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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/15/2026 has been entered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9, 11, 13-17, & 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 20190326189) in view of Bower et al. (US 20220013698).
Regarding claim 1, Sato discloses that a display device using a light emitting device, the display device comprising:
a wiring substrate thereon 10 (Fig. 1A);
a pair of wiring electrodes 11 & 12 arranged on the wiring substrate;
a pair of electrode pads 30 disposed on the wiring substrate 10 and connected to the pair of wiring electrodes 11 & 12, respectively, wherein an entirety of a lower surface of each of the pair of electrode pads 30 is in contact with an upper surface of the wiring substrate 11 & 12; and
a device 20 electrically connected to and installed on the pair of electrode pads 30, wherein the device 20 has a tilt angle with a side surface inclined to one side and the pair of electrode pads have different vertical thicknesses (Fig. 1A), wherein the different vertical thicknesses are configured to correct asymmetric distribution with respect to a surface of the device, the asymmetric distribution being caused by the tilt angle (Fig. 1A).
Sato fails to teach that a wiring substrate with a plurality of unit pixel regions defined thereon;
a pair of wiring electrodes arranged in a unit pixel region on the wiring substrate; and a device is a light emitting device.
However, Bower suggests that a wiring substrate with a plurality of unit pixel regions defined thereon (Fig. 12-13);
a pair of wiring electrodes arranged in a unit pixel region on the wiring substrate (Fig. 12-13); and a device is a light emitting device (para. 0042).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Sato with a wiring substrate with a plurality of unit pixel regions defined thereon;
a pair of wiring electrodes arranged in a unit pixel region on the wiring substrate; and a device is a light emitting device as taught by Bower in order to improve electrical contact by increasing the contact area between the device electrical contact and the substrate electrical contact and to firmly adhere the device to the substrate (para. 0040), also improve angular distribution of light emission from the light-emitting diode by using a light emitting diode (para. 0054) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Reclaim 3, Sato & Bower disclose that in the tilt angle is an angle with respect to a perpendicular direction of a main plane of the wiring substrate (Sato, Fig. 1A).
Reclaim 4, Sato & Bower disclose that a thickness difference of the electrode pads is disposed to decrease the tilt angle (Sato, Fig. 1A).
Reclaim 5, Sato & Bower disclose that the pair of electrode pads includes a first electrode pad and a second electrode pad, and at least one of the first electrode pad or the second electrode pad includes a thickness compensator (Sato, Fig. 1A).
Reclaim 6, Sato & Bower disclose that the thickness compensator is to compensate for the tilt angle (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 7, Sato & Bower disclose that a thickness difference between the first electrode pad and the second electrode pad corresponds to the tilt angle of the light emitting device (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 8, Sato & Bower disclose that the tilt angle is due to crystallinity of a semiconductor material of the light emitting device (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 9, Sato & Bower disclose that the light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a parallelogram (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Regarding claim 11, Sato & Bower disclose that a display device using a light emitting device, the display device comprising:
a wiring substrate 10 with a plurality of unit pixel regions defined thereon (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).;
a first wiring electrode and a second wiring electrode arranged in a unit pixel region on the wiring substrate;
a first electrode pad and a second electrode pad 30 disposed on the wiring substrate 10 and connected to the first wiring electrode and the second wiring electrode 21, respectively, wherein an entirety of a lower surface of each of the first electrode pad and the second electrode pad is in contact with an upper surface of the wiring substrate (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13); and
a light emitting device 20 (Bower, Fig. 13) electrically connected to and installed on the first electrode pad and the second electrode pad 30 to define a sub pixel (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13), wherein the light emitting device has a tilt angle with a side surface inclined to one side and the first electrode pad and the second electrode pad have a vertical thickness difference corresponding to the tilt angle of the light emitting device, wherein the vertical thickness difference is configured to correct asymmetric light distribution with respect to a light emitting surface of the light emitting device, the asymmetric light distribution being caused by the tilt angle (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 13, Sato & Bower disclose that the tilt angle is an angle with respect to a perpendicular direction of a main plane of the wiring substrate (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 14, Sato & Bower disclose that a thickness difference of the first electrode pad and the second electrode pad is disposed to decrease the tilt angle (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 15, Sato & Bower disclose that at least one of the first electrode pad or the second electrode pad includes a thickness compensator (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 16, Sato & Bower disclose that the thickness compensator is to compensate for the tilt angle (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 17, Sato & Bower disclose that the tilt angle is due to crystallinity of a semiconductor material of the light emitting device (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 19, Sato & Bower disclose that a plurality of light emitting devices that emit light of the same color are located in adjacent pixel areas (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Reclaim 20, Sato & Bower disclose that the light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a parallelogram (Sato, Fig. 1A in view of Bower’s Fig. 12-13).
Claim(s) 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 20190326189) in view of Bower et al. (US 20220013698) and further in view of Gong et al. (US 20170271560).
Reclaims 21 & 22, Sato & Bower disclose that the light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a rhombus.
Sato & Bower fail to specify that the light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a rhombus.
However, Gong suggests that the light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a rhombus (para. 0026).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Sato & Bower with a light emitting device has a cross section or side surface of a rhombus as taught by Gong in order to enhance variation of LEDs and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights