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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed August 07, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-18, and 20-21 remain pending in the application. Claims 2-5, 7-8, 11-13, 15, and 21 remain withdrawn as being drawn to nonelected Species. Applicant timely traversed the restriction(election) requirement in the reply filed November 07, 2025, for claims 2-5, 7-8, 11-13, and 15. Examiner notified Applicant of the withdrawal of claim 21 in the Office Action filed May 14, 2026.
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, 9-10, 14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyoda et. al. (US 20140062294 A1), hereinafter Toyoda, in view of Hanawa et. al. (US 20150097168 A1), hereinafter Hanawa, in further view of Jian et. al. (CN 110957348 A), hereinafter Jian.
Regarding claim 1, Toyoda teaches a display device (Fig 1 EL display device 100, [0017]), comprising: a substrate (Fig 1 substrate 1, [0018]); a plurality of light-emitting units (Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7), disposed on the substrate, wherein the plurality of light-emitting units (Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7) comprise a first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) and a second light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11R) adjacent to the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) along a first direction (Fig 1 left/right direction); a spacer layer (Fig 1 pixel separation films 5, [0021]), disposed on the substrate (Fig 1 substrate 1, [0018]), the spacer layer (Fig 1 pixel separation films 5, [0021]) comprising a first spacer pattern (See first annotated figure), a second spacer pattern (See first annotated figure), a third spacer pattern (See first annotated figure), a first opening (See first annotated figure), and a second opening (See first annotated figure), wherein the first opening (See first annotated figure) is disposed between the first spacer pattern (See first annotated figure) and the second spacer pattern (See first annotated figure) along the first direction (See first annotated figure), and the second opening (See first annotated figure) is disposed between the second spacer pattern (See first annotated figure) and the third spacer pattern (See first annotated figure) along the first direction (Fig 1 left/right direction), wherein the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) is disposed in the first opening (See first annotated figure), the second light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11R) is disposed in the second opening (See first annotated figure), and the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) and the second light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11R) are separated by the second spacer pattern (See first annotated figure)
PNG
media_image1.png
530
879
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; a plurality of color filter units (Fig 1 color filters 11R, 11G, and 11B, [0026]), disposed on the plurality of light-emitting units (Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7) and comprising a first color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11G, [0026]) and a second color unit (Fig 1 color filter 11R, [0026]), wherein the first color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11G, [0026]) is overlapped with the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) and the second color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11R, [0026]) is overlapped with the second light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11R); a protecting layer (Fig 1 second substrate 9, [0025]), disposed on the plurality of color filter units (Fig 1 color filters 11R, 11G, and 11B, [0026]), wherein the display device has zero brightness when viewed along a second direction (Fig 1 direction parallel with the top surface of second substrate 9), a normal direction (Fig 1 up/down) is defined by a direction perpendicular to the substrate (Fig 1 substrate 1, [0018]), a maximum light- emitting angle θ2 is defined by an angle included between the second direction (Fig 1 direction parallel with the top surface of second substrate 9) and the normal direction (Fig 1 up/down), wherein a pitch P (See second annotated figure) is formed between the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) and the second light emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11R) along the first direction (Fig 1 left/right direction), the protecting layer has a refractive index n1 (not listed; however, glass is used for protecting layer so the refractive index is known, [0031]), the first color filter unit has a width WCF (Fig 2 ½ width of the black matrix, WBM + width of aperture area, WB + ½ width of the black matrix, WBM, [0030]) along the first direction (Fig 2 left-right direction), a light-emitting layer (Fig 1 EL layer 6, [0018]) of the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) has a width WL (Fig 2 width of aperture area, WB, [0030]) along the first direction (Fig 2 left-right direction), and the first color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11G, [0026]) has a thickness HCF (Fig 2 thickness of the black matrix, HBM + thickness of the color filter 11B, HB, [0030]) along the normal direction (Fig 1 up/down), a distance H (Fig 2 distance between a front surface of the pixel separation film 5 and a rear surface of the color filter 11B, HG, [0030]) is formed between the first light-emitting unit (Fig 1 light emitting unit under color filter 11G) and the first color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11G, [0026]) along the normal direction (Fig 1 up/down), and the display device (Fig 1 EL display device 100, [0017]).
Toyoda fails to teach an anti-reflection layer disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the plurality of color filter units; and a first adhesive layer, disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the anti- reflection layer, wherein the first adhesive laver is attached to the first spacer pattern, the second spacer pattern and the third spacer pattern, and the parameters satisfies the inequation:
2
*
tan
sin
-
1
sin
θ
2
n
1
*
H
C
F
+
H
+
W
L
≤
W
C
F
≤
1
2
*
P
.
However, Toyoda teaches a display that satisfies the inequation taught in claim 1 to reduce the degradation of image quality due to color mixing ([0007]). Further, the parameters of the inequation of Toyoda have similar parameters to that of the instant invention. Hanawa teaches that as the pixel pitch is reduced the possibility of color mixing increases ([0082]-[0083]). The parameters of the inequation are therefore a result-effective variables.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to vary, through routine optimization, the parameters of the inequation as Toyoda and Hanwa has identified the parameters of the inequation as a result-effective variable. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the inequation:
2
*
tan
sin
-
1
sin
θ
2
n
1
*
H
C
F
+
H
+
W
L
≤
W
C
F
≤
1
2
*
P
, in order to achieve the desired balance between the pixel density and color fidelity, as taught by Toyoda and Hanawa. MPEP 2144.05.
Furthermore, the applicant has not presented persuasive evidence that the claimed inequation is for a particular purpose that is critical to the overall claimed invention (i.e., that the invention would not work without the specific claimed inequation).
Toyoda and Hanawa fail to teach an anti-reflection layer disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the plurality of color filter units; and a first adhesive layer, disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the anti- reflection layer, wherein the first adhesive laver is attached to the first spacer pattern, the second spacer pattern and the third spacer pattern.
However, Jian teaches an anti-reflection layer (Fig 10 antireflective layer 15, [0091] of translation), disposed between (Fig 10) the plurality of light-emitting units (Fig 10 not shown located in display device 11, [0052] of translation corresponds to Toyoda: Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7) and the plurality of color filter units (Fig 10 color filter 16, [0091] of translation corresponds to Toyoda: Fig 1 color filters 11R, 11G, and 11B, [0026]); and a first adhesive layer (not shown, the color filter 16 and anti-reflection layer 15 are first formed and then bonded to the display device 11 with an optically transparent adhesive, [0071]), disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units (Fig 10 not shown located in display device 11, [0052] of translation corresponds to Toyoda: Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7) and the anti- reflection layer (Fig 10 antireflective layer 15, [0091] of translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Toyoda and Hanawa to incorporate the teachings of Jian by having an anti-reflection layer, disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the plurality of color filter units. This would absorb most of the ambient light reducing the reflection of the ambient light by the cathode of the light-emitting units ([0091] of translation).
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Toyoda and Hanawa to incorporate the teachings of Jian by having an anti-reflection layer, disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the plurality of color filter units; and a first adhesive layer, disposed between the plurality of light-emitting units and the anti- reflection layer. The anti-reflection layer would absorb most of the ambient light reducing the reflection of the ambient light by the cathode of the light-emitting units ([0091] of translation). The first adhesive layer would allow for simplifying the manufacturing process ([0072] of translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in disposing a first adhesive layer between the plurality of light-emitting units and the anti- reflection layer in the modified structure of Toyoda; the first adhesive laver would be attached to the first spacer pattern, the second spacer pattern and the third spacer pattern since the spacer patterns are located adjacent to the light-emitting units on a similar level.
PNG
media_image2.png
548
772
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Toyoda as modified in claim 1 teaches the anti-reflection layer (Jian: Fig 10 antireflective layer 15, [0091] of translation) is a light-absorbing layer (Jian: absorbs ambient light, [0091] of translation), and the light-absorbing layer (Jian: Fig 10 antireflective layer 15, [0091] of translation) is continuously disposed on (Jian: Fig 10) the plurality of light-emitting units (Toyoda: Fig 1 light emitting units are lower electrodes 4, EL layer 6, and upper electrode 7).
Regarding claim 10, Toyoda as modified in claim 9 teaches the light-absorbing layer (Jian: Fig 10 antireflective layer 15, [0091] of translation) comprises an encapsulation layer (Jian: Fig 10 antireflective layer 15 includes an optically transparent adhesive layer, [0059] of translation) and a plurality of light-absorbing particles (Jian: Fig 10 light-absorbing nanoparticles 17, [0059] of translation) disposed in (Jian: [0059] of translation) the encapsulation layer (Jian: Fig 10 antireflective layer 15 includes an optically transparent adhesive layer, [0059] of translation).
Regarding claim 16, Toyoda as modified in claim 1 teaches a light-shielding layer (Toyoda: Fig 1 black matrix 10, [0025]), disposed between (Toyoda: Fig 1) the plurality of color filter units (Toyoda: Fig 1 color filters 11R, 11G, and 11B, [0026]).
Regarding claim 17, Toyoda as modified in claim 16 fails to teach a thickness of the light-shielding layer is equal to the thickness HCF of the first color filter unit.
However, Hanawa teaches a thickness of the light-shielding layer (Fig 3 black matrix layer 20, [0072] corresponds to Toyoda: Fig 1 black matrix 10, [0025]) is equal to the thickness HCF of the first color filter unit (Fig 3 color filter layers 20G, [0072] corresponds to Toyoda: Fig 1 color filters 11G, [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Toyoda to incorporate the teachings of Hanawa by having a thickness of the light-shielding layer is equal to the thickness HCF. This would aid to improve image quality ([0005]).
Regarding claim 18, Toyoda as modified in claim 1 teaches the width WCF of the first color filter unit (Fig 1 color filter 11G, [0026]) (Toyoda: Fig 2 ½ width of the black matrix, WBM + width of aperture area, WB + ½ width of the black matrix, WBM, [0030]) is greater than or equal (Toyoda: Fig 2) to the width WL of the first light-emitting unit (Toyoda: Fig 2 width of aperture area, WB, [0030]).
Regarding claim 20, Toyoda as modified in claim 14 fails to teach the distance H is a sum of thicknesses of the anti-reflection layer, the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer.
However, Toyoda teaches a distance between a front surface of the pixel separation film 5 and a rear surface of the color filter (Fig 2 HG, [0030]). Further, Toyoda teaches HG contains a sealing layer. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that in placing an anti-reflection layer, first adhesive layer and second adhesive layer in between the color filter and light-emitting units, the separation distance would also include the components. MPEP2144(I)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyoda et. al. (US 20140062294 A1), hereinafter Toyoda, in view of Hanawa et. al. (US 20150097168 A1), hereinafter Hanawa, in further view of Jian et. al. (CN 110957348 A), hereinafter Jian, with supporting evidence from Kishimoto et. al. (US 20210333934 A1), hereinafter Kishimoto.
Toyoda as modified in claim 1 fails to teach a second adhesive layer, wherein at least a portion of the second adhesive layer is disposed between the anti-reflection layer and the plurality of color filter units.
However, Jian teaches forming the anti-reflection layer as a discrete component to be placed later ([0059] of translation). Further, Jian teaches bonding a secondary substrate containing a color filter and anti-reflection layer to a first substrate with light emitting units ([0071]). Kishimoto teaches it was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that individual components can be bonded to each other (Fig 4A, [0084]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to have a second adhesive layer, wherein at least a portion of the second adhesive layer is disposed between the anti-reflection layer and the plurality of color filter units to further simplify the manufacturing process by having producing different components separately and then bonding them together. MPEP2144(I)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see 35 USC §112 section on page 11, filed August 07, 2026, with respect to amendments to overcome the 35 USC §112 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC §112 rejection of independent claim 1 and dependent claims has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see distinguishing technical feature (1) section on page 11, filed August 07, 2026, with respect to Toyoda not teaching amended distinguishing technical feature (1) of claim 1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the spacer pattern being disposed to separate the EL layer and no adhesive layer attached to the pixel separation film 5) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The claim as written allows for the first and second light-emitting units being disposed in the first and second openings, respectively; there being no requirement for the light-emitting units to be separated and disposed in their respective openings. The light-emitting units are separated by the spacer patterns.
Regarding the first adhesive layer being attached to the spacer patterns, there is no requirement that the first adhesive layer is directly attached to the spacer patterns. The first adhesive layer is attached to the layers on the spacer patterns, which themselves are attached to the spacer patterns.
Applicant's arguments, see distinguishing technical feature (2) section on page 13, filed August 07, 2026, with respect to Toyoda not teaching amended distinguishing technical feature (2) of claim 1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the limitation involving the maximum light emitting angle of the instant invention being different from that of the prior art) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The limitation as written does not specify a point of reference for determining the maximum light emitting angle (i.e., the top most surface of the light emitting device in the case of the instant invention versus the surface of the light-emitting layer in the case of Toyoda).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Eisuke et. al. (JP2021161401A) teaches the light-emitting units may be placed completely within partition walls. This would allow for additional layers to be placed directly on the partition walls and light-emitting units.
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN L LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm (ET).
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, STEVEN GAUTHIER can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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.
/ALVIN L LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights