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 Status
Previous action: claims 1 through 35 rejected
Present action: claims 1-7,12-13,15-17,19-24,26-31 and 34-35 rejected, 8-11,14,18,25 and 32-33 objected.
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 23 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 23 recites “the first reflective plate that is under the first connection electrode is electrically separated from the first reflective plate that is under the second connection electrode.” However, this indicates that the reflective plate is separated from itself. The examiner suggests rephrasing the claim to refer to a first portion of the reflective plate being separated from a second portion of the reflective plate.
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.
Rejection Note: Italicized and struck through claim limitations indicate limitations that are not explicitly disclosed in the primary reference, but disclosed in the secondary reference(s).
Claim(s) 1 through 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268)
Regarding claim 1.
Kwon teaches:
A display device (fig 2b:100; [para 0061]) comprising: a substrate (fig 2b:101; [para 0058]);
a first layer (fig 2b:111; [para 0058]) over the substrate (fig 2b:101; [para 0058]);
a light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) over the first layer (fig 2b:111; [para 0058]);
a first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) over the first layer (fig 2b:111; [para 0058]), the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) and having a first refractive index ([para 0065]);
a second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) over the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]), the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) having a second refractive index ([para 0065]);
, wherein the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) includes a moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) surrounds at least a portion of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]), wherein the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) includes a first moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) disposed on a first side of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) and a second moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) disposed on a second side of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) opposite to the first side, wherein the first moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) is defined at least by a side surface of the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) and a side surface of the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]), and wherein the second moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) is defined at least by a side surface of the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) and an upper surface of the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
772
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kwon does not teach 1st planarization layer covers the side of the LED and that the moat is separated from the LED.
Moon teaches:
A display device comprising:
a substrate (fig 6:100; [para 0124]);
a first layer (fig 6:105; [para 0124]) over the substrate (fig 6:100; [para 0124]);
a light emitting element (fig 6:EL; [para 0069]) over the first layer (fig 6:105; [para 0124]);
a first planarization layer (fig 4,6:110,315; [para 0077,0099]) over the first layer (fig 6:105; [para 0124]),
the first planarization layer (fig 4,6:110,315; [para 0077,0099]) configured to cover a side surface of the light emitting element (fig 6:EL; [para 0069]) and has a first refractive index (benzocyclobutene inherently has a refractive index);
and a bank (fig 6:510; [para 0109]) over the second planarization layer (fig 6:140; [para 0131]),
wherein the first planarization layer (fig 4,6:110,315; [para 0077,0099]) includes a moat spaced apart from the light emitting element (fig 6:EL; [para 0069]) and surrounds at least a portion of the light emitting element (fig 6:EL; [para 0069]).
PNG
media_image2.png
531
1068
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the first planarization layer to over the sidewall of the LED in order to provide a protected LED structure, further it would be obvious to provide a bank structure in order to improve separation between LED structures of the display thereby preventing light blurring between adjacent pixels.
Regarding claim 2.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 1,
Kwon teaches:
the second refractive index (silicon nitride=2; [para 0065]) is greater than the first refractive index (silicon oxide=1.45; [para 0065]).
Regarding claim 3.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 1,
Kwon teaches:
the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) includes a first side surface and a second side surface located further away from the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) than the first side surface, and the display device (fig 2b:100; [para 0061]) further comprising: a first reflective plate (fig 2b:510; [para 0068]) over the second side surface of the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]).
PNG
media_image3.png
559
764
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 3,
Kwon teaches:
a second reflective plate (fig 2b:510 annotated; [para 0068]) under the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]).
Regarding claim 5.
Kwon in view of Moon the display device according to claim 1,
Kwon teaches:
the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0068]) includes organic material ([para 0068]).
Regarding claim 6.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 1, further
Moon teaches:
the bank (fig 6:510; [para 0109]) is non-overlapping with the moat (fig 6).
Regarding claim 7.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 1, further
Kwon teaches:
the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067])includes a light emitting diode (fig 2b:380; [para 0067]) including an N-type semiconductor layer (fig 2b:370; [para 0067]), a light emitting layer (fig 2b:350; [para 0067]), a P-type semiconductor layer (fig 2b:330; [para 0067]), an N-type electrode (fig 2b:390; [para 0067]), and a P-type electrode (fig 2b:310; [para 0067]).
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Kim (US 2023/0121816)
Regarding claim 12.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device of claim 1 above.
Kwon in view of Moon does not teach the third planarization layer.
Kim teaches:
a driving transistor (fig 6:T,GE; [para 0171]) over the substrate (fig 6:sub; [para 0124]); a third planarization layer (fig 6:PSV; [para 0168]) over the driving transistor (fig 6:T,GE; [para 0171]);
a first reflective electrode (fig 6:ale1; [para 0137]) and a second reflective electrode (fig 6:ale2; [para 0137]) between the third planarization layer (fig 6:PSV; [para 0168]) and the first layer (fig 6:ins1; [para 0194]);
a first connection electrode (fig 6:pe1; [para 0123]) electrically connected with a first reflective electrode (fig 6:ale1; [para 0137]) through a first contact hole;
and a second connection electrode (fig 6:pe2; [para 0123]) electrically connected with a second reflective electrode (fig 6:ale2; [para 0137]) through a second contact hole.
PNG
media_image4.png
409
645
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a reflection electrode in order to increase light output efficiency by directing emitted light away from the substrate and in order to improve the alignment of the device during manufacture thereby reducing the steps required (paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 13.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device of claim 1, further
Kim teaches:
the moat is spaced apart from the first contact hole and the second contact hole (annotated fig 6 above).
Claim(s) 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 34 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268)
Regarding claim 15.
Kwon teaches:
A display device (fig 2b:100; [para 0061]) comprising: a light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) over a substrate (fig 2b:101; [para 0058]);
a first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) having a first refractive index ([para 0065]); a second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) over the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]), the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) having a second refractive index ([para 0065]);
a moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) over the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) and including a side surface facing the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]);
and a first reflective plate (fig 2b:510; [para 0068]) over at least a portion of the side surface of the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]), wherein the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) includes a first moat disposed on a first side of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) and a second moat disposed on a second side of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) opposite to the first side, wherein the first moat is defined at least by a side surface of the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]) and a side surface of the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]), and wherein the second moat is defined at least by a side surface of the second planarization layer (fig 2b:420; [para 0063]) and an upper surface of the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]).
PNG
media_image5.png
594
985
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Kwon does not teach the first planarization layer over the side and upper surface of the LED,
Moon teaches:
A display device comprising:
a light emitting element (fig 6:el; [para 0069]) over a substrate (fig 6:100; [para 0124]);
a first planarization layer (fig 4,6:110,315; [para 0077,0099]) over a side surface and an upper surface of the light emitting element (fig 6:el; [para 0069]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the first planarization layer to over the sidewall of the LED in order to provide a protected LED structure
Regarding claim 16.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Kwon teaches:
the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) includes a first side surface and a second side surface facing each other, wherein the second side surface includes an inclined surface in which a separation distance from the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]) gradually increases from a lower portion to an upper portion, and the first reflective plate (fig 2b:510; [para 0068]) is over at least a portion of the second side surface of the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]).
Regarding claim 17.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 16, further
Kwon teaches:
the first reflective plate (fig 2b:510; [para 0068])covers the second side surface of the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) and is over at least a portion of an upper surface of the first planarization layer (fig 2b:410; [para 0061]).
Regarding claim 19.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Moon teaches:
the moat is spaced apart from the light emitting element (fig 6:el; [para 0069]).
PNG
media_image6.png
406
600
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Kwon teaches:
the moat (fig 2b:430; [para 0061]) surrounds at least a portion of the light emitting element (fig 2b:300; [para 0067]).
Regarding claim 21.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Moon teaches:
a first connection electrode (fig 6:AE; [para 0132]) that electrically connects the light emitting element (fig 6:el; [para 0069]) and a driving transistor (fig 6:T2; [para 0132]);
and a second connection electrode (fig 6:CE; [para 0135]) that electrically connects the light emitting element (fig 6:el; [para 0069]) and a power wiring (fig 6:CL; [para 0135]),
wherein the first connection electrode (fig 6:AE; [para 0132]) and the second connection electrode (fig 6:CE; [para 0135]) are over the side surface of the moat (fig 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Kwon with the first and second connection electrodes extending over the side surfaces of the moat as is taught by Moon in order to enable electrical connection of the LED after the LED has been placed.
Regarding claim 22.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 21, further
Kwon teaches:
the first connection electrode (fig 2b:310; [para 0067]) and the second connection electrode (fig 2b:390; [para 0067]) are over the first reflective plate (fig 2b:510; [para 0067]).
Regarding claim 24.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 21, further
Moon teaches:
the first moat overlaps the first connection electrode (fig 6:ae; [para 0132]) at least partially, and the second moat overlaps the second connection electrode (fig 6:CE; [para 0132]) at least partially.
PNG
media_image7.png
515
547
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 26.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 24, further
Kwon teaches:
the first moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) and the second moat (fig 2b annotated; [para 0061]) are connected to each other.
PNG
media_image8.png
527
707
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 28.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 21, further:
Moon teaches
a electrode (fig 6:SE; [para 0132]) between the substrate (fig 6:100; [para 0131]) and the light emitting element (fig 6:EL; [para 0069]), the electrode (fig 6:SE; [para 0132]) electrically connected with the driving transistor (fig 6:T2; [para 0132]), wherein the first connection electrode (fig 6:AE; [para 0132]) is electrically connected with the electrode (fig 6:SE; [para 0132]) through a first contact hole (fig 6:CCH1; [para 0132]).
Moon further teaches:
electrode (fig 6:e1; [para 0084]) comprises reflective material ([para 0084])
PNG
media_image9.png
547
726
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the electrodes connecting the driving transistor to the connection electrodes in order to controllably convey voltage from the transistor to the light emitter, further it would have been obvious that the electrodes comprise a reflective material to the ability of reflective metals to convey voltage with low resistance.
Regarding claim 30.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 28, further
the first contact hole (fig 6:cch1; [para 0132]) is spaced apart from the moat (fig 6:130; [para 0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a contact hole apart from the moat region in order to provide a path to connect the electrode of the transistor to the electrode of the light emitter.
Regarding claim 31.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 28, further
the moat is between the first contact hole (fig 6:cch1; [para 0132]) and the light emitting element (fig 6:300; [para 0085])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a contact hole apart from the moat region in order to provide a path to connect the electrode of the transistor to the electrode of the light emitter.
Regarding claim 34.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Moon teaches:
a second reflective plate (fig 6:101; [para 0117])under the light emitting element (fig 6:300; [para 0085]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a second reflective plate under the light emitting element in order to further improve light reflection efficiency (paragraph 143])
Regarding claim 35.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 15, further
Kwon teaches:
wherein the second refractive index (silicon nitride=2; [para 0065]) is greater than the first refractive index (silicon oxide=1.45; [para 0065]).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268) as applied to claim 22 and further in view of Kim (US 2023/0121816).
Regarding claim 23.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 22, above
Kwon in view of Moon does not teach an electrically divided reflective plate.
Kim teaches:
the first reflective plate (fig 6:ALE1; [para 01237])that is under the first connection electrode (fig 6:PE1; [para 0123]) is electrically separated from the first reflective plate (fig 6:ALE2; [para 0137]) that is under the second connection electrode (fig 6:PE2; [para 0123]).
PNG
media_image10.png
596
692
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a reflective plate comprising electrically isolated portions in order that the plate can be used to connect LED electrodes to the power delivery wiring buried beneath, further the plates can be used for aligning the positioning of the device (paragraph 138)
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268) as applied to claim 24 and further in view of Kim (US 2023/0121816).
Regarding claim 27.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 24, above
Kwon in view of Moon does not teach an electrically divided reflective plate.
Kim teaches:
a portion of the first reflective plate (fig 6:ALE1; [para 0137]) that is in the first moat is spaced apart from another portion of the first reflective plate (fig 6:ALE2; [para 0122])that is in the second moat.
PNG
media_image10.png
596
692
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a reflective plate comprising electrically isolated portions in order that the plate can be used to connect LED electrodes to the power delivery wiring buried beneath, further the plates can be used for aligning the positioning of the device (paragraph 138)
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268) as applied to claim 21 and further in view of Kim (US 2023/0121816).
Regarding claim 29.
Kwon in view of Moon teaches the display device according to claim 21, above
Kwon in view of Moon does not teach a second reflective electrode
Kim teaches:
a second reflective electrode (fig 6:ale1; [para 0137])between the substrate (fig 6:sub; [para 0090]) and the light emitting element (fig 6:LD; [para 0056]), the second reflective electrode (fig 6:ale2; [para 0137]) electrically connected with the power wiring (fig 6:PL2; [para 0188]), wherein the second connection electrode (fig PE2; [para 0149])is electrically connected with the second reflective electrode (fig 6:ale2; [para 0137])through a second contact hole.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a reflective plate comprising electrically isolated portions in order that the plate can be used to connect LED electrodes to the power delivery wiring buried beneath, further the plates can be used for aligning the positioning of the device (paragraph 138)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 through 11, 14, 18, 25, 32 and 33 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 8, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the light emitting element is electrically connected with the driving transistor through the first connection electrode and is connected with the first power line through the second contact hole, and the first contact hole and the second contact hole are overlapped with the moat.
Regarding claim 14, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the moat includes the first contact hole and the second contact hole.
Regarding claim 18, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the first side surface includes an inclined surface in which a separation distance from the light emitting element gradually decreases from a lower portion to an upper portion, and the first reflective plate is not over the first side surface of the moat.
Regarding claim 25, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the first moat and the second moat are spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 32, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the moat is overlapped with the first contact hole.
Regarding claim 33, in combination with other elements of the claim, the prior art does not teach the moat exposes at least a portion of an upper surface of the reflective electrode on a lower surface of the moat, and the first reflective plate is in contact with the reflective electrode in the moat.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 through 35 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference combination applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Newly applied rejections over Kwon (US 2017/0062674) in view of Moon (US 2018/0175268) anticipate the claims.
Previously applied objection to claim 23 and 112 2nd paragraph rejection of claims 12, 13, 14, 27 and 33 are overcome by amendment and withdrawn.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8451. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00 - 19:00.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571)272-5055. 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.
/D.J.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/NICHOLAS J TOBERGTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights