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The objection to the specification has been withdrawn in view of the amendments filed 08/05/2026.
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 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 of this title, 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 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choung et. Al. (US 20220077257 A1 hereinafter Choung) and further in view of Ochi et. Al. (US 20190363275 A1 hereinafter Ochi).
Regarding claim 1, Choung teaches in Figs. 1A or 1B with associated text a display device comprising: a base 102; a lower electrode 104 disposed in a first region on the base (Fig. 1A on left side [0027]); a rib 126 covering a part of the lower electrode and including an aperture (opening exposing lower electrode) overlapping the first region (region overlapping 108A) (See annotated Fig. below [0027]); a partition 110 including a lower portion 110A disposed on the rib and an upper portion 110B protruding from a side surface of the lower portion (Fig. 1A, [0030] and [0040]), which compartmentalizes the first region and a second region (region overlapping 108A or portion overlapping portion of 110B contacting 118) adjacent to the first region (See annotated Fig. below [0027]); an organic layer (112 of 108A) disposed in the first region and in contact with the lower electrode via the aperture (Fig. 1A, [0033]); and an upper electrode (114 of 108b) disposed on the organic layer (Fig. 1A, [0033]); a sealing layer (116 of Fig. 1A or 122 of Fig. 1B) disposed on the upper electrode (Fig. 1A, [0034]); and a layer 118 covering the sealing layer (Fig. 1A, [0036]), wherein the organic layer and the upper electrode are not disposed in the second region (while there is an organic layer and upper electrode in 108b these are separated from and formed at a different time than those formed in 108a and so are interpreted to be different layers Fig. 1A and Figs. 4E-4W the claim would not necessarily require that no organic layer and upper electrode is in the second region furthermore it is noted that structure in the step shown in of Fig. 4Q would read on the claim as well), and the layer is in contact with the rib in the second region (Fig. 1A and see annotated Fig. below).
Choung does not specify the layer is a resin layer however Choung teaches using an inkjet acrylic material [0036] for the layer.
Ochi discloses in Fig. 1 with associated text a layer 31 similar to that of Choung that is an acrylic resin [0091].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a resin as taught by Ochi for the inkjet acrylic layer of Choung because according to Ochi a photosensitive resin, such as an acrylic resin, an epoxy resin, or a silicon resin can be used as the organic material, as the liquid organic material, the organic layer 32 can be formed, for example, by performing ink-jet application of an ink including this type of photosensitive resin onto the first inorganic layer 31, and then performing ultraviolet (UV) curing [0091] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use “resin”, since 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
270
757
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Choung teaches the first and second regions are disposed in respective positions overlapping a light-receiving element 118 that receives light via the display device (light passe into 118 from the OLEDs so that 118 is interpreted to be a light receiving element the claim would not necessarily require for example a light detecting element).
Regarding claim 3, Choung teaches the rib does not include an aperture overlapping the second region (portion overlapping portion of 110B contacting 118).
Regarding claim 4, Choung teaches a cap layer (116 of Fig. 1B) disposed between the upper electrode and the sealing layer (here the sealing layer is interpreted to be 122 of Fig. 1B); wherein the cap layer and the sealing layer are not disposed in the second region (while there is an organic layer sealing layer capping layer and upper electrode in 108b these are separated from and formed at a different time than those formed in 108a and so are interpreted to be different layers Fig. 1A and Figs. 4E-4O the claim would not necessarily require that no organic layer and upper electrode is in the second region furthermore it is noted that structure in the step shown in of Fig. Q would read on the claim as well).
Claim 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choung et. Al. in view of Ochi and further in view of Choung et. Al. (US 11348983 B1 hereinafter Choung983).
Regarding claim 6, Choung in view of Ochi teaches the display device of claim 1.
Choung does not specify the resin layer is in contact with the upper portion and the lower portion in the second region.
Choung983 discloses in Fig. 1 with associated text a layer 120 similar to the resin of Choung that is in contact with an upper portion 110B and the lower portion 110A in a second region (region occupied by (110A and 110B) (Fig. 1A; col. 7, lines 21-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a resin structure as taught by Choung983 in the device of Choung in view of Ochi because according to Choung983 a global encapsulation layer 120 may be disposed over the encapsulation layer 116, in one example, as shown in FIG. 1A, the global encapsulation layer is conformal to the cathode 114 and the overhang structures 110, the global encapsulation layer may include an inkjet sublayer 118a and a global encapsulation sublayer 118b. The inkjet sublayer 118a may include an acrylic material (col. 7, lines 21-29) so that such a material would be suitable for an encapsulating structure, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teachings of Choung, Ochi and Choung983, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the arguments on pages 6-7 Choung teaches a layer 118 covering the sealing layer (Fig. 1A, [0036]), wherein the layer is in contact with the rib in the second region (Fig. 1A and see annotated Fig. above) Ochi is relied upon for using a resin for the layer particularly and Choung 983 for the resin contacting the first portion (see the rejections of claims 1 and 6 above).
Conclusion
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 AARON J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-7629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Toledo Fernando can be reached on 5712721867. 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.
/AARON J GRAY/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
