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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 is objected to because they include essential subject matter enclosed within parentheses. While reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses, so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims, essential subject matter should not be enclosed within parentheses since references enclosed within parentheses do not constitute a limitation. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-6, 8-11, 14, 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Im et al. (US 2021/0359012 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Im discloses a display apparatus comprising: a substrate (110); a plurality of subpixels including a red subpixel (PXA), a blue subpixel (PXC), and a green subpixel (PXB), each of the red subpixel, the blue subpixel and the green subpixel including: a subpixel electrode (191); an emission layer (370) over the subpixel electrode; and an opposite electrode (270) over the emission layer; an encapsulation layer (390) over the plurality of subpixels; a light-blocking layer (520) disposed over the encapsulation layer and including a plurality of openings respectively overlapping the plurality of subpixels; and a plurality of color filters (530) disposed over the light-blocking layer and including a red color filter (530A), a blue color filter (530C), and a green color filter (530B), wherein the plurality of color filters (530) includes a repetitive arrangement structure of a color filter pattern unit block including the red color filter, the blue color filter, and the green color filter, the plurality of subpixels (PX) includes a repetitive arrangement structure of a subpixel pattern unit block including the red subpixel, the blue subpixel, and the green subpixel, and a size of the color filter pattern unit block is greater than a size of the subpixel pattern unit block (¶[0107]).
Regarding claim 2, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein, each of the red subpixel (PXA), the green subpixel (PXB) and the blue subpixel (PXC) is provided in plural, and in the subpixel pattern unit block, a number of green subpixels (PXB) is equal to a sum of a number of red subpixels and a number of blue subpixels (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein the plurality of subpixels is arranged in a Pentile structure (¶[0089]).
Regarding claim 4, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein subpixels of the plurality of subpixels corresponding to the color filter pattern unit block have a structure in which K (K is a natural number) subpixel pattern unit blocks are arranged in a first direction and L (L is a natural number) subpixel pattern unit blocks are arranged in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 2, ¶[0088]).
Regarding claim 5, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein the plurality of color filters (530) includes: a plurality of first sub color filters respectively arranged in a plurality of first areas, filling at least a portion of openings (521A, 521B, 521C) of the light-blocking layer (520), and including a first red sub color filter (530A), a first blue sub color filter (530C), and a first green sub color filter (530B); and a plurality of second sub color filters respectively arranged in a plurality of second areas between the plurality of first areas (Figs. 4-5), covering an upper surface of the light-blocking layer (520, Fig. 5), and including a second red sub color filter (520A), a second blue sub color filter (520C), and a second green sub color filter (520B).
Regarding claim 6, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein the plurality of second areas has a same size (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein, among the plurality of first sub color filters and the plurality of second sub color filters, color filters (RR3) contacting each other and having a same color are unitary with each other (Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 9, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein the color filter pattern unit block includes a first sub color filter pattern (i.e., color filter pattern within light blocking layer openings 521) in which the plurality of first sub color filters is arranged and a second sub color filter pattern (i.e., color filter pattern extending outside the light blocking layer opening 521) in which the plurality of second sub color filters is arranged (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein, in the second sub color filter pattern (color filter pattern extending outside the light blocking layer opening 521, Fig. 4), second sub color filters of two or more colors (e.g., RR1, RR2) among the plurality of the second sub color filters are arranged in at least one of a first direction and a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 11, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein, in the second sub color filter pattern (color filter pattern extending outside the light blocking layer opening 521, Fig. 4), second sub color filters of two or more colors (e.g., RR1, RR22) among the plurality of the second sub color filters are arranged in a diagonal direction oblique to a first direction and a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein a first sub color filter (530) of the plurality of first sub color filters and a second sub color filter (530) of the plurality of second sub color filters adjacent to each other contact or overlap each other over the light-blocking layer (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 15, Im discloses a display apparatus wherein the plurality of color filters includes a first color filter pattern unit including the red color filter (RR1), the blue color filter (RR3), and the green color filter (RR21, RR22), and the color filter pattern unit block has a same size as or a greater size than a size of the first color filter pattern unit (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 18, Im discloses a display apparatus further comprising: a bank layer (360) in which a plurality of subpixel openings exposing at least a portion of each of the subpixel electrodes is defined; and a touch sensor layer (2000) including touch electrodes (451) arranged between the encapsulation layer (390) and the light-blocking layer (521), wherein the touch electrodes (451) overlap the bank layer and some of the plurality of color filters.
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.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im et al. (US 2021/0359012 A1) in view of Joo et al. (US 2021/0013268 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Im fails to disclose wherein the plurality of first sub color filters has a circular shape in a plan view.
Joo discloses a display apparatus comprising a substrate (110); a plurality of subpixels including a red subpixel (PX1a), a blue subpixel (PX3a), and a green subpixel (PX2a), each of the red subpixel, the blue subpixel and the green subpixel including: a subpixel electrode (121, 122, 123); an emission layer (141, 142, 143) over the subpixel electrode; and an opposite electrode (150) over the emission layer; an encapsulation layer (160) over the plurality of subpixels; a light-blocking layer (BM) disposed over the encapsulation layer and including a plurality of openings respectively overlapping the plurality of subpixels; and a plurality of color filters (CF) disposed over the light-blocking layer and including a red color filter (CF1a), a blue color filter (CFL1), and a green color filter (CF2a), wherein the plurality of color filters includes: a plurality of first sub color filters respectively arranged in a plurality of first areas, filling at least a portion of openings (OP2a1, OP2a2, OP2a3) of the light-blocking layer (Fig. 17); and a plurality of second sub color filters respectively arranged in a plurality of second areas between the plurality of first areas (Figs. 17), wherein the plurality of first sub color filters has a circular shape in a plan view (Fig. 16, ¶[0058]) conforming with the circular opening of the light-blocking layer used to omnidirectionally and uniformly induce diffraction of light on the basis of the virtual center point of the opening. It has been held that a change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the plurality of first sub color filters having a circular shape in a plan view as disclosed by Joo in the display apparatus of Im which conforms with the circular opening of the light-blocking layer, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im et al. (US 2021/0359012 A1) in view of Lee et al. (KR 2016-0081704 A).
Regarding claim 19, Im fails to disclose wherein at least one of the touch electrodes directly contacts the light-blocking layer.
Lee discloses a display apparatus comprising: a substrate (111); a plurality of subpixels including a red subpixel, a blue subpixel, and a green subpixel (Fig. 1), each of the red subpixel, the blue subpixel and the green subpixel including: a subpixel electrode (141); an emission layer (142) over the subpixel electrode; and an opposite electrode (143) over the emission layer; an encapsulation layer (114) over the plurality of subpixels; a light-blocking layer (160) disposed over the encapsulation layer and including a plurality of openings respectively overlapping the plurality of subpixels; and a plurality of color filters (CF) disposed over the light-blocking layer and including a red color filter (R), a blue color filter (B), and a green color filter (G), a bank layer (113) in which a plurality of subpixel openings exposing at least a portion of each of the subpixel electrodes is defined; and a touch sensor layer including touch electrodes (151) arranged between the encapsulation layer (114) and the light-blocking layer (160), wherein the touch electrodes (151) overlap the bank layer and some of the plurality of color filters (Fig. 1), wherein at least one of the touch electrodes directly contacts the light-blocking layer in order to prevent the touch electrodes from being viewed from the outside. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the touch electrode contacting the light-blocking layer as disclosed by Lee in the display apparatus of Im in order to prevent the touch electrodes from being viewed from the outside.
Regarding claim 20, Im fails to disclose wherein the bank layer includes a light-blocking material.
Lee discloses a display apparatus comprising: a substrate (111); a plurality of subpixels including a red subpixel, a blue subpixel, and a green subpixel (Fig. 1), each of the red subpixel, the blue subpixel and the green subpixel including: a subpixel electrode (141); an emission layer (142) over the subpixel electrode; and an opposite electrode (143) over the emission layer; an encapsulation layer (114) over the plurality of subpixels; a light-blocking layer (160) disposed over the encapsulation layer and including a plurality of openings respectively overlapping the plurality of subpixels; and a plurality of color filters (CF) disposed over the light-blocking layer and including a red color filter (R), a blue color filter (B), and a green color filter (G), a bank layer (113) in which a plurality of subpixel openings exposing at least a portion of each of the subpixel electrodes is defined; and a touch sensor layer including touch electrodes (151) arranged between the encapsulation layer (114) and the light-blocking layer (160), wherein the touch electrodes (151) overlap the bank layer and some of the plurality of color filters (Fig. 1), wherein the bank layer includes a light-blocking material (¶[0041]) in order to prevent light emitted from a light emitting element to pass into neighboring light emitting elements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 12 and 16-17 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:
Regarding claim(s) 7, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 7, and specifically comprising the limitation of a color filter of the plurality of color filters is not disposed in at least one of the plurality of second areas.
Regarding claim(s) 12, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 12, and specifically comprising the limitation of a size of the first red sub color filter is less than a size of the first blue sub color filter and a size of the first green sub color filter.
Regarding claim(s) 16, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 16, and specifically comprising the limitation of each of the first color filter pattern unit and the second color filter pattern unit includes first sub color filters of the plurality of first sub color filters and second sub color filters of the plurality of second sub color filters, wherein an arrangement of the second sub color filters of the second color filter pattern unit is different from an arrangement of the second sub color filters of the first color filter pattern unit.
Regarding claim(s) 17, claims(s) 17 is/are allowable for the reasons given in claim(s) 16 because of its/their dependency status from claim(s) 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee (US 2019/0252470 A1) discloses a display device including a first pixel and a second pixel successively arranged along a first direction and configured to emit light of different colors, a first color filter disposed on the first pixel, and a second color filter disposed on the second pixel so as to be adjacent to the first color filter.
Huo (CN 109244116 A) discloses a display panel comprising a plurality of light emitting devices; a color filter comprising a plurality of user-defined areas, each of the user-defined areas corresponding to the plurality of the light emitting devices, the color filter of the same of said user-defined region have the same color, and the color film comprises defined regions of different colors.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
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, Jessica Han, can be reached on (571) 272-2078. 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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Prosecution Insights