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 Arguments
Applicant’s amendments necessitated the shift in grounds of rejection detailed below. The shift in grounds of rejection renders Applicant’s arguments moot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US-20220285460-A1; Kim).
Regarding claim 21, Kim discloses an electronic device comprising: a display panel including: a display area including emission areas (Fig. 5, EA, ¶140) and a non-emission area (Fig. 5, RA, ¶140) adjacent to the emission areas; a pixel defining layer (Fig. 5, BK, ¶140) that includes first openings corresponding to the emission areas and a second opening corresponding to the non-emission area; light emitting elements (Fig. 5,PEL1/EML/PEL2, ¶137-143) each including a first electrode, a second electrode, and a light emitting layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode, wherein each of the light emitting elements is partially disposed in a corresponding one of the first openings (PEL2 outside of opening); and a photovoltaic element (Fig. 5,SEL1/LRL/SEL2, ¶137-143) including a first cell electrode, a second cell electrode, and an optical photovoltaic layer disposed between the first cell electrode and the second cell electrode, wherein the photovoltaic element is disposed partially in the second opening (SEL2 outside of opening), wherein the second electrode and the second cell electrode form an integral electrode (Fig. 5,CD, ¶137-143) that extends continuously across the emission areas and the non-emission area at a constant height above the pixel defining layer (the height of CD is the same above each PDL).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance, which paraphrases and summarizes the claimed invention without intending to be limiting, wherein the legally defined scope of the claimed invention is defined by the allowed claims themselves in view of the written description under 35 USC 112. This statement is not intended to necessarily state all the reasons for allowance or all the details why the claims are allowed and has not been written to specifically or impliedly state that all the reasons for allowance are set forth (MPEP 1302.14).
The relevant art (US-20220165834-A1, US-20220285460-A1) discloses a display device where the sensing line provides a signal to a gate but is silent on supplying signal to a power supply. The claim language implies a configuration where the photovoltaic component is connected to a power supply. The art ( US-20190245155-A1) discloses devices comprising displays where solar energy supplies energy to a battery which powers the device. The art is silent on the claimed structural configuration where the photovoltaic element supplies energy to a power supply.
US-20210210557-A1 discloses a plurality of partition walls spaced apart on an encapsulant in the non-display area, where a photovoltaic element is beneath a wall opening. However the partitions and associated encapsulant do not overlap the PDL . CN 108229417 A discloses partitioning walls over a photo sensing region and on an encapsulant that covers a light emitting region. However the partitions do not overlap a PDL.
Regarding claim 1, the references of the Prior Art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure and to the examiner’s knowledge does not teach or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the instant invention regarding: " and supplies the electrical energy to a power supply of the display device.”, as recited in Claim 1, with the remaining features.
Regarding claim 15, the references of the Prior Art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure and to the examiner’s knowledge does not teach or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the instant invention regarding: " a partition wall layer including a first partition wall opening overlapping a portion of the pixel defining layer and second partition wall openings corresponding to respective openings, wherein the partition wall layer is disposed on the encapsulation layer; …wherein the photovoltaic element is disposed in the first partition wall opening.”, as recited in Claim 15, with the remaining features.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 LAWRENCE C TYNES JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-7606. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Zandra Smith can be reached at 571-272-2429. 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.
/LAWRENCE C TYNES JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights