DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication filed on 25 November 2025.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 25 November 2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
Accordingly, the cited sections of Kang should not disclose or even suggest that “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view,” as now recited in amended claims 1 and 12. . . .
Chung appears to disclose a light-transmitting area but does not describe adjacent low reflection layers in a plan view. Cho appears to teach an external light reflection layer that uniformly covers the display, not two separate layers positioned side-by-side. Kang's layers 32A and 32B should be vertically stacked interference layers, not horizontally adjacent regions. Park appears to merely add housing and a cover window and does not address low reflection layer arrangement.
Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment (filed 25 November 2025) at 9 (emphasis added).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant appears to state that a reference teaching “horizontally adjacent regions” would read on the amended claim language “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view.” The Examiner respectfully asserts Chung teaches horizontally adjacent regions including the display area 100 and the light transmitting area 210, and that the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho, applied to said horizontally adjacent regions, would result in a configuration wherein the external light reflection layer 140 has a “first low reflection layer” in the display area 100 region and a “second low reflection layer” in the light transmitting area 210 (i.e., two horizontally adjacent external light reflection layer 140 regions). Chung and Cho have been interpreted accordingly in the rejection of claims 1-21, below.
Thus, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1: claim 1 states, in relevant part: “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view . . . .” The Examiner respectfully asserts that Applicant discloses only a single layer with various adjacent regions, rather than any configuration that could be considered “layers being adjacent.” Nowhere in the original disclosure does Applicant describe a configuration wherein the first and second low reflection layers form more than a single layer, which would be required for the first and second low reflection layers to be “layers being adjacent,” as recited in claim 1. See FIG. 10 of the instant application (depicting wherein the first low reflection layer AL and the second low reflection layer AL2a have lead lines drawn to the very same region and layer, as well as depicting the first low reflection layer AL2 and second low reflection layer AL2a as forming a single continuous layer); [0204] (referring to the first and second low reflection layers as “the low reflection layer AL2” collectively); see also [0111], [0179], [0197] (describing the second low reflection layer AL2a as simply a portion of the first low reflection layer AL of a particular area). Thus, claim 1 is directed to subject matter the specification fails to describe.
Claims 2-11 and 21, which depend from claim 1, are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 12: claim 12 states, in relevant part: “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view . . . .” The Examiner respectfully asserts that Applicant discloses only a single layer with various adjacent regions, rather than any configuration that could be considered “layers being adjacent.” Nowhere in the original disclosure does Applicant describe a configuration wherein the first and second low reflection layers form more than a single layer, which would be required for the first and second low reflection layers to be “layers being adjacent,” as recited in claim 12. See FIG. 10 of the instant application (depicting wherein the first low reflection layer AL and the second low reflection layer AL2a have lead lines drawn to the very same region and layer, as well as depicting the first low reflection layer AL2 and second low reflection layer AL2a as forming a single continuous layer); [0204] of the instant application (referring to the first and second low reflection layers as “the low reflection layer AL2” collectively); see also [0111], [0179], [0197] of the instant application (describing the second low reflection layer AL2a as simply a portion of the first low reflection layer AL of a particular area). Thus, claim 12 is directed to subject matter the specification fails to describe.
Claims 13-20, which depend from claim 12, are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) for the same reasons as claim 12.
Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims, or present a sufficient showing that the claims comply with the statutory requirements.
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 claimed features:
Of claim 1: wherein “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view . . . .”
Of claim 12: wherein “the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view . . . .”
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0357871 (published Nov. 12, 2020) (hereinafter “Chung”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0079567 (published Mar. 17, 2016) (hereinafter “Cho”), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2018/0011385 (published Jan. 11, 2018) (hereinafter “Kang”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Chung discloses: A display device (FIG. 1, depicting a display panel, [0031]) comprising:
a display area (FIG. 1, display area 100, [0051]) and a component area (FIG. 1, light transmitting area 210, [0051]) at least partly surrounded by the display area (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the display area 100 at least partly surrounds the light transmitting area 210);
a light-emitting device (FIG. 2, depicting a light emitting device comprising a pixel electrode 20, an organic emission layer 22, and an upper electrode 23) disposed on a substrate (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the light emitting device is disposed on a lower glass substrate 140) in the display area (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the light emitting device is disposed in the display area) and including:
a first electrode (FIG. 2, pixel electrode 20, [0077]);
an emission layer (FIG. 2, organic emission layer 22, [0078]); and
a second electrode (FIG. 2, upper electrode 23, [0080]);
a capping layer (FIG. 2, common film organic passivation layer 24, [0110]) disposed on the light-emitting device (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the common film organic passivation layer 24 is disposed on the light emitting device).
Chung does not specifically disclose wherein the display device further includes a low reflection layer, the low reflection layer disposed on the capping layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 1, display apparatus 1, [0079]) including a low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140, [0044]), wherein the low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140) is disposed on a capping layer (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the external light reflection layer 140 is disposed on a phase control layer 130, [0050]). Regarding the external light reflection layer 140, in [0046], Cho states: “Therefore, a portion of a light incident from outside may be primarily absorbed by the external light reflection layer 140, and thus reflection of external light may be prevented or reduced.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung by adding the external light reflection layer of Cho such that the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho would be disposed on the common film organic passivation layer 24 and would overlap the entire display, including the display area 100 and the light-transmitting area 210 of Chung (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the external light reflection 140 layer overlaps the entire display, including emission areas and non-emission areas, [0043]) in order to prevent or reduce the reflection of external light. See Cho [0046].
Moreover, the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho, added to the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140) includes a first low reflection layer overlapping the display area in a plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) and a second low reflection layer overlapping the component area in a plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”), the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the display area 100 and light transmitting area 210are adjacent to each other in a plan view, such that the portions of the external light reflection layer 140 in those areas would be adjacent to each other).
Chung in view of Cho does not specifically disclose wherein the second low reflection layer includes an inorganic oxide.
In the same field of endeavor, Kang discloses a low reflection layer (FIG. 3, multilayer low reflection layer 30, [0048]), wherein the low reflection layer includes an inorganic oxide (FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti), a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/titanium (Ti)/indium zinc oxide (IZO)/titanium (Ti), or a stack structure of copper (Cu)/indium tin oxide (ITO)/copper oxide (Cu2O).”). Regarding the multilayer low reflection layer 30, in [0063]-[0065], Kang states: “Supposing that a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the pixel-defining layer 40 and the top layer 32B of the upper layer 32 is P1, a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the top layer 32B and the bottom layer 32A of the upper layer 32 is P2, and a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the upper layer 32 and the lower layer 31 is P3, refractive indexes and thicknesses of the layers 32A and 32B included in the upper layer 32 may be adjusted, thereby allowing light due to path differences of P1, P2, and P3 to be offset from each other. That is, reflectance of light incident from outside of a display apparatus may be reduced by the upper layer 32 above the lower layer 31,” the result being increased destructive interference of light due to path differences of P1/P2/P3. See Kang [0065].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung and the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho by substituting the single layer configuration of the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho for the multilayer configuration of the low reflection layer 30 of Kang in order to reduce reflectance of light incident from outside the display. See Kang [0063]-[0065].
Moreover, the multilayer configuration of the low reflection layer 32 of Kang, substituted for the configuration of the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho in the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) would include an inorganic oxide (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti), a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/titanium (Ti)/indium zinc oxide (IZO)/titanium (Ti), or a stack structure of copper (Cu)/indium tin oxide (ITO)/copper oxide (Cu2O).”)
Chung in view of Kang does not specifically disclose an encapsulation layer disposed on the first low reflection layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 1, display apparatus 1, [0079]) including an encapsulation layer (FIGS. 1/2, thin-film encapsulating layer 150, [0051]) disposed over a low reflection layer (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 is disposed over the external light reflection layer 140, which is disposed over the , [0044]). Regarding the thin-film encapsulating layer 150, in [0052]-[0053], Cho states: “The inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e are configured to prevent or reduce penetration of external moisture and/or oxygen into the intermediate layers 121 a, 121 b, and 121 c. . . . The organic layers 150 b and 150 d are configure to lower or reduce internal stresses of the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e, cover defects of the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e, and planarize the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung including the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang by adding the thin film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho over the external the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang in order to prevent or reduce penetration of external moisture and/or oxygen. See Cho [0052]-[0053].
Moreover, the thin film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho, added to the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the encapsulation layer (Cho FIGS. 1/2, thin-film encapsulating layer 150, disposed on the external light reflection 140 layer, overlaps the entire display, including emission areas and non-emission areas) is disposed on the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”).
The FIG. 2 embodiment of Chung does not specifically disclose wherein the display device includes a reflection adjusting layer disposed on the encapsulation layer.
In the FIG. 18 embodiment of the display panel of Chung, however, Chung discloses wherein the display device (FIG. 18, depicting a display panel, [0212]) includes a reflection adjusting layer (FIG. 18, anti-reflection layers 231, [0213]) disposed over the light-emitting device (FIG. 18, pixel PX, [0163]: “[P]ixel PX including the thin film transistor and the organic light emitting element in the display area 100.”). Regarding the anti-reflection layers 231, in [0214], Chung states: “The loss of the light is reduced in the boundary surface of the upper glass substrate 150 and the air layer 235 due to the low reflection layers 231 in the light-transmitting area 210, and the loss of the light is reduced in the boundary surface of the air layer 235 and the window 200, thereby improving the light transmittance.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung, Cho, and Chang, including the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho, by adding the anti-reflection layers 231 such that the antireflection layers 231 are disposed on the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 in order to improve the light transmittance of the display panel. See Chung [0214].
Regarding claim 2, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) includes an inorganic material (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)), and an absorption coefficient k of the inorganic oxide is less than a corresponding absorption coefficient k of the inorganic material (Kang FIG. 3, in [0068], Kang discloses identical materials to that of the instant disclosure (e.g., aluminum and aluminum oxide for the first and second low reflection layers), and thus the properties of the materials are the same). See MPEP § 2112.01(I) (“Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”) (citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (C.C.P.A. 1977)).
Regarding claim 3, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein an absorption coefficient k of the inorganic oxide is equal to or less than about 0.5 (Kang FIG. 3, in [0068], Kang discloses identical materials to that of the instant disclosure (e.g., aluminum and aluminum oxide for the first and second low reflection layers)). See MPEP § 2112.01(I) (“Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”) (citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (C.C.P.A. 1977)).
Regarding claim 4, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) includes a metal oxide (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 5, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) includes an inorganic material, and the inorganic material is bismuth (Bi), ytterbium (Yb), cobalt (Co), molybdenum (Mo), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), zirconium (Zr), aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), niobium (Nb), platinum (Pt), tungsten (W), indium (In), tin (Sn), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), tantalum (Ta), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), germanium (Ge), silver (Ag), magnesium (Mg), gold (Au), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), or a combination thereof (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 6, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the inorganic oxide is Bi2O3, MoO2, MoO3, Ta2O5, NbO2, SnO2, ZrO2, HfO2, F2O3, ZnO, ITO, CdO, SiO2, TiO2, Al2O3, Y2O3, BeO, MgO, PbO2, WO3, SiNx, LiF, CaF2, MgF2, CdS, or a combination thereof (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 7, to the extent claim 7 claims process limitations, the Examiner respectfully notes that claim 7 is directed to a product. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP § 2113(I) (quoting In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). Moreover, “because validity is determined based on the requirements of patentability, a patent is invalid if a product made by the process recited in a product-by-process claim is anticipated by or obvious from prior art products, even if those prior art products are made by different processes.” MPEP § 2113(I) (quoting Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., 580 F.3d 1340, 1370 n. 14 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
In the instant case, the claimed process step wherein “the second low reflection layer is formed based on an oxidation treatment according to at least one of irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, and a plasma process” does not appear to impart or imply any distinctive structural characteristics to the final display device, and the claimed display device product is capable of definition other than by the process steps by which it is made. See MPEP § 2113(I) (citing In re Garnero, 412 F.2d 276 (CCPA 1979) and In re Nordt Dev. Co., 881 F.3d 1371, 1375-76 (Fed. Cir. 2018)). Accordingly, the claimed process step wherein “the second low reflection layer is formed based on an oxidation treatment according to at least one of irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, and a plasma process” has not been given any patentable weight, insofar as claim 7 claims a process, technique, or steps of formation via oxidation treatment, including irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, or plasma process.
Accordingly, Chung in view of Cho and Kang disclose the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”).
Regarding claim 8, Chung in view of Kang does not specifically disclose wherein the display device further includes: a light blocking layer disposed between the encapsulation layer and the reflection adjusting layer, and having an opening overlapping the emission layer in the plan view.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 4, display apparatus 2, [0074]) including a light blocking layer (FIG. 4, black matrix 160, [0056]) disposed on an encapsulation layer (FIG. 4, thin film encapsulating layer 150, [0056]) and having an opening overlapping an emission layer in a plan view (FIG. 4, depicting wherein the black matrix 160 includes openings overlapping the intermediate layers 121a-c, which include organic emission layers, [0036]). Regarding the black matrix 160, in [0059], Cho states: “The organic light emitting display apparatus 1 according to exemplary embodiments may efficiently prevent or reduce reflection of an external light using double prevention units including the external light reflection layer 140 and the black matrix 160 in the non-emission area NA.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung including the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang and the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho by adding the black matrix 160 of Cho over the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho and under the anti-reflection layer 231 of Chung, such that the black matrix 160 is disposed between the encapsulating layer 150 and the anti-reflection layer 231 and such that the black matrix 160 includes openings overlapping the organic emission layer 22 of Chung in a plan view, in order further prevent or reduce reflection of external light from the non-emission areas of the display panel. See Cho [0059].
Regarding claim 9, Chung in view of Cho does not specifically disclose wherein the display device further includes: a first conductive layer disposed on the encapsulation layer; a first touch insulating layer disposed on the first conductive layer; a second conductive layer disposed on the first touch insulating layer; and a second touch insulating layer disposed on the second conductive layer.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Kang discloses a display device (FIG. 8, depicting a display apparatus, [0072]) including a touch panel portion TP including a first conductive layer (FIG. 8, detection electrode 80, [0075]) disposed on an encapsulation layer (FIG. 8, depicting wherein the detection electrode 80 is disposed on a thin film encapsulation layer 70, [0073]); a first touch insulating layer (FIG. 8, insulating layer 90) disposed on the first conductive layer (FIG. 8, depicting wherein the insulating layer 90 is disposed on the detection electrode 80); a second conductive layer (FIG. 8, bridge 84, [0074]) disposed on the first touch insulating layer (FIG. 8, depicting wherein the bridge 84 is disposed on the insulating layer 90); and a second touch insulating layer (FIG. 8, passivation layer 100, [0118]) disposed on the second conductive layer (FIG. 8, depicting wherein the passivation layer 100 is disposed on the bridge 84). Regarding the touch panel TP, in [0074], Kang states: “The display apparatus according to an example embodiment may further include the touch panel TP for detecting a touch of a user. The touch panel TP may include the detection electrode 80 detecting a touch signal and including a plurality of conductive lines in a grid shape . . . .”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung including the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang and the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho by adding the touch panel TP of Kang such that the touch panel TP is disposed on the thin film encapsulation layer TFEL, in order detect user touch, thereby enabling the display panel with touch sensing functionality. See Kang [0074].
Regarding claim 10, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the display device (Chung FIG. 1, depicting a display panel, [0031]) further includes: an optical element (FIG. 2, optical member 10, [0053]) overlapping the component area in the plan view (FIGS. 1/2, depicting wherein the optical member 10 overlaps the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view), wherein the optical element is disposed on a rear side of the substrate (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the optical member 10 is disposed on a rear side of the lower glass substrate 140).
Regarding claim 11, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein a thickness of the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) is about 1 nm to about 100 nm (Cho FIG. 1, [0047]: “Thickness t2 of the external light reflection layer 140 may be less than or equal to 0.01 μm.”). See MPEP § 2144.05(I) (“A prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.”)(quoting In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 U.S.P.Q.2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).
Regarding claim 21, Chung in view of Cho and Kang further discloses wherein the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) is only in the component area (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view forming a “second low reflection layer” is only in the light transmitting area 210) and has an absorption coefficient k equal to or less than about 0.5 (Kang FIG. 3, in [0068], Kang discloses identical materials to that of the instant disclosure (e.g., aluminum and aluminum oxide for the first and second low reflection layers)). See MPEP § 2112.01(I) (“Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”) (citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (C.C.P.A. 1977)).
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Chung, Cho, and Kang, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0208761 (published July 8, 2021) (hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding independent claim 12, Chung discloses: An electronic device comprising:
a display panel (FIG. 1, depicting a display panel, [0031]) including a display area (FIG. 1, display area 100, [0051]) and a component area (FIG. 1, light transmitting area 210, [0051]) surrounded by the display area (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the display area 100 surrounds the light transmitting area 210); and
an optical element (FIG. 2, optical member 10, [0053]) disposed on a rear side of the display panel (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the optical member 10 is disposed on a rear side of the lower glass substrate 140) and overlapping the component area in a plan view (FIGS. 1/2, depicting wherein the optical member 10 overlaps the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view),
wherein the display panel (FIG. 1, depicting a display panel) includes:
a light-emitting device (FIG. 2, depicting a light emitting device comprising a pixel electrode 20, an organic emission layer 22, and an upper electrode 23) overlapping the display area in a plan view (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the light emitting device overlaps the display area 100 in a plan view, [0163]) and including
a first electrode (FIG. 2, pixel electrode 20, [0077]),
an emission layer (FIG. 2, organic emission layer 22, [0078]), and
a second electrode (FIG. 2, upper electrode 23, [0080]),
a capping layer (FIG. 2, common film organic passivation layer 24, [0110]) disposed on the light-emitting device (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the common film organic passivation layer 24 is disposed on the light emitting device).
Chung does not specifically disclose wherein the display device comprises a housing and a cover window disposed on an upper portion of the housing, wherein the display panel is disposed on a lower portion of the cover window.
In the same field of endeavor, Park discloses a display device including a housing (FIG. 2, housing member BM, [0073]) and a cover window (FIG. 2, window member WM, [0068]) disposed on an upper portion of the housing (FIGS. 1/2, depicting wherein the window member WM is disposed on an upper portion of the housing member BM), wherein a display panel (FIG. 2, display panel EP, [0057]) is disposed on a lower portion of the cover window (FIG. 2, depicting wherein the display panel EP is configured to be disposed on a lower portion of the window member WM). Regarding the housing member and the window member, in [0068], Park states: “The window member WM is disposed on the front surface of the display panel EP to protect the display panel EP.” Park further states in [0073]: “The housing member BM stably protects the structures of the display device EA accommodated in the inner space from external impacts. The interior space of the housing member BM can accommodate the display panel EP and various components shown in FIG. 3.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung by adding the housing member BM and window member WM of Park such that the display panel is disposed on a lower portion of the window member as configured in Park, in order to protect the display panel and other components located in the housing member. See Park [0068], [0073].
Chung in view of Park does not specifically disclose wherein the display device further includes a low reflection layer, the low reflection layer disposed on the capping layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 1, display apparatus 1, [0079]) including a low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140, [0044]), wherein the low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140) is disposed on a capping layer (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the external light reflection layer 140 is disposed on a phase control layer 130, [0050]). Regarding the external light reflection layer 140, in [0046], Cho states: “Therefore, a portion of a light incident from outside may be primarily absorbed by the external light reflection layer 140, and thus reflection of external light may be prevented or reduced.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung by adding the external light reflection layer of Cho such that the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho would be disposed on the common film organic passivation layer 24 and would overlap the entire display, including the display area 100 and the light-transmitting area 210 of Chung (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the external light reflection 140 layer overlaps the entire display, including emission areas and non-emission areas, [0043]) in order to prevent or reduce the reflection of external light. See Cho [0046].
Moreover, the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho, added to the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the low reflection layer (FIG. 1, external light reflection layer 140) includes a first low reflection layer overlapping the display area in a plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) and a second low reflection layer overlapping the component area in a plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”), the first and second low reflection layers being adjacent to each other in the plan view (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the display area 100 and light transmitting area 210are adjacent to each other in a plan view, such that the portions of the external light reflection layer 140 in those areas would be adjacent to each other).
Chung in view of Park and Cho does not specifically disclose wherein the second low reflection layer includes an inorganic oxide.
In the same field of endeavor, Kang discloses a low reflection layer (FIG. 3, multilayer low reflection layer 30, [0048]), wherein the low reflection layer includes an inorganic oxide (FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti), a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/titanium (Ti)/indium zinc oxide (IZO)/titanium (Ti), or a stack structure of copper (Cu)/indium tin oxide (ITO)/copper oxide (Cu2O).”). Regarding the multilayer low reflection layer 30, in [0063]-[0065], Kang states: “Supposing that a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the pixel-defining layer 40 and the top layer 32B of the upper layer 32 is P1, a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the top layer 32B and the bottom layer 32A of the upper layer 32 is P2, and a path of light reflected from a boundary surface of the upper layer 32 and the lower layer 31 is P3, refractive indexes and thicknesses of the layers 32A and 32B included in the upper layer 32 may be adjusted, thereby allowing light due to path differences of P1, P2, and P3 to be offset from each other. That is, reflectance of light incident from outside of a display apparatus may be reduced by the upper layer 32 above the lower layer 31,” the result being increased destructive interference of light due to path differences of P1/P2/P3. See Kang [0065].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung and the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho by substituting the single layer configuration of the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho for the multilayer configuration of the low reflection layer 30 of Kang in order to reduce reflectance of light incident from outside the display. See Kang [0063]-[0065].
Moreover, the multilayer configuration of the low reflection layer 32 of Kang, substituted for the configuration of the external light reflection layer 140 of Cho in the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) would include an inorganic oxide (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti), a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/titanium (Ti)/indium zinc oxide (IZO)/titanium (Ti), or a stack structure of copper (Cu)/indium tin oxide (ITO)/copper oxide (Cu2O).”)
Chung in view of Park and Kang does not specifically disclose an encapsulation layer disposed on the first low reflection layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 1, display apparatus 1, [0079]) including an encapsulation layer (FIGS. 1/2, thin-film encapsulating layer 150, [0051]) disposed over a low reflection layer (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 is disposed over the external light reflection layer 140, which is disposed over the , [0044]). Regarding the thin-film encapsulating layer 150, in [0052]-[0053], Cho states: “The inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e are configured to prevent or reduce penetration of external moisture and/or oxygen into the intermediate layers 121 a, 121 b, and 121 c. . . . The organic layers 150 b and 150 d are configure to lower or reduce internal stresses of the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e, cover defects of the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e, and planarize the inorganic layers 150 a, 150 c, and 150 e.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung including the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang by adding the thin film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho over the external the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang in order to prevent or reduce penetration of external moisture and/or oxygen. See Cho [0052]-[0053].
Moreover, the thin film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho, added to the display panel of Chung, would result in a configuration wherein the encapsulation layer (Cho FIGS. 1/2, thin-film encapsulating layer 150, disposed on the external light reflection 140 layer, overlaps the entire display, including emission areas and non-emission areas) is disposed on the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”).
The FIG. 2 embodiment of Chung does not specifically disclose wherein the display device includes a reflection adjusting layer disposed on the encapsulation layer.
In the FIG. 18 embodiment of the display panel of Chung, however, Chung discloses wherein the display device (FIG. 18, depicting a display panel, [0212]) includes a reflection adjusting layer (FIG. 18, anti-reflection layers 231, [0213]) disposed over the light-emitting device (FIG. 18, pixel PX, [0163]: “[P]ixel PX including the thin film transistor and the organic light emitting element in the display area 100.”). Regarding the anti-reflection layers 231, in [0214], Chung states: “The loss of the light is reduced in the boundary surface of the upper glass substrate 150 and the air layer 235 due to the low reflection layers 231 in the light-transmitting area 210, and the loss of the light is reduced in the boundary surface of the air layer 235 and the window 200, thereby improving the light transmittance.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung, Cho, and Chang, including the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho, by adding the anti-reflection layers 231 such that the antireflection layers 231 are disposed on the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 in order to improve the light transmittance of the display panel. See Chung [0214].
Regarding claim 13, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) includes an inorganic material (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)), and an absorption coefficient k of the inorganic oxide is less than a corresponding absorption coefficient k of the inorganic material (Kang FIG. 3, in [0068], Kang discloses identical materials to that of the instant disclosure (e.g., aluminum and aluminum oxide for the first and second low reflection layers)). See MPEP § 2112.01(I) (“Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”) (citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (C.C.P.A. 1977)).
Regarding claim 14, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein an absorption coefficient k of the inorganic oxide is equal to or less than about 0.5 (Kang FIG. 3, in [0068], Kang discloses identical materials to that of the instant disclosure (e.g., aluminum and aluminum oxide for the first and second low reflection layers)). See MPEP § 2112.01(I) (“Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.”) (citing In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (C.C.P.A. 1977)).
Regarding claim 15, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) includes a metal oxide (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 16, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein the first low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the display area 100 in a plan view would form a “first low reflection layer”) includes an inorganic material, and the inorganic material is bismuth (Bi), ytterbium (Yb), cobalt (Co), molybdenum (Mo), tin (Sn), titanium (Ti), zirconium (Zr), aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), niobium (Nb), platinum (Pt), tungsten (W), indium (In), tin (Sn), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), tantalum (Ta), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), germanium (Ge), silver (Ag), magnesium (Mg), gold (Au), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), or a combination thereof (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 17, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein the inorganic oxide is Bi2O3, MoO2, MoO3, Ta2O5, NbO2, SnO2, ZrO2, HfO2, F2O3, ZnO, ITO, CdO, SiO2, TiO2, Al2O3, Y2O3, BeO, MgO, PbO2, WO3, SiNx, LiF, CaF2, MgF2, CdS, or a combination thereof (Kang FIG. 3, [0068]: “According to an embodiment, the upper layer 32 of the first low reflection layer 30 may include a stack structure of aluminum (Al)/aluminum oxide (AlOx)/titanium (Ti) . . . .” (emphasis added)).
Regarding claim 18, to the extent claim 18 claims process limitations, the Examiner respectfully notes that claim 18 is directed to a product. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. MPEP § 2113(I) (quoting In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698 (Fed. Cir. 1985)). Moreover, “because validity is determined based on the requirements of patentability, a patent is invalid if a product made by the process recited in a product-by-process claim is anticipated by or obvious from prior art products, even if those prior art products are made by different processes.” MPEP § 2113(I) (quoting Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., 580 F.3d 1340, 1370 n. 14 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
In the instant case, the claimed process step wherein “the second low reflection layer is formed based on an oxidation treatment according to at least one of irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, and a plasma process” does not appear to impart or imply any distinctive structural characteristics to the final display device, and the claimed display device product is capable of definition other than by the process steps by which it is made. See MPEP § 2113(I) (citing In re Garnero, 412 F.2d 276 (CCPA 1979) and In re Nordt Dev. Co., 881 F.3d 1371, 1375-76 (Fed. Cir. 2018)). Accordingly, the claimed process step wherein “wherein the second low reflection layer is formed based on an oxidation treatment according to at least one of irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, and a plasma process” has not been given any patentable weight, insofar as claim 18 claims a process, technique, or steps of formation via oxidation treatment, including irradiation of laser beams, gas doping, or plasma process.
Accordingly, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang disclose the second low reflection layer (Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”).
Regarding claim 19, Chung in view of Park and Kang does not specifically disclose wherein the display device further includes: a light blocking layer disposed between the encapsulation layer and the reflection adjusting layer, and having an opening overlapping the emission layer in a plan view.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Cho discloses a display device (FIG. 4, display apparatus 2, [0074]) including a light blocking layer (FIG. 4, black matrix 160, [0056]) disposed on an encapsulation layer (FIG. 4, thin film encapsulating layer 150, [0056]) and having an opening overlapping an emission layer in a plan view (FIG. 4, depicting wherein the black matrix 160 includes openings overlapping the intermediate layers 121a-c, which include organic emission layers, [0036]). Regarding the black matrix 160, in [0059], Cho states: “The organic light emitting display apparatus 1 according to exemplary embodiments may efficiently prevent or reduce reflection of an external light using double prevention units including the external light reflection layer 140 and the black matrix 160 in the non-emission area NA.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display panel of Chung including the multilayer external light reflection layer 140 of Cho and Kang and the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho by adding the black matrix 160 of Cho over the thin-film encapsulating layer 150 of Cho and under the anti-reflection layer 231 of Chung, such that the black matrix 160 is disposed between the encapsulating layer 150 and the anti-reflection layer 231 and such that the black matrix 160 includes openings overlapping the organic emission layer 22 of Chung in a plan view, in order further prevent or reduce reflection of external light from the non-emission areas of the display panel. See Cho [0059].
Regarding claim 20, Chung in view of Park, Cho, and Kang further discloses wherein a thickness of the second low reflection layer (K Cho FIG. 1; Chung FIG. 2; depicting wherein the portion of the external light reflection layer 140 overlapping the light transmitting area 210 in a plan view would form a “second low reflection layer”) is about 1 nm to about 100 nm (Cho FIG. 1, [0047]: “Thickness t2 of the external light reflection layer 140 may be less than or equal to 0.01 μm.”).
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Patent Publication Nos.: 2023/0393325 (effectively filed June 1, 2022); 2019/0214596 (published July 11, 2019).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D WEILAND whose telephone number is (703)756-4760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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.
/ADAM D WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813