DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1 and Species D in the reply filed on 1/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11, 14, 18, and 20-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/29/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a display panel according to claim 1” should be changed to “the display panel according to claim 1.” Appropriate correction is required.
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(s) 1-2, 4-9, 12-13, 16-17, 19, and 23 is/are 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.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “[a] display panel, comprising a substrate and a light-emitting structure on one side of the substrate, wherein the light-emitting structure comprises:” is unclear as to what constitutes the preamble. Specifically, it appears as if the claim is drawn to the display panel, however the lack of punctuation after “[a] display panel, comprising” appears to indicate otherwise.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “a pixel region” and “the pixel region,” are unclear as to how they are related to the previously recited “plurality of pixel regions.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “a distance between a middle portion of a pixel region and the pixel defining structure, is equal to or greater than a distance between an edge portion of the pixel region and the pixel defining structure,” is unclear as to the proper interpretation of “middle portion” and “edge portion.” Specifically, the plain meaning of “middle portion” and “edge portion” would make it impossible for the distances recited to be equal to each other, and therefore it is unclear as to the proper scope of “middle portion” and “edge portion.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a reflective layer on one side of the substrate,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “one side of the substrate.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a reflective part” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of reflective parts.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “one reflective part” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of reflective parts” and “a reflective part.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “one first conductive part,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of first conductive parts.”
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17 and 19, the limitations “the reflective part” are unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of reflective parts,” “a reflective part,” and “one reflective part.”
Regarding claim 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, and 16, the limitations “the first conductive part,” are unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of first conductive parts” and “one first conductive part.”
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a first spacing is provided between a side of the reflective part close to the pixel defining structure and a corresponding side of the pixel defining structure close to the reflective part, and/or a second spacing is provided between a side of the first conductive part close to the pixel defining structure and a corresponding side of the pixel defining structure close to the first conductive part,” is unclear because the use of “and/or” renders the claim indefinite. Additionally, it is unclear which of the subsequent aspects are required in the instance that “and/or” is interpreted as “or” (i.e. a second spacing is provided or both the second spacing is provided and a corresponding side of the pixel defining structure close to the first conductive part).
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “an orthographic projection of the first subpart on the substrate overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate, and an overlapping area, between an orthographic projection of the second subpart on the substrate and the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate, is zero,” is unclear because the use of “and/or” renders the claim indefinite. Additionally, it is unclear which of the subsequent aspects are required in the instance that “and/or” is interpreted as “or” (i.e. an orthographic projection of the first subpart on the substrate overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate or both the orthographic projection of the first subpart on the substrate overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate and the overlapping area is zero).
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “an orthographic projection of the second subpart on the substrate,” (line 8) is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited orthographic projection of the second subpart on the substrate.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “one reflective part” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “a plurality of reflective parts,” “a reflective part,” “the reflective part,” and “one reflective part.”
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “one second conductive part,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of second conductive parts.”
Regarding claims 4, 5, 13, 17, 19, the limitation “the second conductive part,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of second conductive parts” and “one second conductive part.”
Regarding claims 4 and 12, the limitations “the pixel region,” are unclear as to how they are related to the previously recited “plurality of pixel regions.”
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “one opening,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of openings.”
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “one second conductive part,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of second conductive parts,” “the second conductive part,” and “one second conductive part.”
Regarding claim 5, the limitations “a light outlet,” and “the light outlet,” are unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of light outlets.”
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “the openining” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of openings,” and “one opening.” Additionally,
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “the light outlet,” is unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of light outlets”
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “an overlapping area between the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate and the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate, do not overlap with the orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate” is unclear as to what element(s) need to not overlap. Specifically, “do not overlap with” would appear to indicate plural objects not overlapping with the orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate, however the phrasing of the first part of the limitations would appear to indicate it is the “overlapping area” which is intended to not overlap.
Regarding claim 9, the claim is unclear because the use of “and/or” renders the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 9, the limitation “in the direction perpendicular to the substrate, a side, away from the substrate, of a cross section of the second part is an arc protruding in a direction away from the substrate,” is unclear as to what is required to be “in the direction perpendicular to the substrate” and as to how it differs from the requirement of “in a direction away from the substrate.”
Regarding claims 12, 13, 17, 19, the limitations “a first insulating part,” and “the first insulating part,” are unclear as to how it is related to the previously recited “plurality of first insulating parts.”
Regarding claim 17, the limitation “the first insulating part comprises: a third subpart…a fourth subpart…a fifth subpart” is unclear because the first insulating part has not been previously recited as having a first or second subpart.
Note the dependent claims necessarily inherit the indefiniteness of the claims on which they depend.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9, 12-13, 16-17, 19, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bang et al. (US 20180122875; herein “Bang”).
Regarding claim 1, Bang discloses in Fig. 10 and related text a display panel, comprising a substrate (111) and a light-emitting structure on one side of the substrate, wherein the light-emitting structure comprises:
a pixel defining structure (270, see [0065]) on one side of the substrate, configured to define a plurality of pixel regions arranged in an array, wherein a distance between a middle portion of a pixel region and the pixel defining structure, is equal to or greater than a distance between an edge portion of the pixel region and the pixel defining structure (see Fig. 10);
a reflective layer (264, when e.g. Al, see [0066]) on one side of the substrate, comprising a plurality of reflective parts spaced apart, a reflective part being within the pixel region;
a first conductive layer (261/266, see [0065] and [0067]) on one side, away from the substrate, of the reflective layer, the first conductive layer comprising a plurality of first conductive parts spaced apart; and
a hole injection layer (e.g. at least a portion of 262, see [0075] and [0076]) on one side, away from the substrate, of the first conductive layer, the hole injection layer comprising a first subpart and a second subpart, wherein the first subpart is disposed in the middle portion of the pixel region, and the second subpart is disposed in the edge portion of the pixel region; and
in a direction perpendicular to the substrate, at least a portion of the second subpart has a size greater than a size of the first subpart (note that one can choose “parts” of the layer such that the claimed limitation is met);
wherein one reflective part (264) corresponds to one first conductive part (261/266), and an orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate at least partially overlaps with an orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate see Fig. 10); and
in a direction parallel to the substrate, a first spacing is provided between a side of the reflective part close to the pixel defining structure and a corresponding side of the pixel defining structure close to the reflective part, and/or a second spacing is provided between a side of the first conductive part close to the pixel defining structure and a corresponding side of the pixel defining structure close to the first conductive part (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 2, Bang further discloses wherein
an orthographic projection of the first subpart on the substrate overlaps with the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate, and an overlapping area, between an orthographic projection of the second subpart on the substrate and the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate, is zero (see Fig. 10; also note that one can choose “parts” of the layer such that the claimed limitation is met); and/or
an orthographic projection of the first subpart on the substrate overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate, and an overlapping area, between an orthographic projection of the second subpart on the substrate and the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate, is zero (see Fig. 10; also note that one can choose “parts” of the layer such that the claimed limitation is met).
Regarding claim 4, Bang further discloses wherein the light-emitting structure further comprises:
a second conductive layer (e.g. 214, see [0057]) between the substrate and the reflective layer, comprising a plurality of second conductive parts spaced apart, wherein
an orthographic projection of the pixel region on the substrate is within (at least partially) an orthographic projection of a second conductive part on the substrate (see Fig. 10); and
in the direction perpendicular to the substrate, one reflective part corresponds to one second conductive part, and an orthographic projection of the second conductive part on the substrate at least partially overlaps with the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, Bang further discloses
wherein the pixel defining structure has, in the direction perpendicular to the substrate, a bottom end close to the substrate, a top end away from the substrate, and a middle part between the bottom end and the top end, the bottom end of the pixel defining structure is configured to define a plurality of openings, the middle part or the top end of the pixel defining structure is configured to define a plurality of light outlets, and one opening corresponds to one second conductive part to expose the second conductive part (see Fig. 10);
an orthographic projection of a light outlet on the substrate is within an orthographic projection of the openining on the substrate (e.g. GP is within opening at 271); and
the orthographic projection of the light outlet on the substrate, the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate, and the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate are at least partially overlapped (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 6, Bang further discloses wherein
along a direction away from the substrate, the pixel defining structure comprises a first part and a second part connected in sequence; and
an orthographic projection of the first part on the substrate is within an orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate, and an area of the orthographic projection of the first part on the substrate is smaller than an area of the orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate (271 is within 272 and 271 is smaller than 272, see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 7, Bang further discloses
an overlapping area between the orthographic projection of the first conductive part on the substrate and the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate, do not overlap with the orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate (261/266 does not overlap with 272, see Fig. 10); and
at least a portion of an orthographic projection of the first spacing or the second spacing on the substrate is within the orthographic projection of the second part on the substrate (space between 271 and 261/266 overlaps with 272, see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 8, Bang further discloses wherein in the direction perpendicular to the substrate, a height of the first part is greater than or equal to a sum of a thickness of the reflective part and a thickness of the first conductive part (271 thicker than 261/266 and 264, see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 9, Bang further discloses wherein in the direction perpendicular to the substrate, a side, away from the substrate, of a cross section of the second part is an arc protruding in a direction away from the substrate; and/or a cross section of the pixel defining structure is in a mushroom shape (mushroom shape, see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 12, Bang further discloses wherein the light-emitting structure further comprises:
a first insulating layer (251, see [0122] and [0126]) between the reflective layer (264) and the first conductive layer (261/266), the first insulating layer comprising a plurality of first insulating parts spaced apart, wherein a first insulating part is within the pixel region, and the orthographic projection of the reflective part on the substrate is within an orthographic projection of the first insulating part on the substrate (e.g. in the interpretation where a portion of 264 is the “reflective part”; note that one can choose a “part” of the layer such that the claimed limitation is met).
Regarding claim 13, Bang further discloses wherein the first insulating part contacts a sidewall of the reflective part and a surface of the reflective part on a side away from the substrate (see Fig. 10), and the first insulating part contacts (e.g. thermally) an area of the second conductive part exposed by the reflective part.
Regarding claim 16, Bang further discloses
a planarization layer (230, see [0092]) on a side of the light-emitting structure close to the substrate, wherein
the first conductive part (261/266) is connected to a pixel circuit through a via hole (via hole for 214) in the planarization layer, and an orthographic projection of the via hole on the substrate and an orthographic projection of the pixel defining structure on the substrate are at least partially overlapped (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 17, Bang further discloses wherein the first insulating part comprises:
a third subpart on a side of the reflective part away from the substrate;
a fourth subpart in contact (e.g. thermal contact) with the second conductive part; and
a fifth subpart connected between the third subpart and the fourth subpart, wherein an angle is between an extension direction of the fifth subpart and the substrate, the angle being acute (note that one can choose “parts” of the layer such that the claimed limitation is met).
Regarding claim 19, Bang further discloses
a first insulating layer (250 and 251, see [0064] and [0122]) between the reflective layer (264) and the first conductive layer (261/266), the first insulating layer comprising a plurality of first insulating parts spaced apart, wherein a first insulating part at least partially covers a portion of the second conductive part exposed by the reflective part (a part of 250 covers portion of 214 exposed by 264, see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 23, Bang further discloses a display device comprising a display panel according to claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lauren R Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-7199. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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.
/LAUREN R BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896 3/5/2026