewing angle brightness of pixel openings of the second color pixels in unit area is a second decay rate, and the first decay rate is smaller than the second decay rate; and
an area of the pixel opening of one of the first color pixels is smaller than an area of the pixel opening of one of the second color pixels.
809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein
a decay rate of viewing angle brightness (“light-emitting materials of different colors have different decay rates”, [0070], Ln. 2,3) of pixel openings of the first color pixels (pixel item R) in unit area is a first decay rate (decay rate of viewing angle brightness of item R), and a decay rate of viewing angle brightness (“light-emitting materials of different colors have different decay rates”, [0070], Ln. 2,3) of pixel openings of the second color pixels (pixel item G) in unit area is a second decay rate (decay rate of viewing angle brightness of item G), and the first decay rate is smaller than the second decay rate (“in general, the red light-emitting material has the slowest decay rate”, [0070], Ln. 3-4); and
an area of the pixel opening of one of the first color pixels is smaller than an area of the pixel opening of one of the second color pixels (area of pixel item R is smaller than area of pixel item G).
Thus, it would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the
invention was made, to consider utilizing the smaller area first color (red) pixel with also smaller decay rate of 809 to compensate for different decay rates of the multiple light-emitting materials of 509 in order to reduce color cast effects in the display of panel as taught by 809 in Fig. 7B for pixel items R and G.
Regarding Claim 2. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein
in a first direction (vertical direction), the pixel opening of one of the first color pixels is provided with a first size (vertical span of the first color pixel items R), the pixel opening of one of the second color pixels is provided with a second size (vertical span of the second color pixels items G), and the first size is smaller than the second size (vertical span a pixel item R is smaller than the vertical span of a pixel item G).
Regarding Claim 3. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein a ratio of the first size to the second size is about 1:1.8.
809 does not teach about a display panel, wherein a ratio of the first size to the second size is in a range of 1:1.2 to 1:1.6.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider a larger vertical span for pixel item R as compared to the vertical span of pixel item G (while still maintaining a smaller area for pixel item R compared to the area of pixel item G), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 4. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein
in a second direction (horizontal direction), the pixel opening of one of the first color pixels is provided with a third size (horizontal span of the first color pixel items R), the pixel opening of one of the second color pixels is provided with a fourth size (horizontal span of the second color pixels items G), the third size equal to the fourth size, and the second direction intersects with the first direction (the vertical and horizontal directions are orthogonal to each other).
809 does not teach about a display panel, wherein the third size is smaller than the fourth size.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider a smaller horizontal span for pixel item R as compared to the horizontal span of pixel item G (while still maintaining a smaller area for pixel item R compared to the area of pixel item G), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 5. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein a ratio of the third size to the fourth size is about 1:1.
809 does not teach about a display panel, wherein a ratio of the third size to the fourth size is in a range of 1: 1.2 to 1: 1.6.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider a smaller horizontal span for pixel item R as compared to the horizontal span of pixel item G (while still maintaining a smaller area for pixel item R compared to the area of pixel item G), since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 6. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein
the plurality of pixels further comprise third color pixels (pixel items B); and
the area of the pixel opening of one of the second color pixels is smaller than an area of a pixel opening of one of the third color pixels (area of pixel item G is smaller than area of pixel item B).
Regarding Claim 7. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel comprising:
a black matrix (item 63), located on a side of the pixel defining layer facing away from the base substrate (matrix item 63 located on a side of layer item 2 facing away from item 1), wherein the black matrix is provided with a plurality of black matrix openings (matrix item 63 is provided with a plurality of opening items 621); the plurality of black matrix openings are in one-to-one correspondence with the plurality of pixel openings (opening items 621 are in one-to-one correspondence with items 22); and
orthographic projections of bottom ends of the black matrix openings on the base substrate cover orthographic projections of bottom ends of the pixel openings on the base substrate (opening items 621 are greater in size than opening items 22, and these items are also concentric with each other).
Regarding Claim 8. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel, wherein
wherein in the first color pixel, first opening spacing is between an edge of an orthographic projection of a bottom end of a black matrix opening on the base substrate and an edge of the orthographic projection of the bottom end of the pixel opening on the base substrate (first color pixel, first opening is smaller than corresponding black matrix opening and pixel opening, while all being concentric to each other);
in the second color pixel, second opening spacing is between an edge of an orthographic projection of a bottom end of a black matrix opening on the base substrate and an edge of the orthographic projection of the bottom end of the pixel opening on the base substrate (second color pixel, second opening is smaller than corresponding black matrix opening and pixel opening, while all being concentric to each other); and
the first opening spacing is larger than the second opening spacing.
509 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
the first opening spacing is smaller than the second opening spacing.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider a smaller first opening spacing (for red pixel) when compared to a larger second opening spacing (for green pixel) because a red color pixel is well known to those skill in the art to have a lower decay rate of viewing angle brightness, therefore a smaller aperture for the red color pixel would alleviate display color casting effects, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 9. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel, wherein
a ratio of the first opening spacing to the second opening spacing is in a about 1:1.2.
509 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
a ratio of the first opening spacing to the second opening spacing is in a range of 1:1.2 to 1:2.2.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider experimenting to find proper size range of a smaller first opening spacing (for red pixel) when compared to a larger second opening spacing (for green pixel) because a red color pixel is well known to those skill in the art to have a lower decay rate of viewing angle brightness, therefore a smaller aperture for a red color pixel would alleviate display color casting effects, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 10. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel, wherein
the plurality of pixels further comprise the third color pixels (right pixel item 3), and in each of the third color pixels, third opening spacing is between an edge of an orthographic projection of a bottom end of a black matrix opening on the base substrate and an edge of the orthographic projection of the bottom end of the pixel opening on the base substrate (third color pixel, third opening is smaller than corresponding black matrix opening and pixel opening, while all being concentric to each other); and
the third opening spacing is not smaller than the first opening spacing (first opening center item 22 is smaller than third opening right item 22; therefore, third opening spacing is not smaller than first opening spacing) and is about the same size as the second opening spacing.
509 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
the third opening spacing is smaller than the second opening spacing.
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to consider a smaller third opening spacing (for blue pixel) when compared to a larger second opening spacing (for green pixel) to adjust for decay rate of viewing angle brightness to alleviate display color casting effects, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding Claim 17. 809 teaches in Fig. 7B about a display panel, wherein
the plurality of pixels further comprise the third color pixels; one of the first color pixels, one of the second color pixels and one of the third color pixels constitute a repeating unit with pixel rows layout mirrored along a horizontal direction every other row; and a plurality of repeating units are arranged in sequence in the first direction and constitute pixel rows (pixel rows within area item 100 or 200).
809 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
in the repeating unit, the first color pixel and the second color pixel are arranged in the first direction, and a straight line passing through a center of the pixel opening of the third color pixel and perpendicular to the first direction is located at a gap between the pixel opening of the first color pixel and the pixel opening of the second color pixel
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the plurality of three-color pixels in any order withing and RGB pixel, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 18. 809 teaches in Fig. 2B about a display panel, wherein
the plurality of pixels further comprise the third color pixels;
one first color pixel, two second color pixels and one third color pixel constitute a repeating unit (repeating unit item 101 of first region item 100); in the repeating unit, centers of the pixel openings of the first color pixel, the two second color pixels and the third color pixel constitute a quadrangle (rhomboid quadrangle of unit item 101), a connecting line of the center of the pixel opening of the first color pixel and the center of the pixel opening of the third color pixel constitutes a first diagonal line of the quadrangle (connecting line between the centers of pixel item R and pixel item B), and a plurality of repeating units are arranged in sequence in a direction perpendicular to the first diagonal line and constitute pixel rows.
809 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
a plurality of repeating units are arranged in sequence in a direction parallel to the first diagonal line and constitute pixel rows.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the plurality of repeating RGGB pixel units by turning each unit ninety degrees counterclockwise, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 20. 509 teaches in Fig. 3 about a display panel, wherein
an orthographic projection of the pixel opening of any one pixel in the plurality of pixels on the base substrate is in a shape not disclosed.
509 does not teach about a display panel, wherein
an orthographic projection of the pixel opening of any one pixel in the plurality of pixels on the base substrate is in a shape of at least one of rectangle, rhombus or circle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the pixel opening of any one pixel into any shape deemed necessary (while maintaining relative area sizes of each color pixel to prevent color casting effects), since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding Claim 21. 809 teaches in Fig. 10 about a display apparatus (item 30), comprising the display panel according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-16 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, since the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE ANDRES LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5763. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8:30am to 5:00pm).
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, Fernando Toledo can be reached on 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/JORGE ANDRES LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2897