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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 7 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwata et al. (US 2022/0393130).
Regarding claim 1, Iwata teaches (FIG. 1, 3):
A display device comprising:
a first anode (22);
a cathode (25) opposing the first anode; and
a first organic layer located between the first anode and the cathode, wherein the first organic layer includes a first light emitting layer (24R/24G/24B) and a hole transport layer (30) located between the first anode and the first light emitting layer (FIG. 1), and
an average particle diameter per unit area of a material which constitutes the first light emitting layer ([0105]) is smaller than an average particle diameter per unit area of a material which constitutes the hole transport layer ([0049]).
Regarding claim 2, Iwata teaches:
The display device of claim 1, wherein the average particle diameter per unit area of the material which constitutes the first light emitting layer is 39nm or less ([0105]).
Regarding claim 7, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The display device of claim 1, wherein the first light emitting layer contains fluorescent molecules which emit blue fluorescence.
Regarding claim 8, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The display device of claim 1, wherein the first light emitting layer contains phosphorescent molecules which emit green phosphorescence.
Regarding claim 9, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The display device of claim 1, wherein the first light emitting layer contains phosphorescent molecules which emit red phosphorescence.
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 3 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata et al. (US 2022/0393130) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tokailin et al. (US 2002/0192499).
Regarding claim 3, Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as:
The display device of claim 1, wherein at least one of the hole transport layer and the first light emitting layer is formed at a deposition rate of 0.12nm per second or higher.
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 4, Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as:
The display device of claim 1, wherein at least one of the hole transport layer and the first light emitting layer is formed at a deposition rate of 0.17nm per second or higher.
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 5, Iwata teaches (R, G, B, portions, FIG. 3):
The display device of claim 1, further comprising:
a second anode spaced apart from the first anode;
a third anode spaced apart from the first anode and the second anode;
a second organic layer located between the second anode and the cathode and including a second light emitting layer formed of a material different from that of the first light emitting layer ([0105]); and
a third organic layer located between the third anode and the cathode and including a third light emitting layer formed of a material different from those of the first light emitting layer and the second light emitting layer ([0105]),.
Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as
wherein the second light emitting layer and the third light emitting layer are formed at a deposition rate of 0.12nm per second or higher
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 6, Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as:
The display device of claim 5, wherein the second light emitting layer and the third light emitting layer are formed at a deposition rate of 0.17nm per second or higher.
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Claims 10 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata et al. (US 2022/0393130) in view of Tokailin et al. (US 2002/0192499).
Regarding claim 10, Iwata teaches (FIG. 1, 3):
A method of manufacturing a display device, comprising:
forming a first anode (22);
forming a first organic layer (30/24R,B,G/33) on the first anode; and
forming a cathode (25) on the first organic layer, wherein the forming the first organic layer comprises:
forming a hole transport layer (30); and
forming a first light emitting layer (24R,B,G), the hole transport layer is located between the first anode and the first light emitting layer (FIG. 1),.
Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as
and at least one of the hole transport layer and the first light emitting layer is formed at a deposition rate of 0.12 nm per second or higher
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 11, Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as:
The method of claim 10, wherein at least one of the hole transport layer and the first light emitting layer is formed at a deposition rate of 0.17nm per second or higher.
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 12, Iwata teaches:
The method of claim 10, further comprising:
forming, when forming the first anode, a second anode spaced apart from the first anode and a third anode spaced apart from the first anode and the second anode, simultaneously (22);
forming a second organic layer on the second anode before forming the cathode; and
forming a third organic layer on the third anode before forming the cathode, wherein the forming the second organic layer comprises forming a second light emitting layer, the forming the third organic layer comprises forming a third light emitting layer,.
Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as
and the second light emitting layer and the third light emitting layer are formed at a deposition rate of 0.12nm per second or higher
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 13, Iwata teaches that the forming of the organic layers is not particularly limited, but fails to expressly disclose deposition rates such as:
The method of claim 12, wherein the second light emitting layer and the third light emitting layer are formed at a deposition rate of 0.17nm per second or higher.
Tokailin teaches co-evaporation processes for forming organic light emitting layers including deposition rates of 10 nm/s ([0133]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the co-evaporation processes of Tokailin to form the OLED device of Iwata in a well-known and predictable manner.
Regarding claim 14, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The method of claim 10, wherein the first light emitting layer contains fluorescent molecules which emit blue fluorescence.
Regarding claim 15, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The method of claim 10, wherein the first light emitting layer contains phosphorescent molecules which emit green phosphorescence.
Regarding claim 16, Iwata teaches ([0119]):
The method of claim 10, wherein the first light emitting layer contains phosphorescent molecules which emit red phosphorescence.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CORY W ESKRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)272-0543. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 - 5.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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.
/CORY W ESKRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624