DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant Election filed on 01/20/2026.
Currently, claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-14, 16-17, and 19-24 are pending in the application.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 05/14/2024 is acknowledged. Applicant’s traversal is on the ground(s) that the cited prior art does not teach the adaptively amended claim limitations of independent claim 1 (see pg. 11 of Applicant’s Remarks filed 01/20/2026) and that the outlined species do have the shared special technical feature. This argument is not found persuasive the outlined species do not have the shared special technical features in view of the cited prior art (see prior art rejections below). Claims 1-4, 6-10, 12-14, 16-17, and 19-24 are examined in this Office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/05/2023 and 10/16/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 19-23 seem to require the selection of the second option presented in claim 17 (lines 4-8) In the case that only the first option presented by claim 17 (lines 2-3) is selected, Claims 19-23 fail to further limit the invention. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, 12-14, 17, and 19-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over MA et al. (US Patent. No. 10,756,136) in view of CHUNG et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0373372).
Regarding independent claim 1, Ma teaches a display panel (Fig. 1), having a functional device configuration region (Fig. 1, 20, Col. 3 lines 40-64), the display panel comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 11, 100, Col. 3 lines 40-64);
a plurality of first sub-pixels (Fig. 12, 2201R + 2201G + 2201B, Col. 8 lines 50-67), disposed on the substrate and located in the functional device configuration region, wherein at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels each include a first pixel circuit (Fig. 11, 222, Col. 7 lines 21-41) and a first light-emitting device (Fig. 11, 220, 2201, Col. 5 lines 1-17); the first light-emitting device includes a first electrode (Fig. 11, Col. 5 lines 1-17); the first electrode is electrically connected with the first pixel circuit; and an orthographic projection of a portion of the first pixel circuit on the substrate is located outside an orthographic projection of the first electrode on the substrate (Fig. 11, at least a portion of 222 is non overlapping with 2201); and
a plurality of first light-shielding portions (Figs. 10 & 12, 306, Col. 7, 21-41), arranged at intervals and located in the functional device configuration region (Fig. 10), wherein each first light- shielding portion is provided with a plurality of first opening regions (Figs. 11 & 12, area corresponding to light emitting elements 220); each first opening region corresponds to a single first light-emitting device of the plurality of first light-emitting devices (Figs. 11 & 12), a light-emitting region (Fig. 11, area of 220) of the single first light-emitting device is located in the first opening region, an orthographic projection of a first portion of a first pixel circuit electrically connected with a first electrode of the single first light-emitting device on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the first light-shielding portion on the substrate, and the first portion is a portion, whose orthographic projection on the substrate is located outside an orthographic projection of the first electrode on the substrate, of the first pixel circuit (Fig. 11, a portion of driving circuit setting area 222 is overlapping 306 but is not overlapping anode 2201).
However, Ma does not explicitly teach a plurality of first light-shielding portions, arranged on a side of a plurality of first light- emitting devices of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels away from the substrate
However, Chung is a is a pertinent art that teaches a plurality of first light-shielding portions (Fig. 2C, 400, ¶ [0094]), arranged on a side of a plurality of first light-emitting devices (Fig. 2C,OLED, ¶ [0142]) of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels away from the substrate (Fig. 2C, 100, ¶ [0085]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ma’s light shielding portions to be arranged on a side of the light emitting devices away from the substrate according to the teaching of Chung (Fig. 2C) because changing the relative positioning of light shielding layers is an obvious modification known in the art (see Chung Figs. 2A-2D and Figs. 5A-5D).
Regarding claim 2, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1, and Ma teaches that the display panel comprises a plurality of first pixel units (Fig. 12,Groups of 2201R, 2201G, and 2201B, Col. 8 lines 50-67) disposed in the functional device configuration region (Fig. 1, 20, Col. 3 lines 40-64); each first pixel unit includes multiple first sub-pixels of the plurality of first sub-pixels (Fig. 12, 2201R + 2201G + 2201B, Col. 8 lines 50-67); and the plurality of first opening regions (Figs. 11 & 12, area corresponding to light emitting elements 220) of each first slight-shielding portion (Figs. 10 & 12, 306, Col. 7, 21-41) correspond to multiple first sub-pixels of a same first pixel unit of the plurality of first pixel units in a one-to-one manner (Figs. 11 & 12).
Regarding claim 3, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1, and Ma teaches for multiple first sub-pixels located within an outer border of a same first light-shielding portion , a distance between centers of two first sub-pixels that are adjacent to each other in a setting direction is a first distance (Fig. 10, light emitting devices are adjacent to each other in the plan view of Figs. 10 & 12); in the setting direction, a distance between centers of two adjacent first sub-pixels, which are respectively located within outer borders of two adjacent first light-shielding portions, is a second distance (Fig. 10, different light blocking portions 306 are separated from each other at a distance. Therefore, light emitting devices adjacent to each other (see Fig. 12) are closer in distance than light emitting devices in other light blocking portions); and the first distance is less than the second distance.
Regarding claim 7, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1, and Ma teaches that the plurality of first light-shielding portions ((Figs. 10 & 12, 306, Col. 7, 21-41) are arranged in a plurality of rows and a plurality of columns (Fig. 10), each row includes multiple first light-shielding portions arranged in a first direction, and each column includes multiple first light-shielding portions arranged in a second direction, the first direction being perpendicular to the second direction (Fig. 10, Ma’s light blocking portions 306 are arranged in vertical columns and horizontal rows).
Regarding claim 8, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1.
However, Ma does not explicitly teach an electrode layer, disposed between first electrodes of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels and the plurality of first light-shielding portions, wherein a portion, located in the functional device configuration region, of the electrode layer is provided with a plurality of second opening regions; and at least a portion of orthographic projections of the plurality of second opening regions on the substrate are located in a region between orthographic projections of the plurality of first light-shielding portions on the substrate.
However, Chung teaches an electrode layer (Fig. 11, 230, ¶ [0172]), disposed between first electrodes (Fig. 11, 210, ¶ [0170]) of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels and the plurality of first light-shielding portions (Fig. 2C & 11, 400, ¶ [0094]), wherein a portion, located in the functional device configuration region, of the electrode layer is provided with a plurality of second opening regions (Fig. 11, area of 230OP); and at least a portion of orthographic projections of the plurality of second opening regions on the substrate are located in a region between orthographic projections of the plurality of first light-shielding portions on the substrate (Fig. 11, at least a portion of 230OP corresponding to TA is not overlapping with 400).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ma’s device to further comprise openings in the opposite electrode at least partially corresponding to transmission areas according to the teaching of Chung (Fig. 11) in order to better transmit light/sound through a sensor area (Chung ¶¶ [0090]-[0091]).
Regarding claim 9, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 8, and Ma modified by Chung teaches that the plurality of first light-shielding portions (Chung Figs. 10 & 12, 306, Col. 7, 21-41) are arranged in a plurality of rows and a plurality of columns (Chung Fig. 10); and each row includes multiple first light-shielding portions arranged in a first direction, and each column includes multiple first light-shielding portions arranged in a second direction, the first direction being perpendicular to the second direction (Chung Fig. 10); and
two adjacent first light-shielding portions in the first direction are provided therebetween with a second opening region (Chung Figs. 6A & 6B teaches transmission parts TA, which at least partially corresponds to the opening in Chung’s opposite electrode, in-between adjacent portions of Chung’s light shielding layer 400. Therefore, Ma modified by Chung would fulfill this limitation ); and/or two adjacent first light-shielding portions in the second direction are provided therebetween with a second opening region region (Chung Figs. 6A & 6B teaches transmission parts TA, which at least partially corresponds to the opening in Chung’s opposite electrode, in-between adjacent portions of Chung’s light shielding layer 400. Therefore, Ma modified by Chung would fulfill this limitation ).
Regarding claim 12, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1, and Ma modified by Chung teaches that the display panel further has a main display region (Chung Fig. 2C, DA, ¶ [0078]), and the main display region at least partially surrounds the functional device configuration region (Chung Fig. 2C, SA, ¶ [0076]); and the display panel further comprises:
a plurality of second sub-pixels (Chung Fig. 2C, Pm, ¶ [0088]), disposed on the substrate (Chung Fig. 2C, 100, ¶ [0084]) and located in the main display region, wherein each second sub-pixel includes a second pixel circuit (Chung Fig. 2C, TFTm, ¶ [0087]) and a second light-emitting device (Chung Fig. 2C, OLED in Pm, ¶ [0139]); at least some of a plurality of second light-emitting devices of the plurality of second sub- pixels each include a third electrode (Chung Fig. 11, 210, ¶ [0170 teaches that Chung’s OLEDs have a pixel electrode); the third electrode is electrically connected with a second pixel circuit of a plurality of second pixel circuits of the plurality of second sub-pixels (Chung Fig. 2C, OLEDs are connected to TFTm), and an orthographic projection of a portion of the second pixel circuit on the substrate is located outside an orthographic projection of the third electrode on the substrate (Ma Fig. 11, 222, Ma’s driving circuit regions 222 is larger than Ma’s light emitting elements. Therefore, Ma modified by Chung would fulfill this limitation); and
a second light-shielding portion (Chung Fig. 2C, 400 in Da, ¶ [0094]), disposed on a side of the plurality of second sub-pixels away from the substrate and located in the main display region, wherein the second light-shielding portion includes a plurality of third opening regions (Fig. 2C, openings in 400 in DA); each third opening region corresponds to a single second light-emitting device of the plurality of second light-emitting devices (Fig. 2C), and a light-emitting region (Fig. 2C, area of OLED) of the single second light-emitting device is located in the third opening region; and orthographic projections of second portions of a plurality of second pixel circuits electrically connected to third electrodes of the at least some of the plurality of second devices on the substrate are located within an orthographic projection of the second light-shielding portion on the substrate, and the second portions are portions, whose orthographic projections on the substrate are located outside orthographic projections of the third electrodes on the substrate, of the second pixel circuits (Ma Fig. 11, 222, Ma’s driving circuit region 222 is larger than Ma’s light emitting elements and would be overlapping with Ma modified by Chung’s light shielding portions. Therefore, Ma modified by Chung would fulfill this limitation).
Regarding claim 13, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 12, and Chung teaches a first region (Fig. 2C, area of 400 not overlapping OLED) is within the orthographic projection of the second light-shielding portion on the substrate, the first region being a region between the plurality of second light-emitting devices in the main display region (Fig. 2C).
Regarding claim 14, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 12, and Chung teaches an electrode layer (Fig. 11, 230, ¶ [0172]), disposed between first electrodes (Fig. 11, 210, ¶ [0170]) of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels and the plurality of first light-shielding portions (Fig. 2C & 11, 400, ¶ [0094]), wherein a portion, located in the functional device configuration region, of the electrode layer is provided with a plurality of second opening regions (Fig. 11, area of 230OP); and at least a portion of orthographic projections of the plurality of second opening regions on the substrate are located in a region between orthographic projections of the plurality of first light-shielding portions on the substrate (Fig. 11, at least a portion of 230OP corresponding to TA is not overlapping with 400),
wherein a portion, located in the main display region, of the electrode layer has a continuous film layer structure (Fig. 11, opposite electrode 230 has a continuous structure that is separated by transmission part TA. There is no transmission part TA corresponding to display area DA (see Fig. 2C)).
Regarding claim 17, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 1, and Chung teaches an encapsulation layer (Fig. 2C, 300, ¶ [0084]) disposed between the plurality of first light-shielding portions (Fig. 2C, 400, ¶ [0094]) and the plurality of first light-emitting devices (Fig. 2C, OLED in SA, ¶ [0139]); and/or (the Examiner notes that Ma modified by Chung teaches at least one option required by this claim) a plurality of signal lines electrically connected to first pixel circuits of the at least some of the plurality of first sub-pixels, wherein at least one signal line includes a signal trace and a transferring line; the signal trace is used for being connected with an external signal source; the transferring line is connected with a first pixel circuit of the first pixel circuits; and a portion, located in the functional device configuration region, of the signal trace is transparent.
Regarding claims 19-23, Ma modified by Chung teaches the first option required by claim 17. Claims 19-23 seem to require the selection of the second option presented by claim 17. Therefore, none of the limitations of claims 19-23 are positively recited or required (also see 112(d) rejections above).
Regarding claim 24, Ma modified by Chung teaches a display apparatus (Fig. 17) , comprising: a housing (Fig. 17, Col. 11, lines 12-22 teaches that Ma’s device can be a mobile phone or tablet computer. It would be obvious that a mobile phone or tablet computer has a display panel within a housing); and the display panel according to claim 1, the display panel being disposed in the housing.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over MA et al. (US Patent. No. 10,756,136) in view of CHUNG et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0373372) and further in view of CHO et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0123062).
Regarding claim 10, Ma modified by Chung teaches the display panel according to claim 9.
However, Ma modified by Chung does not explicitly teach that multiple first light-shielding portions in a row are arranged to be staggered with multiple first light-shielding portions in another row adjacent thereto; and multiple first light-shielding portions in a column are arranged to be staggered with multiple first light-shielding portions in another column adjacent thereto.
However, Cho is a pertinent art that teaches that multiple first light-shielding portions (Fig. 15, LS, ¶ [0080]) in a row are arranged to be staggered with multiple first light-shielding portions in another row adjacent thereto (¶ [0080] teaches that Cho’s light shield layer corresponds to Cho’s pixel regions. Fig. 4, ¶ [0059] teaches that Cho’s pixel groups, which correspond to groupings of sub pixels, are arranged in staggered rows and columns. Therefore, Ma modified by Chung modified by Cho would fulfill this limitation); and multiple first light-shielding portions in a column are arranged to be staggered with multiple first light-shielding portions in another column adjacent thereto.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arrangement of Ma modified by Chung’s pixel groups and corresponding light shielding layers to be staggered according to the teaching Cho (Fig. 4) in order to increase light transmittance (Cho ¶¶ [0005] & [0059]).
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over MA et al. (US Patent. No. 10,756,136) in view of CHUNG et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0373372) and further in view of IN et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0208863).
Regarding claim 16, Ma modified by Chun teaches the display panel according to claim 1.
However, Ma modified by Chung does not explicitly teach that the plurality of first sub-pixels further include:
a plurality of first filter portions, each first filter portion corresponding to a single first opening region of a first light-shielding portion of the plurality of first light-shielding portions, a border of an orthographic projection of the first filter portion on the substrate being located within an orthographic projection of the first light-shielding portion on the substrate; and
in a case where the display panel further comprises a plurality of second sub-pixels and a second light-shielding portion, the plurality of second sub-pixels further include: a plurality of second filter portions, each second filter portion corresponding to a single third opening region of the second light-shielding portion, a border of an orthographic projection of the second filter portion on the substrate being within an orthographic projection of the second light- shielding portion on the substrate.
However, In is a pertinent art that teaches that the plurality of first sub-pixels further include (Fig. 8, OLED2, ¶ [0128]):
a plurality of first filter portions (Fig. 8, 620, ¶ [0075]), each first filter portion corresponding to a single first opening region of a first light-shielding portion (Fig. 8, 610, ¶ [0075]) of the plurality of first light-shielding portions, a border of an orthographic projection of the first filter portion on the substrate being located within an orthographic projection of the first light-shielding portion on the substrate (Fig. 8, at least a portion of 620 overlaps 610); and
in a case where the display panel further comprises a plurality of second sub-pixels (Fig. 7, OLED1, ¶ [0128]) and a second light-shielding portion (Fig. 7, 610 in DA1, ¶ [0075]), the plurality of second sub-pixels further include: a plurality of second filter portions (Fig. 7, 610 in DA1), each second filter portion corresponding to a single third opening region of the second light-shielding portion (Fig. 7), a border of an orthographic projection of the second filter portion on the substrate being within an orthographic projection of the second light- shielding portion on the substrate (Fig. 7, at least a portion of 620 overlaps with 610).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ma modified by Chung’s light emitting devices to further comprise color filters according to the teaching of In (Figs. 7-8) in order to selectively transmit desired colors from the light emitting devices (In ¶ [0168]).
Allowable subject matter
Claims 4 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 1), 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art known to the Examiner is listed on the PTO 892 forms of record.
With respect to dependent claim 4, the cited prior art does not anticipate or make obvious, inter alia, the step of: “the plurality of first sub-pixels include a plurality of red sub-pixels, a plurality of first green sub-pixels, a plurality of second green sub-pixels and a plurality of blue sub-pixels; and the plurality of red sub-pixels and the plurality of first green sub-pixels are alternately arranged in a first oblique direction, and the plurality of red sub-pixels and the plurality of second green sub-pixels are alternately arranged in a second oblique direction; the plurality of blue sub- pixels and the plurality of second green sub-pixels are alternately arranged in the first oblique direction, and the plurality of blue sub-pixels and the plurality of first green sub-pixels are alternately arranged in the second oblique direction; the plurality of first green sub-pixels and the plurality of second green sub-pixels are alternately arranged in a first direction; and the plurality of red sub-pixels and the plurality of blue sub-pixels are alternately arranged in a second direction, wherein the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; the first oblique direction intersects the second oblique direction; both the first oblique direction and the second oblique direction intersect each of the first direction and the second direction; or the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction; the first oblique direction intersects the second oblique direction; both the first oblique direction and the second oblique direction intersect each of the first direction and the second direction; and the setting direction is any one of the first direction, the second direction, the first oblique direction and the second oblique direction.”
Claim 6 is dependent on claim 4.
Cited Prior Art
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant.
Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pub No. 2023/0320169 by Song et al. discloses a display device.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pub No. 2021/0005669 by Kamada et al. discloses a display device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RHYS P. SHEKER whose telephone number is (703)756-1348. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am to 5 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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached on 571-270-0373. 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.
/R.P.S./
Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813