DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 05/22/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Kim et al. (US 2020/0176520 A1).
Applicant’s arguments, filed 05/22/2026, with respect to claim 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C 102 rejection of claim 9 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 05/22/2026, with respect to claim 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C 112(a) rejection of claim 9 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (CN 110444690 A; hereinafter “Deng”) wherein US 2022/0013601 A1 is used as a translation, in view of Ding et al. (CN 110265583 A; hereinafter “Ding), wherein US 20210028249 A1 is used as a translation and Kim et al. (US 2020/0176520 A1; hereinafter “Kim”).
In regard to claim 1, Deng teaches a light-emitting panel (a display substrate) (Fig .3 and paragraph 28), having a light-emitting area (a display region 101) and an isolation area adjacent to the light-emitting area (the area containing one isolation wall 103 functions as the isolation area) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28), wherein the light-emitting panel comprises:
a substrate (a base substrate 100) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28);
a barrier structure (an isolation wall 103) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28), disposed on one side of the substrate and located in the isolation area (the isolation wall 103 is shown on the topside of the substrate in the aforementioned isolation area) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28); the barrier structure comprises: a first isolation pattern (a first layer 111 at the bottom of the isolation well 103) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28), a second isolation pattern (a bottom layer of a second layer 112 that consists of two layers) (Fig. 3 and paragraph 28), a third isolation pattern (an upper layer of the second layer 112 that consists of two layers) and a fourth isolation pattern (the first layer 111 above the second layer 112 that consist of 2 layers) stacked in sequence (Fig. 11 and paragraph 28), the first isolation pattern is closer to the substrate than the fourth isolation pattern (as shown in Fig. 3 first layer 111 at the bottom of the isolation well 103 is closer to the substrate 100 than the first layer 111 above the second layer 112 that consist of 2 layers); an orthographic projection of the first isolation pattern on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the second isolation pattern on the substrate (the orthographic projections of the first layer 111 at the bottom of the isolation well is within the orthographic projection of the bottom layer of a second layer 112 that consists of two layers as shown in Fig. 3), and an orthographic projection of the third isolation pattern on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the fourth isolation pattern on the substrate (the upper layer of the second layer 112 that consists of two layers orthographic projection is shown with the orthographic projection of the first layer 111 above the second layer 112 that consist of 2 layers in Fig. 3), and the orthographic projection of the third isolation pattern on the substrate is located within the orthographic projection of the second isolation pattern on the substrate (the orthographic projection of the upper layer of the second layer 112 that consists of two layers is shown within the orthographic projection of the lower layer of the second layer 112 that consists of two layers in Fig. 3), each of sub-pixels comprises a thin film transistor (a thin film transistor structure) and a light-emitting unit (the sub-pixel regions contain an anode layer 125, and a pixel definition layer 126, and an organic light emitting material layer 127 in the display region 101 functions as the light emitting unit) (Fig. 3 and paragraphs 43-44), the thin film transistor comprises a gate electrode, a gate insulation layer, an active layer, a source electrode, a drain electrode and a planarization layer (the thin film transistor structure includes an active layer, a first gate insulating layer, a first gate, a source/drain, and a planarization layer 124) (Fig. 3 and paragraphs 37 and 43), the light-emitting unit comprises a first electrode, a pixel definition layer, a light-emitting layer (the sub-pixel regions contain an anode layer 125, and a pixel definition layer 126, and an organic light emitting material layer 127 in the display region 101 functions as the light emitting unit) (Fig. 3 and paragraphs 43-44).
However, Deng does not explicitly teach wherein, in the light-emitting area, the light-emitting panel comprises: a plurality of pixel units arranged in an array, each of the pixel units comprises at least three sub-pixels, wherein the third isolation pattern and the planarization layer are provided in a same layer and with a same material. the light-emitting unit comprises the first electrode, the pixel definition layer, the light-emitting layer and a second electrode, wherein the third isolation pattern and the planarization layer are provided in a same layer and with a same material.
Ding teaches a display panel (a display panel as taught in Fig. 2A) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 39), wherein, in a light-emitting area (a pixel region 101) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 55), the light-emitting panel comprises: a plurality of pixel units (a grouping of four sub-pixel regions 1010 function as pixel unit) arranged in an array (the pixel units are arranged in an array as shown in annotated Fig. 3A below), each of the pixel units comprises at least three sub-pixels (the pixel units comprise a group of four sub-pixel regions 1010 as shown in annotated Fig. 3A below), a light-emitting unit (a light-emitting device 1011) comprises a first electrode (an anode 1012) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 127), a pixel definition layer (a pixel defining structure 18) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 126), a light-emitting layer (a light-emitting function layer 1014) and a second electrode (cathode 1013) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 68), wherein a third isolation pattern (a protection pattern 1035) and a planarization layer (a planarization layer 160 ) are provided in a same layer and with a same material (the planarization layer 160 may be disposed in the same layer as the protection pattern 1035 and formed of the same material) (Fig. 2A and paragraph 116).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Deng with the teachings of Ding to have the light-emitting area with a light-emitting panel that comprises a plurality of pixel units arranged in an array, each of the pixel units comprises at least three sub-pixels, the light-emitting unit comprises a first electrode, a pixel definition layer, a light-emitting layer and a second electrode since this layout is well known within the art to allow for a display device with a multi-colored display. Further, It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ding with the teachings of Deng to have the first isolation pattern, the second isolation pattern and the sixth isolation pattern are provided in a same layer and with a same material as the source electrode and the drain electrode since this layout is known to simplify the manufacturing process due to having fewer deposition and etching steps. Also, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
PNG
media_image1.png
682
893
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches a light-emitting panel (an electroluminescent display device) having a light-emitting area (a display area AA) and an isolation area (a hole boundary part TH) adjacent to the light-emitting area (the non-display area IA is shown adjacent to the hole boundary part TH in Fig. 1) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 70), wherein a thickness of a third isolation pattern (a planarization layer PLN in a convex portion 1000) is the same as a thickness of a planarization layer (a planarization film PLN in the display area would be the same thickness as the planarization layer PLN in a convex portion 1000 due to both being patterned from the same layer during manufacture) (Fig. 3 and paragraphs 88).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Deng with the teachings of Kim to have a thickness of the third isolation pattern be the same as a thickness of the planarization layer since this is well known to simplify the fabrication process and reduce manufacturing cost by utilizing a common layer between elements within the device.
In regard to claim 2, Deng teaches wherein the barrier structure further comprises: a fifth isolation pattern (a second layer 112 consisting of one layer above the first layer 111) disposed on one side of the fourth isolation pattern away from the substrate (the second layer 112 consisting of one layer is above the first layer 111 as shown in Fig. 3), wherein an orthographic projection of the fifth isolation pattern on the substrate is located within the orthographic projection of the fourth isolation pattern on the substrate (as shown in Fig. 3 the second layer 112 consisting of one layer above the first layer 111 is within the orthographic projection of the first layer 111 under it), or the orthographic projection of the fourth isolation pattern on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the fifth isolation pattern on the substrate.
In regard to claim 3, Deng teaches wherein the barrier structure further comprises:
a sixth isolation pattern disposed between the substrate and the first isolation pattern (the layer shown under the first layer 111 at the bottom of the isolation wall 103 in Fig. 3), wherein the orthographic projection of the first isolation pattern on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the sixth isolation pattern on the substrate (the orthographic projection of the first layer 111 at the bottom of the isolation wall 103 is within the orthographic projection of the layer underneath it as shown in Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 5, Deng doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the first isolation pattern, the second isolation pattern and the sixth isolation pattern are provided in a same layer and with a same material as the source electrode and the drain electrode.
Ding teaches wherein the first isolation pattern (a middle layer of a separation pillar transition structure 104) (Fig. 11B and paragraph 154), a second isolation pattern and a sixth isolation pattern (the bottom and top layers of the separation pillar transition structure 104) are provided in a same layer and with a same material as the source electrode and the drain electrode (as shown in Fig. 11A and 12B the separation pillar transition structure 104 is formed of the same material and located in the same layer as the a source 142 and a drain 143) (Fig. 11A, Fig. 11B and paragraphs 158-159).
It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Ding with the teachings of Deng to have the first isolation pattern, the second isolation pattern and the sixth isolation pattern are provided in a same layer and with a same material as the source electrode and the drain electrode since this layout is known to simplify the manufacturing process due to having fewer deposition and etching steps. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
In regard to claim 17, Deng teaches light-emitting apparatus (a mobile phone) comprising the light-emitting panel according to claim 1 (paragraph 48).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of Ding and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ban et al. (CN 109920818 A; hereinafter “Ban”), wherein US 2022/0376207 A1 is used as a translation.
In regard to claim 7, Deng in view of Ding and Kim don’t explicitly teach wherein the fourth isolation pattern and the first electrode are provided in a same layer and with a same material.
Ban teaches a display panel (paragraph 25), wherein a fourth isolation pattern (a first electrode layer 18) and a first electrode (a third electrode layer 28) are provided in a same layer and with a same material (a first electrode layer 18 covering the surface of the barrier body 114 and a third electrode layer 28 on the first flattening layer 17 are formed from the same material in the same step) (Fig. 1B, Fig. 4G and paragraphs 92).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Deng in view of Deng with the teachings of Ban to have the fourth isolation pattern and the first electrode are provided in a same layer and with a same material since this layout is known to simplify the manufacturing process due to having fewer deposition and etching steps. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of Ding and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Qin et al. (WO2021036411A1; hereinafter “Qin”), wherein US 2021/0408511 A1 is used as a translation.
In regard to claim 8, Deng in view of Ding and Kim doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the fifth isolation pattern and the pixel definition layer are provided in a same layer and with a same material.
Qin teaches a display panel (a display panel 100) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 29), wherein a fifth isolation pattern (a tensile stress layer 403 in a second isolation structure 40) and a pixel definition layer (a pixel definition layer 16) are provided in a same layer and with a same material (the tensile stress layer 403 and a pixel definition layer 16 are formed in a same procedure from the same material) (Fig. 7 and paragraphs 58 and 63).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the teachings of Deng in view of Ding and Kim with the teachings of Qin to have the fifth isolation pattern and the pixel definition layer are provided in a same layer and with a same material since this layout is known to simplify the manufacturing process due to having fewer deposition and etching steps. Further it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 11, 13-16 and 18 are allowed.
The following is the Office's statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 9, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest:
“a thickness of the third isolation pattern is the same as a thickness of the planarization layer”.
Qin is considered a close prior art of reference. However, Qin fails to teach a thickness of the third isolation pattern is the same as a thickness of the planarization layer. Qin is silent regarding the thickness of the element mapped as the planarization layer.
Moreover, none of the prior arts of record, taken either alone or in combination, anticipate nor render obvious the claimed inventions. Hence, claims 9, 11, 13-16 and 18 are allowable over the prior arts of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEYON ALI-SIMAH PUNCHBEDDELL whose telephone number is (571)270-0078. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur: 7:30AM-3:30 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, Sue Purvis can be reached at (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 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.
/SEYON ALI-SIMAH PUNCHBEDDELL/ Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights