DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed 11/8/2023.
Currently, claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: SHORT CIRCUIT PROTECTION FOR ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT DEVICE
Additionally, the specification is objected to over the use of the term “Ω/□” throughout (see e.g. p. 11, line 2). It is not clear what the symbol is meant to represent. While it is understood that “Ω” represents Ohms, it is not clear what “□” is meant to represent.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “tree-shaped transparent electrode(s)”. It is not clear what is meant by the term “tree-shaped”. “Tree” does not describe a definitive shape, such as triangle or rectangle, for example. “Tree” describes an object that does not have a definitive shape. Rather, different trees have different shapes.
The Examiner acknowledges that p. 8, lines 4-5 of the specification discusses the term “tree-shaped”:
The "tree-shaped" of the tree-shaped transparent electrode 30 in this embodiment means that the
electrode 30 has a trunk portion 30-1 and a branch portion 30-2 extending from the trunk portion.
However, this in insufficient to establish definiteness. The passage is clearly only referring to one embodiment, allowing for “tree-shaped” to have a different meaning in a different embodiment.
The term “tree-shaped” is recited in at least claims 1, 7 and 17-20. For purposes of examination, the term is presumed to mean it has a trunk portion and a branch portion extending from the trunk portion.
Furthermore, the claims use a symbol “Ω/□” (see e.g. claim 2), but it is not clear what the symbol is meant to represent. While it is understood that “Ω” represents Ohms, it is not clear what “□” is meant to represent.
While the specification also uses the symbol “Ω/□” throughout, in other instances the specification uses the symbol “Ω/mm2” (see e.g. p. 9, lines 3-4) to describe surface resistance, which is the same characteristic being claimed as “Ω/□” in the claims. Thus, for purposes of examination, it is presumed that “Ω/□” is meant to be ““Ω/mm2”.
“Ω/□” is recited in at least claims 2-5 and 15.
Moreover, the claims use the symbol “um2” (see e.g. claim 9). It is not clear what is meant by this term. For purposes of examination, it is presumed that “um2” is meant to be “µm2”.
“um2” is recited in at least claims 9 and 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
The claims are not allowable for the reasons indicated in the rejections above. However, allowable subject matter is identified.
Reference is made to Lu et al. (CN 109888116, cited in IDS), which is identified as being the closest prior art to the claimed invention. The equivalent document US 2022/0158122 (cited in IDS) is referenced below.
As it pertains to claim 1, Lu shows, with reference to FIG. 6-7 and 12, an organic electroluminescent device, comprising:
a substrate (1);
an auxiliary electrode (7) disposed on the substrate;
a plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes (13; para. [0088]) disposed on the substrate, wherein each tree-shaped transparent electrode of the plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes is disposed at a position corresponding to a luminescent region of the organic electroluminescent device and is electrically connected to the auxiliary electrode, wherein at least one luminescent region is provided (FIG. 6);
an insulating layer (12) covering the auxiliary electrode and the plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes, wherein in each luminescent region of the at least one luminescent region, the insulating layer is provided with a plurality of aperture regions (11), wherein an aperture region of the plurality of aperture regions is disposed at a position corresponding to a tree-shaped transparent electrode of the plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes;
an anti-short-circuit electrode layer (2);
a second electrode layer (4) disposed opposite to the anti-short-circuit electrode layer; and
an organic functional layer (3) disposed between the anti-short-circuit electrode layer and the second electrode layer.
However, Lu does not teach the combination of “an insulating layer covering the auxiliary electrode and the plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes” and “an anti-short-circuit electrode layer disposed on the insulating layer”. In Lu, the plurality of tree-shaped transparent electrodes 13 and the anti-short-circuit electrode layer 2 are different regions of a same pattern, as seen in FIG. 6-7. The insulating layer 12 is formed on this pattern. While the cited limitations may be true separately in different orientations of Lu, there is not a single orientation for which both limitations are true. Thus, Lu does not teach each and every element of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shi (US 2019/0237695), Song et al. (US 10,559,773), Lee et al. (US 9,793,333), Lee et al. (US 9,666,830), Lee et al. (US 9,825,249), and Moon et al. (US 10,325,975) disclose inventions similar to Applicant’s.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL M LUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1569. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, EST.
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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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.
/DANIEL LUKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights