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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, claims 1-5, 8-14, and 26, in the reply filed on 1/6/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-7 and 15-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/6/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. The IDS has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the filler found in claim 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). ¶254 indicates a filler is not shown. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13-14 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
(Re Claim 13) It is unclear how contact as found in “contacting a lower surface of the color filter layer in the direction toward the first substrate” can have a particular direction.
During examination, the quoted limitation was read as “contacting a lower surface of the color filter that faces the first substrate”.
Claim 14 inherits this rejection for indefiniteness.
(Re Claim 26) “the inorganic low-refractive index layer” lacks antecedence.
During examination, the quoted limitation was read as “the organic low-refractive index layer”.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623).
(Re Claim 1) Hiraga teaches a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (11; Fig. 2); a first light-emitting diode (20R; Fig. 2), a second light-emitting diode (20G; Fig. 2), and a third light-emitting diode (20B; Fig. 2), which are disposed on the first substrate and emit light of a wavelength belonging to a first wavelength band (white light emitted by each light-emitting diode; ¶¶58, 79); an encapsulation layer (13; Fig. 2) covering the first light-emitting diode, the second light-emitting diode and the third light-emitting diode; a bank layer (14F; Fig. 2) on the encapsulation layer, the bank layer comprising: a first bank opening (right opening; Fig. 2) corresponding to the first light-emitting diode; a second bank opening (left opening; Fig. 2); corresponding to the second light-emitting diode; and a third bank opening (central opening; Fig. 2) corresponding to the third light-emitting diode.
Hiraga has not been shown to teach a display apparatus additionally comprising:
a first quantum dot layer disposed in the first bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a second wavelength band; a second quantum dot layer disposed in the second bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a third wavelength band; a first organic capping layer disposed in the second bank opening and covering the second quantum dot layer; and an inorganic capping layer covering the bank layer, the first quantum dot layer, and the first organic capping layer.
Zhou teaches replacing dyes within color filters with quantum dots (¶4).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to replace the dyes of the color filters 14R, 14G, and 14B of Hiraga with quantum dots that emit light of the same color as the filters were allowing to pass, quantum dots have good color purity and help solve brightness loss (Zhou: ¶4).
This results in modified Hiraga teaching a first quantum dot layer (14R; Fig. 2) disposed in the first bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a second wavelength band (Zhou: ¶4);
a second quantum dot layer (14G; Fig. 2) disposed in the second bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a third wavelength band (Zhou: ¶4).
Zhou also teaches that light-emitting diodes may emit either white or blue light (¶¶165-166).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the light-emitting diodes of modified Hiraga such that they emit blue instead of white light as blue light is known to effectively excite quantum dots (Zhou: ¶162), and blue and white light are known alternatives when utilizing quantum dot layers for light emission (¶¶148-149, 165-166).
Lin teaches forming organic capping layers (314; Fig. 9) over a first quantum dot layer (306 on the left; Fig. 8) and a second quantum dot layer (306 in the center; Fig. 9), wherein the organic capping layers are disposed in bank openings (left and center bank openings of 604; Fig. 9).
Ichihashi teaches forming a bank (19; Fig. 1) such that the thickness is greater than that of color affecting layers within openings in the bank (¶84).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form capping layers, as taught by Lin, respectively within the first bank opening and the second bank opening that contact the first and second quantum dot layers, to cut out blue light that would otherwise affect the color purity of light emitting from the first and second bank openings (Lin: ¶56).
Additionally, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the bank layer such that it is thicker than the combination of the capping layers from Lin, and the quantum dot layers, of modified Hiraga, as this prevents color mixing (Ichihashi: ¶84).
Doing so ensures that the first organic capping layer is disposed in the second bank opening and covers the second quantum dot layer.
Yamazaki teaches that a yellow color filter may be formed using an organic resin (¶168).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the capping layers taught by Lin, such that they are organic capping layers, as an organic resin is a material known to be used to form yellow color filters, and Lin does not describe a particular material composition for the capping layers. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). "Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
This results in the first capping layer being a first organic capping layer.
Park teaches forming an inorganic capping layer (CP1; Fig. 7, ¶194) covering a bank layer (BNK2; Fig. 7).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form an inorganic capping layer as taught by Park such that it covers the bank layer of modified Hiraga, as this prevents contamination of the underlying layers (¶194), which include the first quantum dot layer and the first organic capping layer of modified Hiraga.
(Re Claim 4) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second quantum dot layer has a concave shape (Fig. 2) in which a thickness of a central portion is less than a thickness of a peripheral portion adjacent to a sidewall of the second bank opening (Fig. 2).
(Re Claim 9) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the second quantum dot layer comprises InxGa(1-x)P, AgInxGa(1-x)S2, AgInS2, AgGaS2, CuInS2, CuInSe2, CuGaS2, CuGaSe2, ZnSe (Zhou: ¶66), ZnTexSe(1-x), or a mixture thereof.
(Re Claim 11) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a second organic capping layer (the organic capping layer of modified Hiraga disposed in the first bank opening, in view of Lin and Yamazaki above) disposed in the first bank opening and covering the first quantum dot layer.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mitsuhashi et al. (US 2007/0269621), and Nakatani et al. (US 2010/0289728).
(Re Claim 2) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, but has not been shown to teach wherein the bank layer further comprises: a first bank layer on the encapsulation layer and having a lyophilic surface; and a second bank layer on the first bank layer and having a lyophobic surface.
Mitsuhashi teaches forming a bank layer (B; Fig. 2) comprising: a first bank layer (B1; Fig. 2) having a lyophilic surface (¶47); and a second bank layer (B2; Fig. 2) having a lyophobic surface (¶47).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the bank layer of modified Hiraga using a sequential stack of a lyophilic and lyophobic material as taught by Mitsuhashi, and maintaining the geometry of bank layer of Hiraga, as providing an interface between a lyophilic and lyophobic materials allows for pinning the edges of deposited material layers to a desired location, improving the uniformity of deposited material layers across bank openings (Nakatani: ¶118).
(Re Claim 3) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 2, but has not been shown to teach wherein a fixed point at which an upper surface of the first organic capping layer contacts a sidewall of the second bank opening coincides with or is adjacent to a point at which an interface between the first bank layer and the second bank layer contacts the sidewall of the second bank opening.
However, as the bank layer is set thicker than the first organic capping layer and the second quantum dot layer (see rejection of claim 1; Ichihashi: ¶84), the upper surface of the first organic capping layer is inside of, and contacts, a sidewall (left) of the second bank opening. The first organic capping layer is deposited on second quantum dot layer, and so is next to the interface between the first bank layer and the second bank layer, as the second quantum dot layer is pinned at the interface (Mitsuhashi: ¶47; Nakatani: ¶118).
The fixed point then is adjacent to a point at which an interface between the first bank layer and the second bank layer contacts the sidewall (on the left) of the second bank opening, as the point with respect to the interface is close to the fixed point.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Sun (US 2020/0312915).
(Re Claim 5) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 4, but has not been shown to teach wherein, in the first organic capping layer, a thickness of a central portion is equal to a thickness of a peripheral portion adjacent to the sidewall of the second bank opening.
Sun teaches adjusting the thickness across an upper surface of capping layers (400B+400C; Fig. 5).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to adjust the thickness across the first organic capping layer, such that a thickness of a central portion of the first organic capping layer is equal to a thickness of a peripheral portion adjacent to the sidewall of the second bank opening, as changing the thickness of a color filter across its surface, such that it has a particular curvature, is a result-effective variable of transmittance (Sun: ¶¶67, 77). Therefore, the claimed thickness relationship would have been obvious to optimize and ascertainable through routine experimentation. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seo et al. (US 2015/0349284).
(Re Claim 8) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, but has not been shown to teach wherein a thickness of the first organic capping layer is in a range of about 0.1 μm to about 3 μm.
Seo teaches forming a capping layer (yellow color filter; ¶301) with a thickness of 0.80 µm (¶301).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Bae et al. (US 2022/0199694).
(Re Claim 10) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, but has not been shown to teach wherein the first wavelength band is in a range of about 450 nm to about 495 nm, and the third wavelength band is in a range of about 495 nm to about 570 nm.
Bae teaches that light-emitting diodes emitting blue light emit in a band of about 400 nm to about 500 nm (¶166), and that green quantum dots emit in a wavelength band of about 500 nm to about 570 nm (¶170).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), and Park et al. (US 2022/0037623) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bae et al. (US 2022/0199694) and Nakamura (US 2012/0228603).
(Re Claim 12) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, but has not been shown to teach further comprising: a second substrate over the first substrate with the bank layer therebetween; and a color filter layer disposed on a lower surface of the second substrate in a direction toward the first substrate, wherein the color filter layer comprises a first filter opening, a second filter opening, and a third filter opening which respectively overlap the first light-emitting diode, the second light-emitting diode, and the third light-emitting diode, when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the first substrate.
Bae teaches that quantum dots layers (LCP1+LCP2; Fig. 7) may also be utilized with a color filter layer (CFL; Fig. 7, ¶62), where the color filter layer is formed on a second substrate (ENC; Fig. 7, ¶62) that has a first, second, and third filter opening (Fig. 7 markup) overlapping respectively with a first, second, and third light-emitting diode, (LD1, LD2, and LD3; Fig. 7).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to stack a color filter layer as taught by Bae over the quantum dot layers of modified Hiraga, as this allows for further control over the color of light emitted from a particular device region.
Nakamura teaches forming the color filter layer (230R+230G+230B; Fig. 3A) on a second substrate (210; Fig. 3A) away from the first substrate and the first and second color conversion layers (190R+190G; 3A) to allow for a subsequent gap fill operation (¶49) using a filler (¶46).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to Form the color filter layer CFL and layer CPL of Bae on the second substrate ENC of Bae, separate from the quantum dot layers of modified Hiraga, as this reduces the amount of heat the color filters are exposed to (Nakamura: “heat-drying the ink droplet”; ¶7; Bae: “after the inkjet…curing may be performed”; ¶208).
Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to have the first, second, and third filter openings from Bae respectively overlap the first, second, and third light-emitting diodes of modified Hiraga, as this allows for the light emitted from each diode to avoid unnecessary absorption through more opaque materials.
This results in modified Hiraga teaching a second substrate (Bae: ENC; Fig. 7) over the first substrate with the bank layer therebetween; and
a color filter layer (Bae: CFL; Fig. 7) disposed on a lower surface of the second substrate in a direction toward the first substrate, wherein the color filter layer comprises a first filter opening (Bae’s Fig. 7 markup), a second filter opening (Bae’s Fig. 7 markup), and a third filter opening (Bae’s Fig. 7 markup) which respectively overlap the first light-emitting diode, the second light-emitting diode, and the third light-emitting diode, when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the first substrate.
PNG
media_image1.png
291
917
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Re Claim 13) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 12, but has not been shown to teach the display apparatus further comprising: a low-refractive index layer contacting a lower surface of the color filter layer in the direction toward the first substrate.
Bae teaches coating a low-refractive index layer (CPL; ¶186) such that it contacts a lower surface of the color filter layer in the direction toward a first substrate (BSL; Fig. 7).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to have a low-refractive index layer contacting a lower surface of the color filter layer in the direction toward the first substrate of modified Hiraga, as taught by Bae, as this improves light emission characteristics (Bae: ¶186).
(Re Claim 14) Modified Hiraga teaches the display apparatus of claim 13, but has not been shown to teach the display apparatus further comprising: a filler between the inorganic capping layer and the low-refractive index layer.
Nakamura teaches bonding a color filter layer (230R+230G+230B; Fig. 3A) to underlying layers using a filler (¶¶46, 49).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to have a filler between the inorganic capping layer and the low-refractive index layer of modified Hiraga, as the filler allows for the first and second substrates to be bonded together when a second substate was used to form the color filter layer.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiraga (US 2024/0423071), Zhou et al. (US 2017/0183567), Lin et al. (US 2021/0028327), Ichihashi et al. (US 2021/0134890), Yamazaki (US 2013/0113843), Park et al. (US 2022/0037623), Kim et al. (US 2019/0296088), Bae et al. (US 2022/0199694), Seo et al. (US 2015/0349284), Yoon et al. (US 2017/0153368), and Chen et al. (US 2019/0252365).
(Re Claim 26) Hiraga teaches a display apparatus comprising: a first substrate (11; Fig. 2); a first light-emitting diode (20R; Fig. 2), a second light-emitting diode (20G; Fig. 2), and a third light-emitting diode (20B; Fig. 2), which are disposed on the first substrate and emit light of a wavelength belonging to a first wavelength band (white light emitted by each light-emitting diode; ¶¶58, 79); an encapsulation layer (13; Fig. 2) covering the first light-emitting diode, the second light-emitting diode, and the third light-emitting diode; a bank layer (14F; Fig. 2) on the encapsulation layer, the bank layer comprising: a first bank opening (right opening; Fig. 2) corresponding to the first light-emitting diode; a second bank opening (left opening; Fig. 2) corresponding to the second light-emitting diode; and a third bank opening (central opening; Fig. 2) corresponding to the third light-emitting diode;
Hiraga has not been shown to teach a display apparatus comprsing:
a first quantum dot layer disposed in the first bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a second wavelength band; a second quantum dot layer disposed in the second bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a third wavelength band; a first organic capping layer disposed in the second bank opening and covering the second quantum dot layer; an inorganic capping layer covering the bank layer, the first quantum dot layer, and the first organic capping layer; an organic low-refractive index layer on the inorganic capping layer and filling the first bank opening, the second bank opening, and the third bank opening; an inorganic protective layer on the inorganic low-refractive index layer; and a color filter layer directly contacting the inorganic protective layer, wherein the color filter layer comprises a first filter opening, a second filter opening, and a third filter opening which respectively overlap the first light-emitting diode, the second light-emitting diode, and the third light-emitting diode, when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the first substrate.
Zhou teaches replacing dyes within color filters with quantum dots (¶4).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to replace the dyes of the color filters 14R, 14G, and 14B of Hiraga with quantum dots that emit light of the same color as the filters were allowing to pass, quantum dots have good color purity and help solve brightness loss (Zhou: ¶4).
This results in modified Hiraga teaching a first quantum dot layer (14R; Fig. 2) disposed in the first bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a second wavelength band (Zhou: ¶4);
a second quantum dot layer (14G; Fig. 2) disposed in the second bank opening and which converts light of a wavelength belonging to the first wavelength band to light of a wavelength belonging to a third wavelength band (Zhou: ¶4).
Zhou also teaches that light-emitting diodes may emit either white or blue light (¶¶165-166).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the light-emitting diodes of modified Hiraga such that they emit blue instead of white light as blue light is known to effectively excite quantum dots (Zhou: ¶162), and blue and white light are known alternatives when utilizing quantum dot layers for light emission (¶¶148-149, 165-166).
Lin teaches forming organic capping layers (314; Fig. 9) over a first quantum dot layer (306 on the left; Fig. 8) and a second quantum dot layer (306 in the center; Fig. 9), wherein the organic capping layers are disposed in bank openings (left and center bank openings of 604; Fig. 9).
Ichihashi teaches forming a bank (19; Fig. 1) such that the thickness is greater than that of color affecting layers within openings in the bank (¶84).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form capping layers, as taught by Lin, respectively within the first bank opening and the second bank opening that contact the first and second quantum dot layers, to cut out blue light that would otherwise affect the color purity of light emitting from the first and second bank openings (Lin: ¶56).
Additionally, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the bank layer such that it is thicker than the combination of the capping layers from Lin, and the quantum dot layers, of modified Hiraga, as this prevents color mixing (Ichihashi: ¶84).
Doing so ensures that the first organic capping layer is disposed in the second bank opening and covers the second quantum dot layer.
Yamazaki teaches that a yellow color filter may be formed using an organic resin (¶168).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the capping layers taught by Lin, such that they are organic capping layers, as an organic resin is a material known to be used to form yellow color filters, and Lin does not describe a particular material composition for the capping layers. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). "Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
This results in the first capping layer being a first organic capping layer.
Park teaches forming an inorganic capping layer (CP1; Fig. 7, ¶194) covering a bank layer (BNK2; Fig. 7).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form an inorganic capping layer as taught by Park such that it covers the bank layer of modified Hiraga, as this prevents contamination of the underlying layers (¶194), which include the first quantum dot layer and the first organic capping layer of modified Hiraga.
Chen teaches that quantum dot layers may have a thickness between 3 µm and 130 µm (¶26).
Seo teaches forming a capping layer (yellow color filter; ¶301) with a thickness of 0.80 µm (¶301).
Yoon teaches forming an inorganic capping layer with a thickness of 1 µm (¶¶70, 72).
As Ichihashi teaches that the bank layer may have a thickness greater than the combined thickness of the quantum dot layers, the organic capping layers, and the inorganic capping layer (Ichihashi: ¶84), and these thicknesses produce layers predictably capable of performing their intended functions, a PHOSITA would find it obvious that there would be space left to fill within the bank openings when utilizing these thicknesses. See also In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436 and In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257.
Kim teaches forming a low-refractive index layer (140; Fig. 12) on a capping layer (171; Fig. 12), which is on a first and second quantum dot layer (150R and 150G; Fig. 12).
Though Kim does not describe the material of the low-refractive index layer 140, another low-refractive index layer 240 is described as being made from an organic material (¶62). A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the low-refractive index layer 140 of Kim using the organic material taught for another, as such a material is suitable for forming a low-refractive index layer. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). "Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig-saw puzzle." 325 U.S. at 335, 65 USPQ at 301.). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the organic low-refractive index layer 140 as taught by Kim on the inorganic capping layer of modified Hiraga, such that it fills the first, second, and third bank openings of modified Hiraga, as organic low-refractive layers improve the color conversion efficiency of quantum dot layers (Kim: ¶62), and there is room within the bank openings to fill (see discussion around Chen, Seo, Yoon, and Ichihashi above).
Kim also teaches forming an inorganic protective layer (172; Fig. 12).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to also form the inorganic protective layer 172 of Kim on the organic low-refractive index layer of modified Hiraga, as taught by Kim, in order to protect underlying layers from water or high-temperature processes (Kim: ¶105).
Bae teaches that quantum dots layers (LCP1+LCP2; Fig. 7) may also be utilized with a color filter layer (CFL; Fig. 7, ¶62), where the color filter layer is formed on a second substrate (ENC; Fig. 7, ¶62) that has a first, second, and third filter opening (Fig. 7 markup) overlapping respectively with a first, second, and third light-emitting diode, (LD1, LD2, and LD3; Fig. 7).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to stack a color filter layer as taught by Bae over the quantum dot layers of modified Hiraga, as this allows for further control over the color of light emitted from a particular device region.
Kim teaches that a color filter layer may be formed either on a second substrate (210; Fig. 10) and then bonded, or deposited as part of a series of depositions on a first substrate (110; Fig. 12, ¶¶167-168).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious then to have the color filter layer of Bae formed directly on, and therefore contacting, the inorganic protective layer of modified Hiraga, as sequential deposition on the inorganic protective layer rather than deposition on a second substrate is an alternative method of forming a color filter layer over quantum dot layers. See Ruiz v. AB Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270.
Bae teaches forming the color filter layer with a first, second, and third filter opening (See Bae’s Fig. 12 markup below).
Furthermore, Kim teaches aligning the color filter layer such that in either method of forming the color filter layer, the color filters are disposed over their respective color’s light emitting area and diodes (Fig. 10 and 12).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to align the color filter layers of Bae such that the first, second, and third filter openings respectively overlap the first, second, and third light-emitting diodes, when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the first substrate, as this allows for light emitted from each diode to be appropriately filtered to produce an RGB display, as intended by Hiraga (Hiraga: Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
281
984
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Seki et al. (US 2005/01864063) teaches using CH4 plasma to from a lyophobic surface (¶184).
Ghosh et al. (US 2018/0269260) teaches that not all color subpixels require a color filter, and that if only one needs improvement then only one color filter may be used (¶97).
Wang (US 2021/0399265) teaches that radius of curvature for a light transmitting layer 400 is adjustable (¶64).
Tanaka et al. (US 2020/0013839) teaches ink drying (Fig. 11A-11C).
Park et al. (US 2021/0074769) teaches that the rate of drying determines curvature (¶265).
Kang et al. (US 2021/0359010) teaches height reduction through volatilization (¶111).
Kwon et al. (US 2021/0408135) teaches forming two quantum dot layers within a bank opening (Fig. 5C), and that the amount deposited in each deposition cycle may be adjusted as needed (¶111).
Lee et al. (US 2022/0028932) teaches a color filter layer (Fig. 23).
Chen (US 2024/0047626) teaches controlling the thickness of a color filter (¶62).
Mei (US 2024/0224598) teaches lyophilic and lyophobic coatings (¶¶85, 99).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher A Schodde whose telephone number is (571)270-1974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 1000-1800 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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571)272-2339. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A. SCHODDE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898