DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 2020/0119296 A1; hereinafter “Cho”) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0355793 A1; hereinafter “Oh”).
Regarding claim 2, Cho teaches an electroluminescent device comprising: a first electrode (an anode 11); a second electrode (a cathode 15); and a light-emitting layer (a quantum dot emission film 13) provided between the first electrode and the second electrode, the light-emitting layer comprising a quantum dot (13 comprising 13a and 13b including quantum dots) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 112-117), at least one heat source (for example, 11 including a metallic material Al, which is the identical metallic material choice for the claimed “at least one heat source” described in paragraph 301 and therefore identically capable of heating the quantum dot emission film 13 as the identical material property) (paragraphs 115-116), and wherein: the quantum dot comprises: a core composed of ZnSe (a core of the quantum dot including ZnSe); and a shell composed of ZnS, provided on a surface of the core, and adjacent to the core (the shell including ZnS) (paragraphs 121-128), the quantum dot emits blue light and is Cd free (paragraphs 113 and 153), and 3 ≤ d ≤ 20 and d − (6.1/((1240/λp)−2.7))1/2 ≤ 3.2 (considering d=8 and λp is 430, (3 ≤ 8 ≤ 20 and 8 − 6.1/((1240/430)−2.7))1/2 = about 2.23 ≤ 3.2), where λp is a fluorescent peak wavelength (a peak wavelength of blue light is in the range of 430-480 nm) and d is a particle diameter of the quantum dot (for example, a particle size of the quantum dot is about 3-20 nm) (paragraphs 132 and 153).
Cho does not explicitly teach an insulating layer covering an entire periphery of the at least one heat source. Oh teaches an electroluminescent device (a blue light emitting element BD) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 49-63), comprising: an insulating layer (a pixel defining layer 410) covering an entire periphery of at least one heat source (a first electrode 530 of BD including Al) (Fig. 2 shows that an entire periphery of B including BD including 530 are covered by 410 as shown in the top-down view in order to define B) (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 78-80). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Cho with that of Oh in order to utilize the pixel definition layer 410 to define each of the subpixels R, B, and G of the pixel and prevent electrical shorting issues among the subpixels.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2021/0005834 A1; hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Oh.
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches an electroluminescent device comprising: a first electrode (an anode 11); a second electrode (a cathode 15); and a light-emitting layer (an emission layer 13) provided between the first electrode and the second electrode, the light-emitting layer comprising a quantum dot (13 including a quantum dot) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 104-113), at least one heat source (for example, 11 including a metallic material Al, which is the identical metallic material choice for the claimed “at least one heat source” described in paragraph 301 and therefore identically capable of heating the emission layer 13 as the identical material property) (paragraph 107), and wherein: the quantum dot comprises: a core composed of ZnSe (a core of the quantum dot including ZnSe); and a shell composed of ZnS, provided on a surface of the core, and adjacent to the core (a shell of the quantum dot including ZnS) (paragraphs 113-120), the quantum dot emits blue light (paragraph 139) and is Cd free (the core/shell ZnSe/ZnS structure of the quantum dot is Cd free), and 3 ≤ d ≤ 20 and d − (6.1/((1240/λp)−2.7))1/2 ≤ 3.2 (for example, considering d=8 and λp is 430, (3 ≤ 8 ≤ 20 and 8 − 6.1/((1240/430)−2.7))1/2 = about 2.23 ≤ 3.2), where λp is a fluorescent peak wavelength (the quantum dot emitting blue light having a peak wavelength from about 440 nm to about 480 nm), and d is a particle diameter of the quantum dot (a particle size of the quantum dot is about 3-20 nm) (paragraphs 139-142).
Lee does not explicitly teach an insulating layer covering an entire periphery of the at least one heat source. Oh teaches an electroluminescent device (a blue light emitting element BD) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 49-63), comprising: an insulating layer (a pixel defining layer 410) covering an entire periphery of at least one heat source (a first electrode 530 of BD including Al) (Fig. 2 shows that an entire periphery of B including BD including 530 are covered by 410 as shown in the top-down view in order to define B) (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 78-80). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Lee with that of Oh in order to utilize the pixel definition layer 410 to define each of the subpixels R, B, and G of the pixel and prevent electrical shorting issues among the subpixels.
Claims 1, 7-18, and 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Oh and Zhang et al. (US 2018/0216003 A1; hereinafter “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches an electroluminescent device comprising: a first electrode (an anode 11); a second electrode (a cathode 15); a light-emitting layer (an emission layer 13) provided between the first electrode and the second electrode, the light-emitting layer comprising a quantum dot (13 including a quantum dot) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 104-113), at least one heat source (for example, 11 including a metallic material Al, which is the identical metallic material choice for the claimed “at least one heat source” described in paragraph 301 and therefore identically capable of heating the emission layer 13 as the identical material property) (paragraph 107), and wherein: the quantum dot comprises: a core including Zn and Se (a core of the quantum dot including ZnSe); and a shell composed of ZnS, provided on a surface of the core, and adjacent to the core (a shell of the quantum dot including ZnS) (paragraphs 113-120), and the quantum dot emits blue light (paragraph 139), is Cd free (the core/shell ZnSe/ZnS structure of the quantum dot is Cd free), and has a particle diameter within a range from 3 nm to 20 nm (a particle size of the quantum dot is about 3-20 nm) (paragraph 142).
Lee does not explicitly teach 1) an insulating layer covering an entire periphery of the at least one heat source and 2) the quantum dot has a fluorescence lifetime in a thin film state of 50 ns or less.
Regarding 1) an insulating layer covering an entire periphery of the at least one heat source, Oh teaches an electroluminescent device (a blue light emitting element BD) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 49-63), comprising: an insulating layer (a pixel defining layer 410) covering an entire periphery of at least one heat source (a first electrode 530 of BD including Al) (Fig. 2 shows that an entire periphery of B including BD including 530 are covered by 410 as shown in the top-down view in order to define B) (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 78-80). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Lee with that of Oh in order to utilize the pixel definition layer 410 to define each of the subpixels R, B, and G of the pixel and prevent electrical shorting issues among the subpixels.
Regarding 2) the quantum dot has a fluorescence lifetime in a thin film state of 50 ns or less, Zhang teaches an electroluminescent device (paragraphs 5 and 72) comprising: a quantum dot having a fluorescence lifetime in a thin film state of 50 ns or less (a core/shell ZnSe/ZnS quantum dot having a lifetime of 30 nm) (paragraph 103 and Table 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Lee with that of Zhang in order to provide the core/shell ZnSe/ZnS quantum dot having the lifetime as a property/characteristic of ZnSe.
Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches comprising: at least one function layer provided at least between the first electrode and the light-emitting layer, or between the second electrode and the light-emitting layer (an electron auxiliary layer 14), wherein the heat source is formed in the at least one function layer, and the at least one function layer is adjacent to the light-emitting layer (14 including a metallic material such as Al) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 158-170).
Regarding claim 8, Lee in view of Oh teaches further comprising: a bank (410) configured to cover an edge of the first electrode (Oh, Fig. 3 and paragraphs 79-80), wherein: the first electrode, the light-emitting layer, and the second electrode are layered, in this stated order, from a lower layer side (Lee, Fig. 1), a first function layer (14) is provided at least between the second electrode and the light-emitting layer (Lee, Fig. 1), and the heat source is formed in the first function layer (Fig. 1 and paragraph 158-170).
While Lee in view of Oh does not explicitly teach the heat source extends across an upper face of the bank, it would have been obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the electron auxiliary layer 14 including the electron transport layer and/or the electron injection layer across the bank (the pixel definition layer 410 in Oh) in order to provide the common electron transport/injection layer among subpixels over the bank.
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches wherein the heat source is formed in at least the light-emitting layer (13 including a metallic material such as Zn, which is within the scope of the claimed “at least one heat source” described in paragraph 301 as “A material of the heating element layer 42 need only be any material that can be used as a heat source, and any material that can be generally used as a wiring line can be used” is considered and therefore having the identical material property) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 120).
Regarding claim 10, Lee teaches wherein the heat source is only formed in the light-emitting layer (13 including a metallic material such as Zn of ZnSe is only in quantum dot of 13) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 120).
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches wherein the heat source has a thin line shape (15 including a metallic material such as aluminum Al has a line shape) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 111).
Regarding claim 12, Lee teaches wherein the heat source has a line width of 100 nm or less (a thickness/width of 15 is about 50 nm) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 112).
Regarding claim 13, Lee teaches wherein the heat source has a thickness within a range from 5 nm to 100 nm (a thickness of 15 is about 50 nm) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 112).
Regarding claim 14, Lee does not explicitly teach that the heat source has a cross-sectional area of a plane parallel to a line width direction of 0.01 μm2 or less. However, Lee teaches 14 including a metallic material such as Al has a thickness of 14a about 2 nm (Fig. 1 and paragraph 158-170 and 197-198). While the length of 14a is not known, it would have been obvious to adjust the length of 14a as a routine skill in the art, including the length that is about 4 nm in order to optimize the dimension of the light emitting device. Furthermore, when the 14a has 2nm thickness and the 4 nm length, then the cross-sectional area is 0.008 μm2, which is less than the claimed range of 0.01 μm2 or less.
Regarding claim 15, Lee teaches wherein the heat source is an Al wiring line having a line width and a thickness, each ranging from 10 nm to 100 nm (15 including a metallic material such as aluminum Al and has a width/thickness about 50 nm) (Fig. 1 and paragraphs 111-112).
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches wherein the heat source is provided in a layer on a light-output face side of the light-emitting layer (with the light emitting device being a bottom-emission type with 11 being a transparent electrode, 11 including a metallic material such as tin is in 11) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 111).
Regarding claim 17, Lee teaches wherein the heat source has a flat plate shape (14 including a metallic material such as Al has a flat plate shape) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 158-170).
Regarding claim 18, Lee teaches wherein the heat source is provided in a layer on a face side opposite a light-output face of the light-emitting layer (with the light emitting device being a bottom-emission type with 11 being a transparent electrode and 15 being a reflective electrode, 14 includes a metallic material such as Al is opposite the light-output face) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 111 and 158-170).
Regarding claim 25, Lee in view of Oh teaches a plurality of pixels including at least one blue pixel (a plurality of subpixels R, G, and B including a subpixel B) (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 49-53), wherein each of the plurality of pixels is provided with an electroluminescent device (RD, BD, and GD), and the blue pixel (B) is provided with the electroluminescent device (BD) according to claim 1 (Oh, Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 49-53 and 63 and Lee for the electroluminescent device in claim 1).
Regarding claim 26, Lee in view of Oh teaches comprising: a plurality of blue pixels, including the blue pixel (Oh, Fig. 1-3 and paragraphs 49-63), wherein the heat source extends across at least two of the plurality of the blue pixels among the plurality of pixels (Oh, Figs. 1-2 for the plurality of blue pixels B and Lee, Fig. 1 and paragraph 111. For example, 15 including a metallic material such as aluminum Al).
Regarding claim 27, While Lee in view of Oh and Zhang does not explicitly teach a luminance sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include such luminance sensor as a part of the display device in order to either detect and the external light input or to sense the light emitting output from the light emitting device of the display device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-23 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejections as set forth above in this Office Action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL B WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3418. The examiner can normally be reached on 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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL WHALEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893