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 .
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: DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING PARTITION AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Choung et. Al. (US 20220077257 A1 hereinafter Choung).
Regarding claim 1, Choung teaches in Figs. 1A 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 overalapping 108A) (See anotated 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 overalapping 108A or portion overlapping portion of 110B contacting 118) different from the first region (See anotated 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]), 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).
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 necesarly 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 114 disposed on the upper electrode; and a sealing layer 116 disposed on the cap layer, wherein the cap layer and the sealing layer 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-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).
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights