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 .
Response to Amendment(s)
The Amendment, filed on 12/24/2025, has been entered and acknowledged by the Examiner.
Cancellation of claim(s) 8, 10-11, 13, 15, 18 has been entered.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 12, 14, 16-17, 19-26 are pending in the instant application.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/5/2023. These drawings are considered acceptable by Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's argument(s) filed on 12/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, as necessitated by Applicant's amendment(s).
America Invents Act
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.
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.
1. Claim(s) 20-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maxik et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0193478 A1) in view of Song (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0219183 A1).
Regarding Claim 20, Maxik et al., teaches a light-emitting base substrate (substrate of 200, LED, ¶ [0051]), the light-emitting base substrate (of 200) comprising a plurality of light-emitting elements (plurality of 200), and is configured to emit a first light (light of 200); and a color conversion substrate (color conversion layer, ¶ [0122]) configured to excite a second light under irradiation of the first light (light of 200), wherein the first light has a first light wavelength, and the first light wavelength is less than or equal to 450 nm (“a first LED configured to emit light having a peak intensity of about 450 nm,” ¶ [0011]), and wherein the second light has a second light wavelength, the second light wavelength is greater than 450 nm, and is less than or equal to 460 nm (second light: “a color conversion material configured to perform a Stokes shift on light having a wavelength within the range from 440 nm to 460 nm,” ¶ [0011]). Maxik et al., is silent regarding the color conversion substrate configuration and material.
the color conversion substrate comprising a plurality of color conversion patterns, the color conversion pattern comprising a matrix material and quantum dots dispersed in the matrix material; the quantum dots are configured to emit light under irradiation of the first light and the second light
In the same field of endeavor, Song teaches a color conversion layer comprising a plurality of color conversion patterns, the color conversion pattern comprising a matrix material and quantum dots dispersed in the matrix material (¶ [0030]) in order to improve brightness since quantum dots are known to be a significantly brighter color conversion material.
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 color conversion layer, as disclosed by Song, in the color conversion layer of maxik et al., in order to improve brightness since quantum dots are known to be a significantly brighter color conversion material. The resultant the quantum dots are configured to emit light under irradiation of the first light and the second light of Maxik et al.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to using quantum dot technology as a matter of choice. Applicant(s) has not disclosed that the materials is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected or significant result, or are otherwise critical and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another configuration (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)).
Regarding Claim 21, Maxik et al., teaches the display panel according to claim 20, wherein a difference between a peak wavelength of the first light and a peak wavelength of the second light is greater than or equal to 10 nm (¶ [0011]).
Regarding Claim 22, Maxik et al., as modified by Song teaches the display panel according to claim 20, wherein the color conversion patterns include a first color conversion pattern and a second color conversion pattern (¶ [0030] of Song), the first color conversion pattern comprises a first matrix material and first quantum dots dispersed in the first matrix material, the first matrix material is configured to excite the second light under irradiation of the first light, and the first quantum dots are configured to emit a light of a first wavelength under irradiation of the first light and the second light, the second color conversion pattern comprises a second matrix material and second quantum dots dispersed in the second matrix material (¶ [0030] of Song), the second matrix material is configured to excite the second light under irradiation of the first light, and the second quantum dots are configured to emit a light of a second wavelength under irradiation of the first light and the second light, wherein the first wavelength is different from the second wavelength, and the color conversion patterns include a third color conversion pattern, the third color conversion pattern comprising a third matrix material (¶ [0030] of Song), and the third matrix material is configured to excite a light of a third wavelength under irradiation of the first light, wherein the first wavelength and the second wavelength are different from the third wavelength (¶ [0030] of Song).
Motivation to combine would be the same as stated above.
2. Claim(s) 23, 25-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoon et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0257575 A1)
Regarding Claim 23, Yoon et al., teaches a display panel, comprising: a light-emitting base substrate (100), the light-emitting base substrate (100) comprising a plurality of light-emitting elements (130), and is configured to emit a first light; and a color conversion substrate (400 [Wingdings font/0xE0] “color conversion area,” ¶ [0416]), the color conversion substrate comprising a plurality of color conversion patterns (400 of each plurality of subpixel, ¶ [0390]), the color conversion pattern comprising a matrix material and quantum dots (QD, ¶ [0388]) dispersed in the matrix material, wherein the matrix material is configured to excite a second light under irradiation of the first light, and the quantum dots are configured to emit light under irradiation of the first light and the second light, and wherein a difference between a peak wavelength of the first light and a peak wavelength of the second light is greater than or equal to 10 nm (¶ [0056]).
Regarding Claim 25, Yoon et al., teaches the display panel according to claim 23, wherein the color conversion substrate further comprises scattering particles (scattering, ¶ [0392]) dispersed in the matrix material.
Regarding Claim 26, Yoon et al., teaches the display panel according to claim 23, wherein the matrix material comprises at least one of: pyridine polymer, carbazole polymer, fluorene oligomer, polythiophene polymer, or polyphenylene vinylene polymer (carbazole, ¶ [0099]).
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 of this title, 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.
3. Claim(s) 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Yoon et al., in view of Lazo Martinez et al., herein after referred to as Lazo et al.
Regarding Claim 24, Yoon et al., teaches the invention set forth above (see rejection in the corresponding claim(s) above). Yoon et al., is silent regarding a third matrix material is configured to excite a light of a third wavelength under irradiation of the first light, wherein the first wavelength and the second wavelength are different from the third wavelength.
In the same field of endeavor, Lazo et al., teaches the color conversion patterns include a first color conversion pattern (CVF1) and a second color conversion pattern (CVF2), the first color conversion pattern comprises a first matrix material and first quantum dots dispersed in the first matrix material, the first matrix material is configured to excite the second light under irradiation of the first light, and the first quantum dots (QD, ¶ [0095]) are configured to emit a light of a first wavelength under irradiation of the first light and the second light, the second color conversion pattern comprises a second matrix material and second quantum dots dispersed in the second matrix material, the second matrix material is configured to excite the second light under irradiation of the first light, and the second quantum dots are configured to emit a light of a second wavelength under irradiation of the first light and the second light, wherein the first wavelength is different from the second wavelength, and the color conversion patterns include a third color conversion pattern (CVF3), the third color conversion pattern comprising a third matrix material, and the third matrix material is configured to excite a light of a third wavelength under irradiation of the first light, wherein the first wavelength and the second wavelength are different from the third wavelength in order to improve and expand the marketability of the display by incorporating a greater variety of light output wavelengths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the third color conversion pattern as disclosed by Lazo et al., in the device of Yoon et al., in order to improve and expand the marketability of the display by incorporating a greater variety of light output wavelengths.
Allowable Subject Matter
A. Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 12, 14, 16-17, 19 are allowed over the prior art of record.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record (most comprehensive prior art of record to Lazo Martinez et al.,) suggests a display panel, comprising a light-emitting base substrate, the light-emitting base substrate comprising a plurality of light-emitting elements, and is configured to emit a first light; and a color conversion substrate, the color conversion substrate comprising a plurality of color conversion patterns, the color conversion pattern comprising a matrix material and quantum dots dispersed in the matrix material, wherein the matrix material is configured to excite a second light under irradiation of the first light, and the quantum dots are configured to emit light under irradiation of the first light and the second light, wherein the display panel further comprises: a first barrier layer, the first barrier layer having a plurality of first grooves, the plurality of color conversion patterns being disposed in the plurality of first grooves; a second barrier layer, having a plurality of second grooves.
However, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art the display panel comprising the various elements as claimed above in combination with the specific limitation of a scattering particle layer, disposed in the second groove, wherein an area of the scattering particle layer is smaller than an area of the color conversion pattern; and a pixel defining laver, comprising a plurality of openings, wherein each of the plurality of light-emitting elements is disposed in one of the plurality of openings, and an area of the opening is larger than the area of the scattering particle layer, and wherein the first barrier layer and the plurality of color conversion patterns are provided on a side of the second barrier laver and the scattering particle laver away from the light-emitting base substrate as set forth in Claim 1.
Claim(s) 2-7, 9, 12, 14, 16-17, 19 are allowable because of their dependency status from Claim 1.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art below is made of record and is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0212122 A1 teaches a difference between a peak wavelength of the first light and a peak wavelength of the second light is greater than or equal to 10 nm.
U.S. Pub. No. 20190270116 A1 teaches a difference between a peak wavelength of the first light and a peak wavelength of the second light is greater than or equal to 10 nm.
U.S. Pat. No. 10,962,705 B2 teaches a difference between a peak wavelength of the first light and a peak wavelength of the second light is greater than or equal to 10 nm.
Espacenet Patent Search Complete (Global Dossier).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment(s) necessitates the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action, therefore:
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner H. Featherly whose telephone number is 571-272-8654. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM-4 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James R. Greece can be reached on 571-272-3711.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/H. Featherly/
Examiner Featherly
Art Unit 2875 Patent Examiner
/JAMES R GREECE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875