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 in the reply filed on 05/22/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/22/2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING CONDUCTIVE ORGANIC LAYER AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 IS rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “a head mounted display device” in line 1 it is unclear what if any relationship is required between the claimed head mounted display and the display device of claim 1 for example whether the claim is meant to require that the display device of claim 1 is a head mounted display device or a head mounted display device is required in addition to the structure of claim 1 for the purpose of examination no particular relationship will be interpreted from the claim. If applicant wishes the claim to require the display device of claim 1 to be a head mounted display device examiner suggest amending the claim so that it recites –wherein the display device is a head mounted display device and--
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 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 of this title, 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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon et. Al. (US 20140167000 A1 hereinafter Jeon) and further in view of Park et. (US 20110140113 A1 hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon teaches in Figs. 1-3 with associated text a display device, comprising: a pixel driving circuit [0038] including a transistor TRs or TRd and on a substrate (100-110) (Figs. 1-3, [0038] and [0051]); an layer 140 covering the pixel driving circuit and including a contact hole CH; a conductive organic layer 150 covering the contact hole and the layer around the contact hole (Fig. 3, [0061]), and electrically connected to the transistor through the contact hole (Fig. 3, [0061]); a non-conductive organic layer 160 (Fig. 3, 0063]) disposed above the organic layer and in a region where the conductive organic layer is not disposed (160 is disposed in a region vertically above 150 and therefore in a region where the conductive organic layer is not disposed Fig. 3, [0063] the claim wouldn’t necessarily require the conductive organic layer and the non-conductive organic layer to not overlap in a direction perpendicular to an upper surface of the substrate for example); and an anode 170 ([0067]) electrically connected to the conductive organic layer (Fig. 3, [0067]), wherein the contact hole overlaps the anode on a plan view (Fig. 3)..
Jeon does not specify the layer 140 is an organic layer but discloses that it is a protective layer [0059]
Park discloses in Fig. 2 with associated text a protective layer 104 similar to that of Jeon that is an organic layer (Fig. 2, [0054])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an organic layer for layer 140 of Jeon as taught by Park because according to Park the protection film 104 is formed of inorganic dielectric material such as Silicon Oxide (SiOx) and Silicon Nitride (SiNx) or organic dielectric material such as acryl resin [0054] so that an organic layer is suitable for a protective layer such a layer of Jeon.
Claims 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon in view of Park and further in view of Ito et. (US 20210247644 A1 hereinafter Ito).
Regarding claim 13, Jeon teaches in view of Park the display device of claim 1.
Jeon does not specify a head-mounted display device includes an optical system including a pair of curved lenses
Ito discloses in Fig. 7 with associated text a head-mounted display device 1 (Fig. 7, [0146]) includes an optical system 20 including a pair of curved lenses (52 and 53) (Fig. 7, [0049])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a head-mounted display device as taught by Ito because according to Ito when the illumination light enters the first substrate 10, light toward the light shielding member 18 can be guided efficiently to the light transmission area 180. Thus, an amount of light emitted from the electro-optical device 1 can be increased, and hence a bright image can be displayed, further, illumination light is converged by the three lens surfaces 51, 53, and 54, thus, there is no need to provide a thick optical path length adjustment layer that is referred to as a path layer for adjusting an optical path length in the second substrate 20. Therefore, the total thickness of the second substrate 20 from the substrate body 29 to the common electrode 21 can be set to 20 μm or smaller, for example, therefore, a time period required for forming a film can be shortened, and hence productivity can be improved ([0061]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12 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:
After completing a thorough search of dependent claim 2, the prior art of record, alone or in combination does not disclose, teach or fairly suggest a display device, comprising: an organic layer covering the pixel driving circuit and including a contact hole; a conductive organic layer covering the contact hole and the organic layer around the contact hole, and electrically connected to the transistor through the contact hole; a non-conductive organic layer disposed above the organic layer and in a region where the conductive organic layer is not disposed; and the conductive organic layer includes PEDOT:PSS, and the non-conductive organic layer is a chemical formula structure in which a thiophene ring is broken in the PEDOT:PSS and separated into two OH groups in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
Claims 3-12 are also allowed being dependent on allowable claim 2.
The closest prior art or record is Jeon and Park as cited above and Lee et. Al. (US 20230082757 A1) which generally teaches a conducting organic layer CDP and a nonconducting organic layer ISP that is generally formed by oxidizing the conducting layer (Fig. 7B, [0145]) but does not specifically teach the non-conductive organic layer is a chemical formula structure in which a thiophene ring is broken in the PEDOT:PSS and separated into two OH groups as claimed. Vaufrey et. Al. (US 20060244680 A1) teaches in Fig. 2 with associated text a device similar to that of Jeon with a general conducting organic layer 161 (Fig. 2, [0014]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-7629. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-4pm.
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, Toledo Fernando can be reached on 5712721867. 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.
/AARON J GRAY/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights