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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 04/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/28/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1, 5, 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2022/0013603) in view of Goto (US 2019/0267438).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a display device comprising: a first electrode (Fig.12, numeral 160) disposed on a substrate (101); a first functional layer (EL) disposed on the first electrode (160); a pixel defining layer (PDLS_1) disposed on the first functional layer (EL) (note: PDLS_1 is disposed on side surfaces of EL); and a via layer (VIA) disposed between the substrate (101) and the first electrode (160).
Kim does not disclose that via layer has liquid repellency on an upper surface overlapping the first electrode in a plan view.
Kim however discloses that via layer is a planarizing layer ([0086]). And Goto discloses planarizing layer having liquid repellency ([0256]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Kim with Goto to have via layer has liquid repellency on an upper surface overlapping the first electrode in a plan view for the purpose of improving formation of a light emitting layers (Goto, [0256]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses wherein the pixel defining layer (PLDLS_1) overlaps an edge portion of the first functional layer (EL) in a plan view (Fig.12).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses wherein a width of the first functional layer (EL) and a width of the first electrode (160) are different from each other in a direction (Fig.12).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses wherein the width of the first functional layer (EL) is greater than the width of the first electrode (160) in the direction.
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses wherein a level of an upper surface of the pixel defining layer (PDLS_1) overlapping the first functional layer (EL) in a plan view and a level of an upper surface of the pixel defining layer (PDLS_1) offset from the first functional layer (EL) in a plan view are different from each other (Fig.12).
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Goto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kaneki (US 2023/0027085).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Kim in view of Goto does not disclose wherein the via layer comprises a fluorine-based surfactant or a silicon-based surfactant.
Goto however discloses that via layer has a liquid repellency. And Kaneki discloses that a fluorine-based surfactant or a silicon-based surfactant affects a liquid repellency ([0015]; [0168]; [0856]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Kim with Kaneki to have the via layer comprising a fluorine-based surfactant or a silicon-based surfactant for the purpose of obtain a via layer with excellent liquid repellency ( Kaneki, [0856]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Goto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ueta (US 2023/0247847).
Regarding claim 4, Kim does not disclose wherein the first functional layer comprises an inorganic metal oxide.
Kim however discloses that the first functional layer is light-emitting element that include electron transporting and hole transporting layers ([0107]). And Ueta discloses that light emitting element comprises an inorganic metal oxide (Fig, 1, numeral 5; [0026]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Kim with Ueta to have the first functional layer comprising an inorganic metal oxide for the purpose of fabrication highly reliable light-emitting element (Ueta, [0004]).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Goto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Miyamoto (US 2024/0040836).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses that the first functional layer is an electron transport layer ([0107]).
Kim does not disclose wherein the first electrode is a cathode. Miyamoto however discloses that in organic EL display device the structure can be reversed and the first electrode can be a cathode ([0140]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the time the invention was filed to modify Kim with Miyamoto to have the first electrode as a cathode because this is typical structure of a EL display device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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 search of the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest wherein a level of an upper surface of the pixel defining layer overlapping the first functional layer in a plan view is greater than a level of an upper surface of the pixel defining layer offset from the first functional layer in a plan view as required by claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA SLUTSKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-6 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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/JULIA SLUTSKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights