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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Kondo (US. Pub: 2017/0069696 A1) of record.
Regarding claim 1, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) a display device comprises: a substrate (100); a planarization layer (118) provided on the substrate; a plurality of pixels (see at least figs. 3-5) including a plurality of electrodes (119) provided on the planarization layer and arrayed in a first direction and a second direction (see at least fig. 4); a bank (122 or 122X, 122Y; [0072]) provided on the planarization layer and the electrodes and formed in a grid pattern so as to surround each of the electrodes (see at least figs. 3 and 4); and a light-emitting layer (123; [0073]) provided on the electrodes, wherein the bank (122X, 122Y) protrudes with respect to the electrodes in a third direction orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction (see at least figs. 4 and 5), and the bank (122 or 122X, 122Y) includes a cutout (see at least fig. 4) such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other (see at least figs. 4-5, and 7) .
PNG
media_image1.png
346
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
228
662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
400
756
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the planarization layer (118) is exposed at a bottom of the cutout in the bank (122X).
Regarding claim 3, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the thickness of the bank (122X, 122Y) from the planarization layer (118) to an upper surface of the bank in the cutout is less than the thickness of the bank from the planarization layer to the upper surface of the bank at a position where the cutout is not formed (best seen in at least fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the planarization layer (118) comprises a first planarization layer (116) and a second planarization layer (118) provided on the first planarization layer, the electrodes (119) are provided on the second planarization layer (118), and the second planarization layer (118) has a hole at a position overlapping the cutout (see at least figs. 4, 5 and 7).
Regarding claim 5, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the hole is filled with the bank (122X, 122Y), the cutout in the bank is formed by the hole (see at least figs. 4, 5 and 7), and a lower surface of the bank in the hole is in contact with an upper surface of the second planarization layer (118) provided to a bottom surface of the hole (see at least figs. 4 and 7) .
Regarding claim 6, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) an end of each of the electrodes (119) partially covers an edge of the hole in the second planarization layer (118).
Regarding claim 10, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the cutout is formed at a corner of the grid in plan view (see at least figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 11, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the pixels include a first pixel, a second pixel, and a third pixel adjacently disposed in the first direction (see fig. 3), wherein a first cutout in the bank (122X) between the first pixel and the second pixel and a second cutout in the bank between the second pixel and the third pixel are arranged in a line (best seen in at least figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 12, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the pixels further include a fourth pixel and a fifth pixel, wherein the first pixel, the fourth pixel, and the fifth pixel are adjacently disposed in the second direction (see at least fig. 3), and a third cutout in the bank between the first pixel and the fourth pixel and a fourth cutout in the bank between the fourth pixel and the fifth pixel are arranged in a line (see at least figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 13, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) a side surface of the grid is a curve including an inflection point in sectional view.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (US. Pub: 2017/0069696 A1) of record in view of Tomohiro et al. (JP: 2012-234748~ hereinafter “Tomohiro”) of record.
Regarding claim 14, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) a method for manufacturing an organic electroluminescent display panel comprising a planarization layer (118) formed on a substrate (100), a plurality of electrodes (119) formed on the planarization layer, a plurality of pixels arranged in a matrix, a bank (122) formed on the planarization layer and each of the electrodes and formed in a grid pattern so as to surround each of the electrodes (see at least figs. 3 and 4), and an organic EL layer (123) formed on the electrodes; and the cutout (best seen in at least fig. 4) being formed between, among the pixels, pixels adjacent to each other (see at least fig. 4).
Kondo does not expressly disclose the method comprising: patterning by photolithography such that a cutout is formed in part of the bank in a display region in which the electrodes are formed; removing a resist layer in an area where the organic EL layer is to be formed, by immersing the resist layer in a solution; and removing the solution from the organic electroluminescent display panel, wherein compressed air is emitted so as to blow away the solution at the removing the solution, and the cutout is formed along a direction of emission of the compressed air.
Tomohiro discloses ([0146]; [0149]; [0153]; [0157]-[0158]) a method for manufacturing an organic electroluminescent display panel comprised of, in part, patterning by photolithography such that a cutout is formed in part of the bank in a display region in which the electrodes are formed; removing a resist layer in an area where the organic EL layer is to be formed, by immersing the resist layer in a solution; and removing the solution from the organic electroluminescent display panel, wherein compressed air is emitted so as to blow away the solution at the removing the solution, and the cutout is formed along a direction of emission of the compressed air.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider using the method of Tomohiro to form the organic electroluminescent display panel of Kondo, since it has been held that the selection of a known method based on its suitability of its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination.
Regarding claim 15, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the electrodes (119) are arrayed in a first direction and a second direction (see at least figs. 3 and 4), and a plurality of the cutouts are formed along the first direction or the second direction (see at least figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 16, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the cutout is formed at a corner of the grid.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kondo (US. Pub: 2017/0069696 A1) of record in view of Tokuda et al. (US. Pub: 2015/0090993 A1~ hereinafter “Tokuda”) of record.
Regarding claim 7, Kondo discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) the hole is filled with the bank (122X, 122Y), the cutout in the bank is formed by the hole (see at least figs. 4-5 and 7), but is silent about a lower surface of the bank is in contact with an upper surface of the first planarization layer in the cutout in the bank.
Tokuda in the same field of organic electroluminescent display panel discloses (in at least fig. 9) a lower surface of the bank (33) is in contact with an upper surface of the first planarization layer (50) in the cutout in the bank (33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bank arrangement of Kondo with the teaching of Tokuda, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 8, Kondo as modified by Tokuda discloses (in at least figs. 3-9) an end of each of the electrodes (119) partially covers an edge of the hole in the second planarization layer (118) and extends to the upper surface of the first planarization layer (116).
Regarding claim 9, Kondo as modified by Tokuda discloses (in at least fig. 9 Tokuda) the bank (33) has an inclined surface formed such that the width of the bank decreases toward the cutout in the bank in plan view (see fig. 9).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that Kondo’s reference fails to disclose the newly amended limitations “a plurality of pixels (see at least figs. 3-5) including… the bank includes a cutout such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other” as cited in claims 1 and 14, and the Applicant cited Kondo figure 3 to support his argument.
In response to that argument, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the cited figures above, Kondo teaches all the claimed limitations. However, the Examiner agrees that figure 3 of Kondo does not appear to show the bank includes a cutout; and the Examiner did not use figure 3 to disclose the cutout. Therefore, the argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Kamada et al. (US. Pub: 2022/0115446 A1) disclose (in at least fig. 8) a bank includes a cutout such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other.
Yamazaki et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0296409 A1) disclose (in at least fig. 2) a bank includes a cutout such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other.
Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0212132 A1) disclose (in at least fig. 7) a bank includes a cutout such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other.
Ohara et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0144353 A1) disclose (in at least fig. 4) a bank includes a cutout such that the cutout is disposed between, among the pixels adjacent to each other.
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 ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875