DETAILED ACTION
This correspondence is in response to the communications received 02/04/2026. Claims 5, 6, 9, and 16 have been withdrawn. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-4, 7, 8, 10-15, and 17-20 in the reply filed on 02/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5, 6, 9, and 16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/04/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/14/2023 has been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 13, 17, and 20 and the claims that depend therefrom are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “opening rate” in claims 1, 2, 4, 13, and 17 is an unspecified term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “opening rate” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention as there does not appear to be a clear consensus on the definition of “opening rate” in the prior art. For the purposes of examination, "opening rate" will be interpretated as the percentage of a specific light emitting area relative to the total display area.
Claim 20 requires “wherein a plurality of first openings included in the first opening, a plurality of second openings included in the second opening, and a plurality of fourth openings included in the fourth opening are provided in the first area”. It is unclear as to whether “included in” refers to a physical description i.e. there are a plurality of sub-openings located physically within the first opening, or if “included in” describes how the first openings are categorized, i.e. since the display apparatus comprises a plurality of first light emitting units, it would therefore include a plurality of first openings all “included in” the label “first opening”. For the purposes of examination, “included in” will be interpretated as categorical rather than physical.
Further, the above limitation of claim 20 requires the plurality of second openings to be provided in the first area. As the second openings are required to expose part of the second anode as per claim 19, and the second anode is included in the second light emitting unit which is in the second area as per claim 12, it is unclear where the second opening is located. Fig. 6A shows the second opening, interpretated as “first opening PDL-OP1”, [00164], as being in “second area DP-A2”, [00164]. Therefore, for the purposes of examination, “wherein a plurality of first openings included in the first opening, a plurality of second openings included in the second opening, and a plurality of fourth openings included in the fourth opening are provided in the first area” will be interpretated as wherein a plurality of first openings included in the first opening, and a plurality of second openings included in the second opening are provided in the second area”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 12 requires "a third light emitting unit in the first area and including a third anode, a fourth light emitting layer, and a third cathode", emphasis added. As the only limitation of claim 15 is "wherein the third light emitting unit further includes a fourth light emitting layer", claim 15 fails to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends.. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim on independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Applicant’s Claim to Figure Comparison
It is noted that this comparison is merely for the benefit of reviewers of this office action during prosecution, to allow for an understanding of the examiner’s interpretation of the Applicant’s independent claims as compared to disclosed embodiments in Applicant’s Figures. No response or comments are necessary from Applicant.
PNG
media_image1.png
751
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
675
1000
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
855
657
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, a display apparatus ("display device DD") comprising:
a base substrate ("base layer 110") divided into a first area ("first area DP-A1") and a second area ("second area DP-A2") adjacent to the first area (see Fig. 5B and Fig. 6A);
a pixel defining layer ("pixel defining layer PDL") on the base substrate and having a first opening ("opening PDL-OP") in the first area with a first area size, and a second opening ("second opening PDL-OP1") in the second area with a second area size greater than the first area size (see Fig. 6A);
a first light emitting unit ("first light emitting element LD1") having an emission area size ("emission area size ARA1") corresponding to the first area size and configured to emit a first color light;
a second light emitting unit ("second light emitting element LD2") having an emission area size corresponding to the second area size and configured to emit the first color light;
a first pixel circuit ("first pixel circuit PC1") in the second area and connected to the first light emitting unit (see Fig. 6A);
a second pixel circuit ("second pixel circuit PC") in the second area and connected to the second light emitting unit (see Fig. 6A); and
an electronic module ("electronic module EM") in the first area and overlapping the first opening,
wherein the first light emitting unit includes a first charge generation layer ("charge generation layer CL1"), and
wherein an opening rate of the first light emitting unit is smaller than an opening rate of the second light emitting unit (see [0007]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 12, 14, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 20240074268 A1, filed 06/30/2021) in view of Ohsawa et al. (US 20240099052 A1, filed 12/15/2021) in view of Wu et al. (US 20230126522 A1, filed 12-27-2022).
PNG
media_image4.png
720
595
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
353
636
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
219
643
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
314
420
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang disclose a display apparatus (see title) comprising:
a base substrate (“array substrate 34”, [0051]) divided into a first area (“first display region 11”, [0049]) and a second area (“second display region 12”, [0049]) adjacent to the first area (as seen in Figs. 1-3, 12 is adjacent to 11);
a first light emitting unit (“first blue sub-pixel 43”, [0077]) in the first area (as seen in Fig. 3, 43 is in 11) and including a first anode (“first anode 211”, [0049], where “211B” is the instance of 211 corresponding to 43) having a first area size (“area of the first anode effective region 2113”, [0078], where “2113B” is the instance of 2113 corresponding to 43), a first light emitting layer (“first organic light-emitting layer 212”, [0051], where “212B” is the instance of 212 corresponding to 43), a second light emitting layer (Huang does not disclose a second light emitting layer, therefore a secondary reference will be used to teach this limitation below), and a first cathode (“first cathode 213”, [0051], where “213B” is the instance of 213 corresponding to 43);
a second light emitting unit (“second blue sub-pixel 46”, [0077]) in the second area (as seen in Fig. 3, 46 is in 12) and including a second anode (“second anode 221”, [0049], where “221B” is the instance of 221 corresponding to 46) having a second area size (“second anode effective region 2212”, [0078], where “2212B” is the instance of 2212 corresponding to 46) greater than the first area size (“the area of the first anode effective region 2113 of the first blue sub-pixel 43 is configured to be less than the area of the second anode effective region 2212 of the second blue sub-pixel 46”, [0078]), a third light emitting layer (“second organic light-emitting layer 222”, [0052], where “222B” is the instance of 222 corresponding to 46), and a second cathode (“second cathode 223”, [0052], where “223B” is the instance of 223 corresponding to 46);
a third light emitting unit (“first green sub-pixel 42”, [0077]) in the first area (as seen in Fig. 3, 42 is in 11) and including a third anode (“first anode 211”, [0049], where “211G” is the instance of 211 corresponding to 42), a fourth light emitting layer (“first organic light-emitting layer 212”, [0051], where “212G” is the instance of 212 corresponding to 42), and a third cathode (“first cathode 213”, [0051], where “213G” is the instance of 213 corresponding to 42); and
an electronic module in the first area (“As shown in FIGS. 1 to 3, the display panel according to this embodiment of the present application is applicable to a display device having a sensor disposed under a screen. The display panel includes the first display region 11 and the second display region 12. The first display region 11 may also serve as the disposition region of the sensor. The sensor may be a device such as a camera and an infrared sensor”, [0050], where “the sensor 92 is disposed in the sensor reserved region 93. The first display region 11 also serves as the sensor reserved region 93”, [0189]) and overlapping a first opening exposing at least part of the first anode (as seen in Fig. 37, 92 overlaps the majority of 11 and would therefore overlap a plurality of the first openings formed by the gaps in “pixel defining layer 33”, [0071], in 43 which in turn expose 211B as seen in Fig. 3),
wherein the first light emitting unit and the second light emitting unit are configured to emit a first color light (as discussed above, 43 and 46 are blue sub-pixels),
wherein the third light emitting unit is configured to emit a second color light different from the first color light (as discussed above, 42 is a green sub-pixel which is a different color than the blue produced by 43 and 46).
Huang fails to disclose “a first light emitting unit including a second light emitting layer;
wherein the first area size is 1/2 or less of the second area size.”
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 2C of Ohsawa teaches a first light emitting unit including a second light emitting layer (“the light-emitting layer 113 may have a stacked-layer structure of a plurality of light-emitting layers that emit light of the same color. For example, a first light-emitting layer containing a light-emitting substance that emits blue light and a second light-emitting layer containing a light-emitting substance that emits blue light may be stacked with or without a layer containing a carrier-transport material therebetween”, [0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a first light emitting unit including a second light emitting layer” as taught by Ohsawa in the system of Huang for the purpose of improving pixel reliability (“The structure in which a plurality of light-emitting layers that emit light of the same color are stacked can achieve higher reliability than a single-layer structure in some cases”, Ohsawa, [0081]) which may be necessary in order to mitigate negative effects from increased drive current (“To ensure that the sensor of the first display region 11 can receive enough external natural light, the first display region 11 is generally provided with a large light-transmissive region. For example, the number of first sub-pixels 111 is reduced to increase the area of the light-transmissive region. However, the reduction of the number of first sub-pixels 111 may reduce the brightness of the first display region 11. As a result, there is a brightness difference between the first display region 11 and the second display region 12. To reduce the brightness difference between the first display region 11 and the second display region 12, the drive current of a first sub-pixel 111 may be increased to increase the brightness of the first display region 11”, Huang, [0054]).
Huang in combination with Ohsawa fails to disclose “an electronic module in the first area and overlapping a first opening exposing at least part of the first anode,
wherein the first area size is 1/2 or less of the second area size.”
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 2C of Wu teaches wherein the first area size is 1/2 or less of the second area size (“the size of the first blue micro pixel 162B2 of the second type pixel 160b may be the same as or larger than a half of the size of the fifth blue micro pixel 163B1 described in the third type pixel 160d”, [0077], where “at least a partial area of the display 160 may include a structure, in which the first type pixels 160c, the second type pixels 160b (or 160c), and the third type pixels 160d are alternately disposed”, [0072], thus as the size of 162B2 of Wu is equivalent to 2113B of Huang, and the size of 163B1 of Wu is equivalent to 2212B of Huang, 2113B may be half the size of 2212B of Huang).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the first area size is 1/2 or less of the second area size” as taught by Wu in the system of Huang in combination with Ohsawa for the purpose of ensuring “that the sensor of the first display region 11 can receive enough external natural light” (Huang, [0054]).
Regarding claim 14, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang in combination with Fig. 2C of Ohsawa and Fig. 2C of Wu disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang further disclose wherein the first color light is blue (as discussed previously, 43 and 46 are configured to emit blue light), and
wherein the third light emitting unit includes a single light emitting layer (as discussed previously, 45 includes a single instance of 212G).
Regarding claim 15, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang in combination with Fig. 2C of Ohsawa and Fig. 2C of Wu disclose the display apparatus of claim 14, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang further disclose wherein the third light emitting unit further includes a fourth light emitting layer (as discussed previously, 212G is a fourth light emitting layer).
Regarding claim 18, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang in combination with Fig. 2C of Ohsawa and Fig. 2C of Wu disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang further disclose wherein the second light emitting unit includes a single light emitting layer (as discussed previously, 46 includes a single instance of 222B).
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US 20240074268 A1, filed 06/30/2021) in view of Ohsawa et al. (US 20240099052 A1, filed 12/15/2021) in view of Wu et al. (US 20230126522 A1, filed 12-27-2022) in view of Han et al. (US 11,543,919 B2, published 01/03/2023).
Regarding claim 19, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang in combination with Fig. 2C of Ohsawa and Fig. 2C of Wu disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang further disclose further comprising:
a second opening (the gap in 33 in 46 is a second opening) exposing at least part of the second anode (a seen in Fig. 3, the gap in 33 in 46 exposes at least part of 221B); and
a pixel defining layer (33 is a pixel defining layer) exposing at least part of the third anode (as seen in Fig. 3, 33 exposes at least a part of 211G),
Huang in combination with Ohsawa and Wu fails to disclose “wherein a fourth opening in the first area and spaced from the first opening and the second opening is defined on the pixel defining layer, and
wherein a light emitting layer is not in the fourth opening.”
PNG
media_image8.png
427
523
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
492
557
media_image9.png
Greyscale
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 1 and 36 of Han teach wherein a fourth opening (“In addition, the pixel defining film BNK provides an opening AP4 for defining the light-receiving surface of the organic photodiode OPD in the sensor pixel S”, col. 34, lines 15-18) in the first area (as seen in Fig. 1, S is located in “first sensing area SA”, col. 5, line 43, which is equivalent to 11 of Huang) and spaced from the first opening and the second opening (as seen in Fig. 3, AP4 is spaced apart from “opening AP3”, col. 34, line 14, which defines “the emission region of the light emitting element OLED in the display pixel R, G or [B]”, col. 34, lines 14-15, where AP3 is equivalent to the gaps in 33 of Huang in 43 and 46) is defined on the pixel defining layer (as seen in Fig. 36, AP$ is defined on BNK of Han which is equivalent to 33 of Huang), and
wherein a light emitting layer is not in the fourth opening (as seen in Fig. 36, AP4 includes “OACT”, col. 33, line 41, which “indicates an organic compound layer of the organic photodiode”, col. 33, lines 41-42, and not “The organic compound layer EL of the light emitting element OLED”, col. 33, lines 17-19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein a fourth opening in the first area and spaced from the first opening and the second opening is defined on the pixel defining layer, and
wherein a light emitting layer is not in the fourth opening” as taught by Han in the system of Huang in combination with Ohsawa and Wu for the purpose of increasing the transmission of light to sensors below the pixel defining layer.
Regarding claim 20, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang in combination with Fig. 2C of Ohsawa, Fig. 2C of Wu, and Figs. 1 and 36 of Han disclose the display apparatus of claim 19, Figs. 1-3, 36, and 37 of Huang further disclose wherein a plurality of first openings included in the first opening, a plurality of second openings included in the second opening, and a plurality of fourth openings included in the fourth opening are provided in the first area (as seen in Fig. 2, each sub-pixel occurs a plurality of instances, therefore each opening includes a plurality of openings).
Figs. 1 and 36 of Han further disclose wherein the plurality of first openings, the plurality of second openings, and the plurality of fourth openings are alternately arranged (as seen in Fig. 1, S and the other display pixels R, G, and B are alternately arranged).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest the display apparatus as recited in the claims of the instant application.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of Zheng (US 11,522,031 B2) discloses a similar display apparatus but fails to disclose the specific claims of the instant application regarding the first and second size openings, and the opening rate of the light emitting units relative to each other e.g. “a pixel defining layer on the base substrate and having a first opening in the first area with a first area size, and a second opening in the second area with a second area size greater than the first area size;
a first light emitting unit having an emission area size corresponding to the first area size and configured to emit a first color light;
a second light emitting unit having an emission area size corresponding to the second area size and configured to emit the first color light;
wherein the first light emitting unit includes a first charge generation layer, and
wherein an opening rate of the first light emitting unit is smaller than an opening rate of the second light emitting unit.”
Claims 2-11 would be allowable by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
Claims 13 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest the display apparatus as recited in the claims of the instant application.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of Huang (US 20240074268 A1) in combination with Ohsawa et al. (US 20240099052 A1), Wu et al. (US 20230126522 A1), and Ishikawa et al. (US 11,156,918 B2) discloses a similar display apparatus but fails to disclose the specific claims of the instant application regarding the opening rate of the first light emitting unit e.g. “wherein the first light emitting unit has an opening rate of 12% or less”.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of Huang (US 20240074268 A1) in combination with Ohsawa et al. (US 20240099052 A1), Wu et al. (US 20230126522 A1), and Ishikawa et al. (US 11,156,918 B2) discloses a similar display apparatus but fails to disclose the specific claims of the instant application regarding the opening rate of the third light emitting unit e.g. “wherein the third light emitting unit has an opening rate of 8% or less”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN M KUPP whose telephone number is (571)272-5608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am - 4:00 pm PT.
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, Yara Green can be reached at (571) 270-3035. 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.
/BENJAMIN MICHAEL KUPP/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights