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 .
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.
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file, as electronically retrieved 03/04/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/28/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Iwasaki et al. (PG Pub 2019/0273122; hereinafter Iwasaki) and Nakano (PG Pub 2021/0223603).
PNG
media_image1.png
436
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 4 provided above and Fig. 6, Iwasaki teaches a display device comprising:
a first substrate 10, wherein the first substrate includes:
a support substrate 11 including a substrate surface (top surface) being a surface at a side facing the second substrate (see Fig. 4),
a plurality of light-emitting elements 30 provided at a substrate 11 surface side of the support substrate,
a first color filter (e.g. 36g) provided at a second substrate side of a first light-emitting element of the plurality of light-emitting elements,
a second color filter (e.g 36r) provided at a second substrate side of a second light-emitting element of the plurality of light-emitting elements and having a color different from that of the first color filter (red not green),
a light-shielding layer 36s (see Fig. 6) provided at the substrate surface side of the support substrate, surrounding the plurality of light-emitting elements in a plan view, and including a first layer 36g made of a same material as that of the first color filter (see Fig. 6) and a second layer 36r made of a same material as that of the second color filter (see Fig. 6), and
a second substrate 110 arranged facing the first substrate and having a light-transmitting property (para [0064]),
an adhesive 41 is provided, and the second substrate is bonded to the first substrate via the adhesive (see Fig. 4).
Although, Iwasaki teaches light-shielding layer, he does not teach a wall portion provided at a side of the light-shielding layer opposite to the support substrate, and surrounding the plurality of light-emitting elements in the plan view; and an adhesive is provided at an inner side of the wall portion in the plan view.
PNG
media_image2.png
640
1008
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In the same field of endeavor, refer to Fig. 3-provided above, Nakano teaches a display device comprising: a support substrate (Sub1); a second substrate (SUB2); a wall portion CN provided at a side of a light-shielding layer 21 opposite to the support substrate, and surrounding a light-emitting element (DA) in the plan view (see Fig. 3); and an adhesive SE is provided at an inner side of the wall portion in the plan view (see Fig. 3).
In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a seal over the light-shielding layer of Iwasaki, as taught by Nakano, to protect the device from moisture.
Regarding claim 2, refer to the figures cited above, in the combination of Iwasaki and Nakano, Nakano teaches the second substrate (SUB2) is provided at the inner side of the wall portion CN in the plan view (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, refer to the figures cited above, in the combination of Iwasaki and Nakano, Nakano teaches an outer edge of the second substrate (e.g. right side of SUB2) includes a first side in the plan view (see Fig. 3) and an inner edge of the wall portion (inner side of CN on right side of Fig. 3) includes a second side being parallel to the first side and facing the first side (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, refer to the figures cited above, in the combination of Iwasaki and Nakano, Nakano teaches the wall portion CN has a light-transmitting property (para [0051]).
Regarding claim 5, refer to the figures cited above, in the combination of Iwasaki and Nakano, Nakano teaches the wall portion CN has a light-shielding property (para [0051]).
Regarding claim 7, refer to the figures cited above, in the combination of Iwasaki and Nakano, Iwasaki teaches the first substrate 10 includes a third color filter 36b provided at a second substrate side 40 of a third light-emitting element 18b of the plurality of light-emitting elements 18 and having a color (blue) different from those of the first color filter (green) and the second color filter (red), and the light-shielding layer 25 includes a third layer 36b made of a same material as that of the third color filter (see Fig. 4).
2. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki and Nakano, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okuzono et al. (PG Pub 2021/0343978; hereinafter Okuzuno).
Regarding claim 8, refer to the figures cited above, Iwasaki and Nakano teach the display device according to claim 1 (see claim 1). They do not explicitly teach an electronic apparatus comprising the display device.
In the same field of endeavor, Okuzono teaches an electronic apparatus comprising a display device (abstract).
In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the display device of claim 1 into an electronic apparatus, as taught by Okuzono, to provide a visual display of information to the user.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claim 6 is 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:
Claim 6 contains allowable subject matter, because the prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or suggest, in combination with the other elements in claim 6, the first substrate includes an alignment mark, and the wall portion and the light-shielding layer do not overlap with the alignment mark in the plan view.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christina A Sylvia whose telephone number is (571)272-7474. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm (M-F).
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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached on 571-272-2063. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTINA A SYLVIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 /MARLON T FLETCHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817