DETAILED ACTION
Priority Claim
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
IDS
All references provided in the IDS have been considered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II (Claims 9-20) in the reply filed on 07/29/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-8 are withdrawn from consideration.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: inconsistent use of names/reference numerals
In the specification, for example ¶ [0136], the lower electrode is given reference numeral ‘LE’. At later points in the specification, for example (¶ [0059]) the lower electrode is given the reference numeral ‘LE1’ or ‘LE2’ (¶ [0064]) or ‘LE3’ (¶[0061]). These are also referred to as “the lower electrodes” (¶ [0062]). In the claims, it becomes unclear as to which electrode is being referred to as ‘the lower electrode’ is a claimed element.
In the specification, for example (¶ [0080]) the upper electrode is given the reference numeral ‘UE1’ or ‘UE2’ (¶ [0082]) or ‘UE3’ (¶ [0083]). These are also referred to as “the upper electrodes” (¶ [0092]). In the claims, it becomes unclear as to which electrode is being referred to as ‘the upper electrode’ is a claimed element.
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.
Claims 9, 11, 15-20 are 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 Independent Claim 9,
Independent Claim 9, lines 6 and lines 17, 26 recite “a lower electrode” and “the lower electrode”, respectively. The corresponding structure for “a/the lower electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “A/the lower electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0136]), the single structure for the lower electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the lower electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. “A lower electrode” and “the lower electrode” has been interpreted to mean “at least one lower electrode”. Claims 10-15 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 9.
Independent Claim 9, lines 16 and 26 recite “a second aperture” and “the second aperture”, respectively. The corresponding structure for “a/the second aperture” cannot be precisely determined. “A/the second aperture” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0113]), the single structure for the second aperture cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the second aperture. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. “A second aperture” and “the second aperture” has been interpreted to mean “at least one second aperture”. Claims 10-15 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 9.
Independent Claim 9, line 27 recites “an upper electrode”. The corresponding structure for “an upper electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “An upper electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0092]), the single structure for an upper electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the upper electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one upper electrode”. Claims 10-15 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 9.
Regarding Dependent Claim 11,
Dependent Claim 11, lines 2 and 6 recites “the lower electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the lower electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The lower electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0136]), the single structure for the lower electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the lower electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one lower electrode”.
Regarding Dependent Claim 15,
Dependent Claim 15, line 3 recites “the upper electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the upper electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The upper electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0092]), the single structure for an upper electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the upper electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one upper electrode”.
Regarding Independent Claim 16,
Independent Claim 16, lines 6 and lines 14, 22 recite “a lower electrode” and “the lower electrode”, respectively. The corresponding structure for “a/the lower electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “A/the lower electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0136]), the single structure for the lower electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the lower electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. “A lower electrode” and “the lower electrode” has been interpreted to mean “at least one lower electrode”. Claims 17-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 16.
Independent Claim 16, lines 13-14 and 22 recite “a second aperture” and “the second aperture”, respectively. The corresponding structure for “a/the second aperture” cannot be precisely determined. “A/the second aperture” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0113]), the single structure for the second aperture cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the second aperture. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. “A second aperture” and “the second aperture” has been interpreted to mean “at least one second aperture”. Claims 17-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 16.
Independent Claim 16, line 23 recites “an upper electrode”. The corresponding structure for “an upper electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “An upper electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0092]), the single structure for an upper electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the upper electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one upper electrode”. Claims 17-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 16.
Regarding Dependent Claim 17,
Dependent Claim 17, line 2 recites “the lower electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the lower electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The lower electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0136]), the single structure for the lower electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the lower electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one lower electrode”.
Regarding Dependent Claim 18,
Dependent Claim 18, line 2 recites “the lower electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the lower electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The lower electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0136]), the single structure for the lower electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the lower electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one lower electrode”.
Dependent Claim 18, lines 2-3 recites “each of the lower electrode and the feed terminal is a multilayer body”. The scope of the claim is unclear. “Each of” is best understood as a plurality while “the lower electrode” is a single element. No plurality of electrodes is claimed. Furthermore, this claim could also be understood as the feed terminal having a multilayer body, which is not supported by the specification or the drawings. Additionally, the corresponding multilayer structure for the single electrode cannot be precisely determined. It has been interpreted to mean “there exists a feed terminal and at least one lower electrode is a multilayer body…”.
Regarding Dependent Claim 19,
Dependent Claim 19, line 3 recites “the upper electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the upper electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The upper electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0092]), the single structure for an upper electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the upper electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one upper electrode”.
Regarding Dependent Claim 20,
Dependent Claim 20, line 3 recites “the upper electrode”. The corresponding structure for “the upper electrode” cannot be precisely determined. “The upper electrode” is understood as a single element. In view of the specification (¶ [0092]), the single structure for an upper electrode cannot be determined, as multiple structures are defined as the upper electrode. Therefore, the claim scope is ambiguous and indefinite. It has been interpreted to mean “at least one upper electrode”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 9-10, 12-16, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kusunoki (US 20250133899 A1).
Re: Independent Claim 9, Kusunoki discloses:
A display device (Kusunoki, display apparatus) comprising:
a substrate (Kusunoki, substrate; Fig. 20, element 151, ¶ [0381]);
an organic insulating layer (Kusunoki, organic insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 214, ¶ [0413]) provided over a display area (Kusunoki, display portion; Fig.19, element 162, ¶ [0375]) and a surrounding area (Kusunoki, the area outside the display portion and including the display portion can be considered a surrounding area) outside the display area above the substrate (Kusunoki, Fig. 20);
a lower electrode (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 112a, 112b, 112c can be considered a lower electrode) provided on the organic insulating layer in the display area (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, element 112a is on element 214);
a feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b) provided on the organic insulating layer in the surrounding area;
a mounting terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126a) exposed from a first through hole (Kusunoki, layer; Fig. 20, element 128) of the organic insulating layer in the surrounding area;
PNG
media_image1.png
576
1046
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an inorganic insulating layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer, Fig. 20, element 125, ¶ [0166]) provided over the display area and the surrounding area on the organic insulating layer, and comprising a first aperture from which the feed terminal is exposed (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated labeled '1st'), a second aperture from which the lower electrode is exposed (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated with the unlabeled box that can be considered a second aperture) and a third aperture (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated labeled '3rd' which can be considered a third aperture) from which the mounting terminal is exposed;
a partition (Kusunoki, mask layers, insulating layers; Fig. 20, elements 118a, 118b, 125, and 127, respectively, collectively make up the partition) comprising a conductive lower portion (Kusunoki, mask layer; Fig. 20, element 118a, ¶ [0151]) which is provided on the inorganic insulating layer and is in contact with the feed terminal through the first aperture (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated image), and an upper portion (Kusunoki, insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 127) which is provided on the lower portion and protrudes from a side surface of the lower portion (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, element 127 is tapered and therefore protrudes from a side surface of 118a);
an organic layer (Kusunoki, resin layer; Fig. 20, element 147) which is in contact with the lower electrode through the second aperture (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated image);
an upper electrode (Kusunoki, common electrode; Fig. 20, element 115) which covers the organic layer and is in contact with the lower portion of the partition.
Re: Dependent Claim 10, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 9 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
PNG
media_image2.png
537
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
further comprising an inspection terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126c) exposed from a second through hole of the organic insulating layer (Kusunoki, organic insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 214, ¶ [0413], the right instance of 128 can be considered a second through hole) in the surrounding area, wherein
the inorganic insulating layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer, Fig. 20, element 125, ¶ [0166]) comprises a fourth aperture from which the inspection terminal is exposed (Kusunoki, see attached annotated figure, label 4th, can be considered a fourth aperture).
Re: Dependent Claim 12, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 9 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
wherein the inorganic insulating layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer, Fig. 20, element 125, is formed of silicon oxynitride (SiON) (Kusunoki, ¶ [0166]).
Re: Dependent Claim 13, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 9 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
wherein the third aperture Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated labeled '3rd' which can be considered a third aperture) overlaps the first through hole (Kusunoki, layer; Fig. 20, element 128), and the organic insulating layer (Kusunoki, organic insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 214, ¶ [0413]) surrounding the first through hole is exposed from the third aperture.
Re: Dependent Claim 14, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 10 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
wherein the fourth aperture (Kusunoki, see attached annotated figure, label 4th, can be considered a fourth aperture) overlaps the second through hole, and the organic insulating layer surrounding (Kusunoki, organic insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 214, ¶ [0413], the right instance of 128 can be considered a second through hole) the second through hole is exposed from the fourth aperture.
Re: Dependent Claim 15, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 9 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
further comprising:
a cap layer (Kusunoki, protective layer; Fig. 20, element 131) provided on the upper electrode (Kusunoki, common electrode; Fig. 20, element 115); and
a sealing layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 103) provided on the cap layer and formed of an inorganic insulating material (Kusunoki, ¶ [0211]).
Re: Independent Claim 16, Kusunoki discloses:
A display device (Kusunoki, display apparatus) comprising:
a substrate (Kusunoki, substrate; Fig. 20, element 151, ¶ [0381]);
an organic insulating layer (Kusunoki, organic insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 214, ¶ [0413]) provided over a display area (Kusunoki, display portion; Fig.19, element 162, ¶ [0375], the regions up to element 215 can be considered the display area) and a surrounding area (Kusunoki, the area outside the display portion and including the display portion can be considered a surrounding area) outside the display area above the substrate (Kusunoki, Fig. 20);
a lower electrode (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 112a, 112b, 112c can be considered a lower electrode) provided on the organic insulating layer in the display area (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, element 112a is on element 214, within region 162);
a feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b) provided on the organic insulating layer in the surrounding area;
an inorganic insulating layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer, Fig. 20, element 125, ¶ [0166]) provided over the display area and the surrounding area on the organic insulating layer, and comprising a first aperture from which the feed terminal is exposed (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated labeled '1st'), a second aperture from which the lower electrode is exposed (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated with the unlabeled box that can be considered a second aperture);
a partition (Kusunoki, mask layers, insulating layers; Fig. 20, elements 118a, 118b, 125, and 127, respectively, collectively make up the partition) comprising a conductive lower portion (Kusunoki, mask layer; Fig. 20, element 118a, ¶ [0151]) which is provided on the inorganic insulating layer and is in contact with the feed terminal through the first aperture (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated image), and an upper portion (Kusunoki, insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 127) which is provided on the lower portion and protrudes from a side surface of the lower portion (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, element 127 is tapered and therefore protrudes from a side surface of 118a);
an organic layer (Kusunoki, resin layer; Fig. 20, element 147) which is in contact with the lower electrode through the second aperture (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, see attached annotated image);
an upper electrode (Kusunoki, common electrode; Fig. 20, element 115) which covers the organic layer and is in contact with the lower portion of the partition.
Re: Dependent Claim 19, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 16 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
wherein the feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b) is a terminal for supplying common voltage to the upper electrode (Kusunoki, common electrode; Fig. 20, element 115) (Kusunoki is a conductive layer and therefore can supply common voltage to the upper electrode).
Re: Dependent Claim 20, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 16 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
a cap layer (Kusunoki, protective layer; Fig. 20, element 131) provided on the upper electrode (Kusunoki, common electrode; Fig. 20, element 115); and
a sealing layer (Kusunoki, insulating layer; Fig. 20, element 103) provided on the cap layer and formed of an inorganic insulating material (Kusunoki, ¶ [0211]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 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.
Claim(s) 11, 17, are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusunoki (US 20250133899 A1).
Re: Dependent Claim 11, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 10 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
the lower electrode (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 112a, 112b, 112c can be considered a lower electrode)
the feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b)
the mounting terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126a)
the inspection terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126c)
Kusunoki does not explicitly disclose:
the lower electrode and the feed terminal are formed of a same material, and the mounting terminal and the inspection terminal are formed of a same material which is different from the lower electrode.
Kusunoki discloses the lower electrode, feed terminal, mounting terminal and inspecting terminals to all be conductive materials, but does not explicitly disclose the lower electrode and the feed terminal to be formed of a same material and the mounting terminal and inspection terminal to be formed of a same material, which is different from the lower electrode. In the absence of criticality or unexpected results, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) before the effective filing date to select conductive materials such that the lower electrode and feed terminal are the same conductive material, and that the mounting terminal and inspection terminal are of the same conductive material, with the conductive material of the mounting terminal and the inspection terminal being different from that of the lower electrode and feed terminal, arriving at the invention as claimed, as a predictable selection of known and alternative conductive materials (Kusunoki, ¶ [0226]) for their known properties without requiring undue experimentation.
Re: Dependent Claim 17, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 16 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
the lower electrode (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 112a, 112b, 112c can be considered a lower electrode)
the feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b)
Kusunoki does not explicitly disclose:
the lower electrode and the feed terminal are formed of a same material.
Kusunoki discloses the lower electrode and feed terminal are conductive layers but does not explicitly disclose the lower electrode and the feed terminal to be formed of a same material. In the absence of criticality or unexpected results, it would be obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to select conductive layers such that the lower electrode and feed terminal are of the same conductive material, arriving at the invention as claimed, as a predictable selection of known and alternative conductive materials (Kusunoki, ¶ [0226]) for their known properties without requiring undue experimentation.
Claim(s) 18, is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusunoki (US 20250133899 A1) in view of Choi (US 20130126700 A1).
Re: Dependent Claim 18, Kusunoki disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 16 on which this claim depends. Kusunoki further discloses:
each of the lower electrode (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 112a, 112b, 112c can be considered a lower electrode) and the feed terminal (Kusunoki, conductive layer; Fig. 20, element 126b) is a multilayer body (Kusunoki, Fig. 20, shows 112a, 112b, and 112c as multilayers)
Kusunoki does not explicitly disclose:
each of the lower electrode is a multilayer body including a transparent electrode and a metal electrode.
Choi discloses:
each of the lower electrode (Choi, first electrode; Fig. 4, element E1) is a multilayer body including a transparent electrode (Choi, first upper electrode; Fig. 4, element 38, ¶ [0060], "the first upper electrode 38 may be a transparent electrode, for example, a transparent conductive oxide ("TCO") electrode. In such an embodiment, the TCO electrode may be, for example, an indium tin oxide ("ITO")") and a metal electrode (Choi, first lower electrode; Fig. 4, element 36, ¶ [0060], "the first lower electrode 36 may be a metal film having a thickness in a range that allows transmission of light. The metal film may be a film including at least one selected from palladium (Pd), titanium (Ti), aluminum (Al), gold (Au), silver (Ag), platinum (Pt), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co) and copper (Cu).".
Kusunoki discloses a multilayer lower electrode and a feed terminal but does not explicitly disclose that the lower electrode includes a transparent electrode and a metal electrode. Choi discloses a multilayer first electrode that includes a transparent electrode and a metal electrode for use in a photodetector device. Both disclose the usage of electrodes and are therefore analogous art. It would be obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to include the first electrode, as disclosed by Choi, to the invention of Kusunoki, for the known benefit of controlling light transmission (Choi, ¶ [0022]) through layers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIMARTA KAUR CHOWDHARY whose telephone number is (571)272-7679. The examiner can normally be reached usually Monday - Thursday, 6:45 AM - 4:45 PM (EST).
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, Leonard Chang can be reached at (571) 270-3691. 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.
/NIMARTA KAUR CHOWDHARY/ Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/Leonard Chang/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights