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
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.
Claims 1-9 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (WO 2022/075571) in view of Imayoshi et al. (WO 2024/048312) in view of Sun et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2024/0373725)
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches a display apparatus comprising:
a display module array (Fig. 1, array 1) comprising a plurality of display modules (modules 30A-P) that are horizontally arranged in a form of a matrix (Fig. 1),
wherein each of the plurality of display modules comprises:
a substrate (Fig. 3, substrate 42) comprising a mounting surface (top surface) and a rear surface (bottom surface) opposite to the mounting surface;
a metal plate (metal plate 110) bonded to the rear surface and configured to dissipate heat from the substrate (labeled heat dissipation member 110);
a front cover (front cover 49) covering the mounting surface;
inorganic light emitting devices (devices 50) mounted on the mounting surface, the inorganic light emitting devices comprising:
a first inorganic light emitting device (53) configured to emit light; and
a second inorganic light emitting device (51) configured to emit light.
Cho does not teach a color layer between the inorganic light emitting devices and the front cover, the color layer comprising: a resin layer through which the light emitted from the first inorganic light emitting device passes; and a color conversion layer through which the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device passes; and an adhesive layer between the mounting surface and the color layer and configured to bond the mounting surface and the color layer, the adhesive layer having a thickness d of less than or equal to 10 µm to 15 µm and being configured to reduce an amount of the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device and directed to the resin layer.
However, Imayoshi teaches a similar display including a color layer (Imayoshi Fig. 3, color layer at 34/32) between the light emitting devices and the front cover, the color layer comprising: a resin layer (resin layer 36B) through which the light emitted from the first inorganic light emitting device passes (see Imayoshi Fig. 3); and a color conversion layer (36R) through which the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device passes (Imayoshi Fig. 3); and an adhesive layer (adhesive layer 4) between the mounting surface and the color layer and configured to bond the mounting surface and the color layer (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that a color layer having color changing media could have been attached through an adhesive because this allows for all LEDs to be the same color, and have their color instead changed in the color changing layer, reducing the number of different LED types to manufacture and allowing for all LEDs to be identical in electrical and optical characteristics.
Cho in view of Imayoshi does not specifically teach the thickness of the adhesive layer. However, Sun teaches the adhesive layer having a thickness d of less than or equal to 10 µm to 15 µm and being configured to reduce an amount of the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device and directed to the resin layer (see Sun Fig. 10, paragraph [0194], total distance between LED and color changing layer must be less than 4 um to avoid cross-color problems). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that the thickness of the adhesive would be less than 4 um in order to avoid cross-color problems (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 2, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein the thickness d of the adhesive layer in a stacking direction is less than or equal to 5 µm (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 3, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the thickness d of the adhesive layer in the stacking direction is less than or equal to 3 µm (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 4, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 3, wherein the color layer further comprises a position guide portion between the resin layer and the color conversion layer (Imayoshi Fig. 3, position guide portion 34).
Regarding claim 5, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 4, wherein each of the plurality of display modules comprises:
a black matrix (Imayoshi Fig. 3, black matrix 32) between the front cover and the position guide portion (Fig. 3); and a color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, color filter 33) between the front cover and each of the color conversion layer and the resin layer.
Regarding claim 6, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 5, wherein the color filter comprises:
a first color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, 33B) between the color conversion layer and the front cover; and a second color filter (33R) between the resin layer and the front cover,
wherein the black matrix is between the first color filter and the second color filter (see Imayoshi Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 6, wherein each of the inorganic light emitting devices is a blue inorganic light emitting device (see Imayoshi translation page 3).
Regarding claim 8, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 7, wherein the color conversion layer comprises quantum dots configured to convert blue light to another color (Imayoshi translation page 10).
Regarding claim 9, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of display modules further comprises an anisotropic conductive layer (Cho Fig. 3, ACL 47) on the mounting surface, on which the inorganic light emitting devices are mounted (Cho Fig. 3), and configured to electrically connect the inorganic light emitting devices to the substrate and absorb the light emitted from the inorganic light emitting devices (Cho Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, wherein each of the inorganic light emitting devices is a blue inorganic light emitting device (Imayoshi translation page 3).
Regarding claim 15, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 14, wherein the color conversion layer comprises quantum dots configured to convert blue light to another color (Imayoshi translation page 10).
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun, further in view of Chang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2025/0081607) and Xu et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2008/0090943).
Regarding claim 10, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, but does not teach wherein the anisotropic conductive layer comprises a dye to darken the anisotropic conductive layer.
However, Chang teaches that an ACF can have a black dye to darken the layer (Chang paragraph [0092]). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that the ACF could have been black in order to allow for reflection and increase contrast (Chang paragraph [0092]).
Chang does not specifically teach that the dye is LACTAM-based. However, Xu teaches that a due for an ACF can be lactam based (Xu paragraph [0025]). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that a lactam based dye could have been used because it would have been a simple substitution of one dye for another with predictable results.
Regarding claim 11, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, Chang and Xu teaches the display apparatus of claim 10, wherein the color layer further comprises a position guide portion between the resin layer and the color conversion layer (Imayoshi Fig. 3, guide portion 34).
Regarding claim 12, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, Chang and Xu teaches the display apparatus of claim 11, wherein each of the plurality of display modules comprises:
a black matrix (Imayoshi Fig. 3, BM 32) between the front cover and the position guide portion (Fig. 3); and
a color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, color filter 33) between the front cover and each of the color conversion layer and the resin layer.
Regarding claim 13, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, Chang and Xu teaches the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein the color filter comprises:
a first color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, 33B) between the color conversion layer and the front cover; and a second color filter (33R) between the resin layer and the front cover, wherein the black matrix is between the first color filter and the second color filter (Fig. 3).
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun, further in view of Seo et al. (KR 10-2023-0090409).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Regarding claim 10, Cho in view of Imayoshi and Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 9, but does not teach wherein the anisotropic conductive layer comprises a lactam-based dye to darken the anisotropic conductive layer.
However, Seo teaches that an ACF can have a lactam based dye to darken the layer (Seo Abstract). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that the ACF could have been black in order to allow for reflection and increase contrast, and Seo teaches that lactam based dyes lowers the brightness index of the ACF (Seo translation page 3).
Regarding claim 11, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, and Seo teaches the display apparatus of claim 10, wherein the color layer further comprises a position guide portion between the resin layer and the color conversion layer (Imayoshi Fig. 3, guide portion 34).
Regarding claim 12, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, and Seo teaches the display apparatus of claim 11, wherein each of the plurality of display modules comprises:
a black matrix (Imayoshi Fig. 3, BM 32) between the front cover and the position guide portion (Fig. 3); and
a color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, color filter 33) between the front cover and each of the color conversion layer and the resin layer.
Regarding claim 13, Cho in view of Imayoshi, Sun, and Seo teaches the display apparatus of claim 12, wherein the color filter comprises:
a first color filter (Imayoshi Fig. 3, 33B) between the color conversion layer and the front cover; and a second color filter (33R) between the resin layer and the front cover, wherein the black matrix is between the first color filter and the second color filter (Fig. 3).
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imayoshi in view of Sun.
Regarding claim 16, Imayoshi teaches a display apparatus comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 3, substrate 21) comprising a mounting surface (top surface) and a rear surface (bottom surface) opposite to the mounting surface;
inorganic light emitting devices (LEDs 25) mounted on the mounting surface, the inorganic light emitting devices comprising:
a first inorganic light emitting device (right side LED 25) configured to emit light; and
a second inorganic light (left side LED 25) emitting device configured to emit light;
a color layer (color layer 36/33) disposed further from the mounting surface than the inorganic light emitting devices (Fig. 3), the color layer comprising:
a resin layer (resin 36B) through which the light emitted from the first inorganic light emitting device passes;
a color conversion layer (CCL 36R) through which the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device passes; and
a position guide portion (portion 34) between the resin layer and the color conversion layer; and
an adhesive layer (adhesive layer 4) between the mounting surface and the color layer and configured to bond the mounting surface and the color layer (Fig. 3).
Imayoshi does not teach the adhesive layer having a thickness d of less than or equal to 10 µm to 15 µm and being configured to reduce an amount of the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device and directed to the resin layer. However, Sun teaches the adhesive layer having a thickness d of less than or equal to 10 µm to 15 µm and being configured to reduce an amount of the light emitted from the second inorganic light emitting device and directed to the resin layer (see Sun Fig. 10, paragraph [0194], total distance between LED and color changing layer must be less than 4 um to avoid cross-color problems). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that the thickness of the adhesive would be less than 4 um in order to avoid cross-color problems (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 17, Imayoshi in view of Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 16, wherein the thickness d of the adhesive layer in a stacking direction is less than or equal to 5 µm (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 18, Imayoshi in view of Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 17, wherein the thickness d of the adhesive layer in the stacking direction is less than or equal to 3 µm (Sun paragraph [0194]).
Regarding claim 19, Imayoshi in view of Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 16, further comprising:
a front cover (Imayoshi Fig. 3, front cover 31) covering the mounting surface;
a black matrix (BM 32) between the front cover and the position guide portion (Fig. 3); and
a color filter (color filter 33) between the front cover and each of the color conversion layer and the resin layer.
Regarding claim 20, Imayoshi in view of Sun teaches the display apparatus of claim 19, wherein the color filter comprises:
a first color filter (33R) between the color conversion layer and the front cover; and
a second color filter (33B) between the resin layer and the front cover,
wherein the black matrix is between the first color filter and the second color filter (Fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evan G Clinton whose telephone number is (571)270-0525. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday at 8:30am to 5:30pm.
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.
/EVAN G CLINTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899