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 .
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tauchi et al. (USPN 2014/0342104).
With regard to claim 1,
Tauchi et al. disclose a display apparatus (paragraph 26) comprising: a reflective electrode wherein the reflective electrode includes a silver alloy including Ag, at least one of Group 15 metal elements, and an indium (see paragraphs 15,16). While Tauchi et al. is silent as to the other details of the display device, such a device having a substrate; and a display element disposed over the substrate, wherein the display element includes: a pixel electrode, an emission layer disposed on the pixel electrode, and a reflective electrode was well known to and widely used by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate as the display of Tauchi et al. in order provide a traditional bottom emission style device.
With regard to claim 2,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein Ag content included in the opposite electrode is 99 at % or more (see paragraphs 15,16).
With regard to claim 3,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the Group 15 metal element included in the opposite electrode is bismuth or antimony (see paragraph 16).
With regard to claim 4,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein a total content of the Group 15 metal elements included in the Ag alloy is from about 0.25 at % to about 0.75 at % (see paragraph 16).
With regard to claim 5,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the opposite electrode further includes zinc (see paragraph 15).
With regard to claim 6,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 5, wherein a total content of indium (In) and zinc (Zn) included in the Ag alloy is from about 0.25 at % to about 0.75 at % (see paragraph 15).
With regard to claim 7,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the opposite electrode includes a first layer and a second layer disposed on the first layer, and wherein the second layer includes the Ag alloy (see paragraph 46).
With regard to claim 8,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 7, wherein the first layer includes at least one of ytterbium (Yb), scandium (Sc), vanadium (V), yttrium (Y), indium (In), cerium (Ce), samarium (Sm), europium (Eu), and terbium (Tb) (See paragraph 46).
With regard to claim 9,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 8. While Tauchi et al. do not explicitly disclose the claimed range a thickness of the second layer from about 50 Å to about 200 Å was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to try as the thickness of the second layer of Tauchi et al. in order to provide a thinner device.
With regard to claim 10,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 9. While Tauchi et al. do not explicitly disclose the claimed range, a thickness of the first layer from about 5 Å to about 30 Å, was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to try as the thickness of the second layer of Tauchi et al. in order to provide a thinner device.
With regard to claim 11,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein a resistivity of the opposite electrode is 7 μΩcm or less (see paragraph 49)
With regard to claim 12,
Tauchi et al. disclose a display apparatus (paragraph 26) comprising: a reflective electrode including a first layer and a second layer disposed on the first layer (see paragraph 46), and wherein the second layer includes a silver alloy including Ag, at least one of Group 15 metal elements, indium, and zinc, an Ag content in the Ag alloy being 99 at % or more (see paragraphs 15,16). While Tauchi et al. do not disclose the details of the of the display device, such a device having a substrate; and a display element disposed over the substrate, wherein the display element includes: a pixel electrode, a pixel-defining layer including an opening exposing at least a portion of the pixel electrode, and an opposite, reflective electrode disposed on the pixel electrode and the pixel-defining layer was well known to and widely use by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate as the display of Tauchi et al. in order provide a traditional bottom emission style device.
With regard to claim 13,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein the Group 15 metal element included in the second layer is bismuth or antimony (see paragraph 16).
With regard to claim 14,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein a total content of the Group 15 metal elements included in the second layer is from about 0.25 at % to about 0.75 at % (see paragraph 16).
With regard to claim 15,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein a total content of indium and zinc included in the second layer is from about 0.25 at % to about 0.75 at % (see paragraph 15).
With regard to claim 16,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein a resistivity of the second layer is 7 μΩcm or less (see paragraph 49).
With regard to claim 17,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12, while Tauchi et al. do not disclose the claimed ranges, a thickness of the first layer from about 5 Å to about 30 Å and a thickness of the second layer from about 50 Å to about 200 Å, was well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to try as the thickness of the second layer of Tauchi et al. in order to provide a thinner device.
With regard to claim 18,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 17, wherein the first layer includes at least one of ytterbium, scandium, vanadium, yttrium, indium, cerium, samarium, europium, and terbium (see paragraph 46).
With regard to claim 19,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12. While Tauchi et al. do not disclose the details of the display, an emission layer disposed between the pixel electrode and the opposite electrode, wherein the emission layer is disposed in the opening of the pixel-defining layer was well known to and widely use by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate as the display of Tauchi et al. in order provide a traditional bottom emission style device.
With regard to claim 20,
Tauchi et al. disclose the display apparatus of claim 12. While Tauchi et al. do not disclose the details of the display a thin-film encapsulation layer disposed on the opposite electrode and including at least one inorganic encapsulation layer and at least one organic encapsulation layer was well known to and widely use by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate as the display of Tauchi et al. in order provide a traditional bottom emission style device.
.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPN 2012/0305889.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher Raabe whose telephone number is (571)272-8434. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0530-1430.
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, James R Greece can be reached at (571)272-3711. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M RAABE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875