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 § 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.
Claims 4, 12 and 13-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites “…wherein at least one of the plurality of emitting units is connected in a region overlapping the trench”. The phrase “is connected” lacks a clear object of connection. It is unclear whether the claimed emitting unit is connected to another emitting unit, connected to itself as a continuous layer across the trench region, or connected to any other structure. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpretated as requiring that at least one of the plurality of emitting units continuously extends in the region overlapping the trench, such that the at least one emitting unit is not broken (or disconnected/separated) in the air gap, based on the disclosed specification.
Claim 12 recites “…openings that expose respective central portions of the first subpixel electrode…”. Claim 12 further recites “…an organic insulating layer including an opening overlapping the trench”. Further claim 12 recites “an electrode layer disposed in the openings to be spaced apart from side surfaces of the openings; and a redistribution layer disposed between the electrode layer and the side surfaces of the openings”. It is unclear whether “the openings” refers to the openings of the subpixel-defining layer, the opening of the organic insulating layer, the trench passing through the sub-pixel defining layer, or combined opening formed by the trench and the opening of the organic insulating layer. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpretated as requiring that the electrode layer is disposed in a combined trench/opening region formed by the trench passing through the sub-pixel defining layer and the opening of the organic insulating layer overlapping the trench, and that the redistribution layer is disposed between the electrode layer and side surfaces of that combined trench/opening region.
Claim 13 recites “…at least one of the plurality of layers has an opening exposing at least a portion of the electrode layer to outside”. The phrase “to outside” is unclear because the claim does not specify whether the electrode layer is exposed to the outside of the at least one layer, outside of the emission element unit, outside of the display apparatus, etc. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpretated as requiring that at least one layer of the emission element unit including a discontinuity, separation, or open space in the region overlapping the electrode layer, such that the discontinuity, separation, or open space exposes at least a portion of the electrode layer from that layer.
Claims 14-20 inherit the indefiniteness of claim 13 for being dependent on claim 13. Hence, claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh (US 11910654 B1) in view of Li (US 20240206242 A1).
Re: Independent Claim 1, Yeh discloses a display apparatus comprising:
a substrate (Yeh, Fig. 24, substrate 26);
a first subpixel electrode (Yeh, Fig. 24, first anode 42-1) and a second subpixel electrode (Yeh, Fig. 24, second anode 42-2) spaced apart from each other and disposed on the substrate;
a subpixel-defining layer disposed on the substrate (Yeh, Fig. 24, pixel defining layer 76), the subpixel-defining layer including:
openings that expose respective central portions of the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode, respectively (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24 and also column 8 lines 31-34, that pixel definition layer may have openings in which the anodes are formed. In Fig. 24, the central portions of adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2 remain uncovered by pixel definition layer 76 and are exposed through respective openings of the pixel definition layer), and
a trench disposed between the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode in plan view (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24 and Column 21 lines 10-13, trench 206 formed in pixel definition layer 76 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2);
an electrode layer disposed in the trench to be spaced apart from side surfaces of the trench (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24, conductive gate 222 is disposed in the trench region while being separated from surrounding trench surfaces by gate insulator 224. Thus, conductive gate 222 is the claimed electrode layer).
Yeh is silent regarding
a redistribution layer disposed between the electrode layer and the side surfaces of the trench to expose at least a portion of the electrode layer.
However, Li teaches a redistribution layer disposed between the electrode layer and the side surfaces of the trench to expose at least a portion of the electrode layer (Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0080], floating hole injection layer 50, floating light-emitting layer 60, and floating charge generation layer 30 located in the recess and stacked with each other. Li further teaches that the recess disconnects hole injection layers, light emitting layers, and charge generation layers of adjacent subpixels from each other. Thus, Li teaches a stacked floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer structure including HIL material, light-emitting layer material, and CGL material. This corresponds to the claimed redistribution layer, because the instant specification describes redistribution layer RE as a stacked structure including portions of a hole injection layer, emitting units, and charge generation layers, broken, disconnected, or separated in the air gap/trench region).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh’s trench 206/conductive gate 222 structure by applying Li’s recess-based OLED-layer disconnection arrangement, such that the stacked floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer material, including floating hole injection layer 50, floating light-emitting layer 60, and floating charge generation layer 30, is formed in the trench region between conductive gate 222 and the side surface of trench 206. Li teaches that the recess causes floating OLED-layer portions to be separated from adjacent subpixel layers, thereby preventing crosstalk and improve display uniformity. Yeh teaches that trench 206 leaves a portion of conductive gate 222/gate insulator 224 not covered by pixel definition layer 76 so that conductive gate 222 can create a high electric field in OLED layers 45 to stop leakage current between pixels. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Li’s floating/disconnected OLED-stack material in Yeh’s trench side regions to further reduce lateral crosstalk/leakage, while maintaining an exposed portion of Yeh’s conductive gate 222 in the trench/opening region to preserve Yeh’s gate-modulator leakage reduction function.
Re: Claim 2, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
further comprising: a plurality of emitting units disposed on the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24, each anode 42 has associated OLED layers 45. For example, anode 42-1 has associated OLED layers 45-R, and anode 42-2 has associated OLED layers 45-B. Thus, the OLED pixels formed by the respective anodes and OLED layers corresponding to the claimed plurality of emission units disposed on the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode).
Re: Claim 3, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein at least one of the plurality of emitting units includes a first functional layer, a second functional layer, and emission layers disposed between the first functional layer and the second functional layer (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24 and OLED layers 45 disposed between anodes 42 and cathode 54. Yeh discloses, in Fig. 5A, that OLED layers 45 may include hole injection layer 44, hole transport layer 46, emissive layer 48, electron transport layer 50, and electron injection layer 52. The hole injection layer 44/hole transport layer 46 correspond to the claimed first functional layer, the electrode transport layer 50/electron injection layer 52 correspond to the claimed second functional layer, and emissive layer 48 corresponds to the claimed emission layer disposed between the first functional layer and the second functional layer).
Re: Claim 4, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein at least one of the plurality of emitting units is connected in a region overlapping the trench (Yeh teaches adjacent OLED pixels/subpixels having OLED layers 45 disposed over adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2. Yeh further teaches that trench 206 is formed in pixel definition layer 76 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2, and that conductive gate 222 is provided in the trench region to create a high electric field in OLED layers 45 to stop leakage current between the pixels. Thus, Yeh teaches OLED layer/emitting-unit material extending in the inter-subpixel region overlapping trench 206. Yeh also explains, in column 8 and lines 10-13, that conductivity of OLED layer 45 may allow leakage current to pass between neighboring anodes. Accordingly, Yeh teaches that at least one emitting unit, including laterally conductive OLED layer material, is connected or continuous in a region overlapping trench 206 between adjacent subpixels.).
Re: Claim 5, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends.
Li further teaches
further comprising: one or more charge generation layers disposed between the plurality of emitting units (Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0080], that each subpixel includes first light-emitting element 61 and second light-emitting element 62, and that charge generating layer 3 is located between first light-emitting element 61 and second light-emitting element 62. For the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to incorporate Li’s OLED stack, including charge generation layer 3 between first and second light-emitting elements 61 and 62, into Yeh’s OLED display to reduce crosstalk and improve display uniformity).
Re: Claim 6, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 5 on which this claim depends.
Li further teaches
wherein the one or more charge generation layers is disconnected in a region overlapping the trench (Li teaches, in Fig. 5, charge generation layer 3 is disconnected in a region overlapping recess 400. In the modified Yeh structure, Li’s recess 400 corresponds to Yeh’s trench 206 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2. Therefore, Yeh in view of Li teaches that the charge generation layer is disconnected in a region overlapping the trench).
Re: Claim 8, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
further comprising: an opposite electrode disposed on the plurality of emitting units (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24, OLED layers 45 disposed over anodes 42, and cathode 54 disposed over OLED layers 45. The OLED 45 corresponds to the claimed plurality of emitting units, and cathode 54 corresponds to the claimed opposite electrode disposed on the plurality of emitting units).
Re: Claim 9, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Li further teaches
wherein the subpixel-defining layer includes a tip portion protruding toward the trench (Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0083], that the size of the first recess 400 in the direction parallel to the main surface 11 first gradually increases and then gradually decreases along the direction from a location away from the main surface 11 to a location close to the main surface 11. Accordingly, the portions of pixel defining layer 4 defining the narrowed part of first recess 400 protrude toward the recess and correspond to the claimed tip portion protruding toward the trench. In the modified Yeh structure, Li’s first recess 400 corresponds to Yeh’s trench 206 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Yeh’s trench 206 with Li’s protruding recess geometry because Li teaches that such recess shape is advantageous for disconnecting the charge generation layers, first light-emitting layers and hole injection layers of adjacent sub-pixels on the pixel definition layer from each other.
Re: Claim 10, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Li further teaches
wherein a width of the trench decreases in a direction ((Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0083], that the size of the first recess 400 in the direction parallel to the main surface 11 first gradually increases and then gradually decreases along the direction from a location away from the main surface 11 to a location close to the main surface 11. Thus, Li teaches a recess having width that decreases in a direction. In the modified Yeh structure, Li’s first recess 400 corresponds to Yeh’s trench 206 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Yeh’s trench 206 with Li’s decreasing-width recess geometry because Li teaches that such recess shape is advantageous for disconnecting the charge generation layers, first light-emitting layers and hole injection layers of adjacent sub-pixels on the pixel definition layer from each other.
Re: Claim 11, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein the trench surrounds each subpixel electrode in plan view (As discussed for claim 1, Yeh teaches each subpixel electrodes/anodes 42-1 and 42-2 and trench/opening/recess 206 formed in pixel definition layer 76 between adjacent anodes. Yeh further teaches in the Fig. 17/Fig. 19 embodiment, that trench 206 exposes conductive ring structure 204 through pixel definition layer 76. Yeh explains that Fig. 17 is a cross-sectional view taken along line 212 of Fig. 19, and Fig. 19 shows conductive ring 204-1 and 204-2 enclosing respective pixels in plan view. Thus, because trench 206 exposes the ring structure 204 and the ring structure encloses the respective pixel/anode in plan view, Yeh teaches that trench 206 surrounds each subpixel electrode in plan view.
To the extent Yeh’s Fig. 24 embodiment is relied upon for the electrode layer disposed in the trench, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Yeh’s Fig. 17/Fig. 19 surrounding ring structure layout to Yeh’s Fig. 24 trench arrangement so that trench 206 extends around each anode 42-1 and 42-2 in plan view in order to use the conductive ring 204 that serves as an active leakage-mitigating structure to stop leakage current between neighboring pixels).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh (US 11910654 B1) in view of Li (US 20240206242 A1) further in view of Choi (US 20120098011 A1).
Re: Claim 7, Yeh and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 5 on which this claim depends.
Both Yeh and Li are silent regarding
wherein the one or more charge generation layers includes a negative charge generation layer and a positive charge generation layer.
However, Choi teaches
wherein the one or more charge generation layers includes a negative charge generation layer and a positive charge generation layer (Choi teaches, in Fig. 1 and ¶ [0035], that charge generation layer 140 may be a PN junction charge generating layer joining N-type charge generation layer and P-type charge generation layer. The N-type charge generation layer corresponds to the claimed negative charge generation layer and P-type charge generation layer corresponds to the claimed positive charge generation layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Choi’s N-type and P-type charge generation layers where the N-type charge generation layer provides electrons and the P-type charge generation layer provides holes to the respective light emission layers, thereby improving luminous efficiency of an organic light emitting device incorporating multiple light emission layers and lowering driving voltage.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh (US 11910654 B1) in view of Kinjo (WO 2022163123 A1) further in view of Li (US 20240206242 A1).
Re: Independent Claim 12, Yeh discloses a display apparatus comprising:
a substrate (Yeh, Fig. 24, substrate 26);
a first subpixel electrode (Yeh, Fig. 24, first anode 42-1) and a second subpixel electrode (Yeh, Fig. 24, second anode 42-2) spaced apart from each other and disposed on the substrate;
a subpixel-defining layer disposed on the substrate (Yeh, Fig. 24, pixel defining layer 76), the subpixel-defining layer including:
openings that expose respective central portions of the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode, respectively (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24 and also column 8 lines 31-34, that pixel definition layer may have openings in which the anodes are formed. In Fig. 24, the central portions of adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2 remain uncovered by pixel definition layer 76 and are exposed through respective openings of the pixel definition layer), and
a trench disposed between the first subpixel electrode and the second subpixel electrode in plan view (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24 and Column 21 lines 10-13, trench 206 formed in pixel definition layer 76 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2).
Yeh is silent regarding
an organic insulating layer disposed between the substrate and the subpixel-defining layer and including an opening overlapping the trench; and wherein the trench passes through the subpixel-defining layer.
However, Kinjo teaches
an organic insulating layer disposed between the substrate and the subpixel-defining layer and including an opening overlapping the trench (Kinjo teaches, in Fig. 3, an insulating layer 13 disposed below rib 14, wherein rib corresponds to a subpixel-defining layer because it includes openings OP associated with first electrodes E1 of subpixels and includes trench TR between adjacent subpixels. Kinjo further teaches, in Fig. 15, recess/opening 13a in insulating layer 13 connected to and overlapping trench TR. Thus, Kinjo teaches an insulting layer below a subpixel-defining structure and including an opening overlapping a trench); and
wherein the trench passes through the subpixel-defining layer (Kinjo teaches, in Fig. 15, the trench TR passes through rib 14).
Regarding the limitation “an electrode layer disposed in the openings to be spaced apart from side surfaces of the openings”, Yeh teaches, in Fig. 24, conductive gate 222 is disposed in the trench/opening region 206 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2. Yeh further teaches gate insulator 224 covering conductive gate 222, including side surfaces of trench/opening 206.
Both Yeh and Kinjo are silent regarding
a redistribution layer disposed between the electrode layer and the side surfaces of the openings to expose at least a portion of the electrode layer.
However, Li teaches a redistribution layer disposed between the electrode layer and the side surfaces of the openings to expose at least a portion of the electrode layer (Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0080], floating hole injection layer 50, floating light-emitting layer 60, and floating charge generation layer 30 located in the recess and stacked with each other. Li further teaches that the recess disconnects hole injection layers, light emitting layers, and charge generation layers of adjacent subpixels from each other. Thus, Li teaches a stacked floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer structure including HIL material, light-emitting layer material, and CGL material. This corresponds to the claimed redistribution layer, because the instant specification describes redistribution layer RE as a stacked structure including portions of a hole injection layer, emitting units, and charge generation layers, broken, disconnected, or separated in the air gap/trench region).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh’s trench 206/conductive gate 222 structure to include Kinjo’s lower insulating layer with recess/opening 13a overlapping the trench and Li’s floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer material in the combined opening/trench region between conductive gate 222 and the side surfaces of the opening/trench region, in order to prevent crosstalk between adjacent subpixels, and improve display quality/uniformity. It would further have been obvious to maintain at least a portion of conductive gate 222 exposed in the opening/trench region because Yeh teaches using conductive gate 222 as a leakage-reducing structure for stopping or reducing leakage current between neighboring pixels.
Claims 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh (US 11910654 B1) in view of Lee (US 20200243790 A1).
Re: Independent Claim 13, Yeh discloses a display apparatus comprising:
a substrate (Yeh, Fig. 18, substrate 26);
a plurality of subpixel electrodes (Yeh, Fig. 18, first anode 42-1 and second anode 42-2) spaced apart from each other and disposed on the substrate;
a subpixel-defining layer disposed on the substrate (Yeh, Fig. 18, pixel defining layer 76) and including a plurality of openings respectively corresponding to the plurality of subpixel electrodes (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 17 and also column 8 lines 31-34, that pixel definition layer may have openings in which the anodes are formed);
an emission element unit including a plurality of emission elements disposed on the plurality of subpixel electrodes (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 18, each anode 42 has associated OLED layers 45. For example, anode 42-1 has associated OLED layers 45-R, and anode 42-2 has associated OLED layers 45-B. Thus, the OLED pixels formed by the respective anodes and OLED layers corresponding to the claimed plurality of emission elements disposed on the plurality of subpixel electrodes); and
an electrode layer disposed on the subpixel-defining layer (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 18, conductive ring 204 formed on pixel defining layer 76), wherein
the emission element unit includes a plurality of layers (Yeh teaches, in column 8 lines 38-45, OLED layers 45 include a hole transport layer, an emissive layer a hole-injection layer (HIL), a hole-transport layer (HTL), an emissive layer (EML), an electron-transport layer (ETL), and an electronic-injection layer (EIL)),
at least one of the plurality of layers is disposed to partially overlap the electrode layer in plan view (Fig. 18, conductive ring 204 is formed on pixel defining layer 76 and is in direct contact with OLED layers 45-R and 45-B. Since OLED layers 45-R and 45-B directly contact conductive ring 204 in the inter-subpixel region, at least one OLED layer partially overlaps conductive ring 204 in plan view).
Yeh is silent regarding
at least one of the plurality of layers has an opening exposing at least a portion of the electrode layer to outside.
However, Lee teaches at least one of the plurality of layers has an opening exposing at least a portion of the electrode layer to outside (Lee teaches, in Fig. 4 and its description, display device including organic pattern EL, pixel defining layer PLE, and auxiliary electrode ES covering a portion of pixel defining layer PLE. Lee teaches that portions of the organic pattern EL, second electrode E2, first protection pattern FL, and second protection pattern SIL cover only part of the upper portion of auxiliary electrode ES, while another portion of ES remains exposed. Thus, Lee teaches an emission layer pattern having an opening or non-covered region that exposes a portion of an electrode disposed on the pixel defining layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh’s OLED layers 45-R/45-B so that at least has an opening or non-covered region exposing a portion of conductive ring 204 as taught by Lee in order to provide electrical access/contact to the electrode on the pixel defining layer and improve electrical connection reliability, because Lee teaches that its protection pattern complements the electrical connection between the second electrode E2 and auxiliary electrode ES, thereby improving reliability of the organic light-emitting element (Lee, ¶ [0191]).
Re: Claim 14, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein one of the plurality of layers of one of the plurality of emission elements is separated from one of the plurality of layers of another one of the plurality of emission elements (Yeh teaches adjacent emission elements/pixels including first anode 42-1 having associated OLED layers 45-R configured to emit red light and second anode 42-2 having associated OLED layers 45-B configured to emit blue light. The OLED layers 45-R of the first emission element and the OLED layers 45-B of the adjacent second emission element are separate layer portions associated with different adjacent subpixels. Thus, Yeh teaches that one layer of one emission element, e.g., OLED layer 45-R, is separated from one layer of another emission element, e.g., OLED layer 45-B).
Re: Claim 15, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein one of the plurality of layers of one of the plurality of emission elements is connected to one of the plurality of layers of another one of the plurality of emission elements in a region overlapping the electrode layer (yeh teaches, in Fig. 17 and also column 1 lines 49-60, adjacent emission elements/pixels including first anode 42-1 having associated OLED layer 45-R and a second anode 42-2 having associated OLED layers 45-B. Yeh further teaches that OLED layer 45 may include laterally conductive layers such as a hole injection layer, hole transport layer, emissive layer, electrode transport layer, electron injection layer, charge generation layer, and that the conductivity of the OLED layers allows leakage current to pass between neighboring anodes. Thus, Yeh teaches that at least one OLED layer associated with one emission element is connected, i.e., laterally continuous or electrically connected, to a corresponding OLED layer associated with another adjacent emission element. Yeh further teaches conductive ring 204 formed directly on the upper surface of pixel definition layer 76 in the region between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2, and conductive ring 204 is in direct contact with OLED layers 45-R and 45-B. According, the connection between the OLED layer of the first emission element and the OLED layer of the second emission element occurs in the inter-subpixel region overlapping conductive ring 204, which corresponds to the claimed electrode layer).
Re: Claim 16, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Lee further teaches
wherein the plurality of layers of the emission element unit are spaced apart from the electrode layer (Lee teaches, in Fig. 4, pixel defining layer PLE including opening OP exposing first electrode E1. Lee further teaches auxiliar electrode ES disposed on pixel defining layer PLE and spaced apart from opening OP. Lee also teaches organic pattern EL disposed in opening OP between first electrode E1 and second electrode E2. Lee teaches, in ¶ [0097], that organic pattern EL may include a plurality of organic/emission layers. Because, Lee’s auxiliary electrode ES is spaced from opening OP, and organic pattern EL including the emission layers is disposed in the opening OP, Lee teaches that the plurality of layers of the emission element unit are spaced apart from the electrode layer. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Yeh’s OLED layers and conductive ring structure according to Lee’s spaced arrangement so that the organic/emission layers are spaced apart from the electrode layer on the pixel defining layer, in order to maintain separation between the organic emission structure and auxiliary/electrodes structure while still allowing the electrode layer to provide electrical access and improved connection reliability).
Re: Claim 18, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein the subpixel-defining layer includes a trench, and the electrode layer is disposed in the trench of the subpixel-defining layer (Yeh teaches trench 206 formed in pixel definition layer 76 between adjacent anodes 42-1 and 42-2, wherein trench 206 exposes conductive ring 204 through pixel definition layer 76. Accordingly, conductive ring 204 is disposed in the trench region of pixel defining layer 76. To the extent conductive ring 204 is considered exposed by, rather than disposed in, trench 206, it would have been obvious to position the conductive leakage-reducing structure (conductive ring 204) in the trench region of pixel definition layer 76 to reduce leakage current and crosstalk between neighboring pixels as taught by Yeh).
Re: Claim 19, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Yeh further teaches
wherein the electrode layer surrounds the plurality of emission elements of the emission element unit (Yeh teaches, in Fig. 19, a top view arrangement in which conductive ring structure 204-1 and 204-2 enclose respective pixels. The pixels include corresponding anodes and OLED layers, including OLED layers 45 associated with the emission regions of the pixels. Thus, because Yeh’s conductive ring structures 204-1 and 204-2 enclose the pixels and their corresponding OLED/emission structures in plan view, Yeh teaches that the electrode layer surrounds the plurality of emission elements of the emission element unit).
Re: Claim 20, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Lee further teaches
further comprising: an opposite electrode disposed on the emission element unit and the electrode layer (Lee teaches, in Fig. 5, organic pattern EL disposed between the first electrode E1 and second electrode E2. Lee further teaches, in ¶ [0094], that second electrode E2 is located on and faces first electrode E1. Lee also teaches, in ¶ [0064] and ¶ [0073], that the organic light emitting device includes a first electrode connected to the driving transistor and a second electrode receiving the second power voltage ELVSS, where the first power voltage ELVDD is greater than the second power voltage ELVSS. Accordingly, Lee’s second electrode E2 corresponds to the claimed opposite electrode.
Lee further teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0103], auxiliary electrode ES disposed in pixel defining layer PLE and electrically connected to second electrode E2. Lee teaches that second electrode E2 is formed on organic pattern EL and is formed to cover an upper portion of organic pattern EL and a portion of an upper portion of auxiliary electrode ES. Accordingly, organic pattern EL corresponding to the claimed emission element unit and auxiliary electrode ES corresponding to the claimed electrode layer. Thus, Lee teaches an opposite electrode disposed on the emission element unit and the electrode layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure Yeh’s cathode/opposite electrode and conductive ring structure according to Lee’s arrangement so that the opposite electrode is disposed on both the OLED emission structure and the electrode layer in order to provide the auxiliary electrode to assist electrical connection with the second/opposite electrode and improve connection reliability of the organic light-emitting element.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh (US 11910654 B1) in view of Lee (US 20200243790 A1) further in view Li (US 20240206242 A1).
Re: Claim 17, Yeh and Lee disclose all the limitations of claim 13 on which this claim depends.
Yeh and Lee are silent regarding
further comprising: a redistribution layer that covers at least a portion of side surfaces of the electrode layer and exposes at least a portion of an upper surface of the electrode layer (Li).
However, Li teaches
further comprising: a redistribution layer that covers at least a portion of side surfaces of the electrode layer and exposes at least a portion of an upper surface of the electrode layer (Li teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0080], a recess between adjacent subpixels and floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer material located in the recess, including floating hole injection layer 50, floating light-emitting layer 60, and floating charge generation layer 30. The floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer material corresponds to the claimed redistribution layer.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Li’s floating/disconnected OLED functional-layer material in the trench region of Yeh/Lee, including along side portions of the electrode layer, so that the redistribution layer covers at least a portion of side surfaces of the electrode layer. The motivation is taught by Li, in ¶ [0060], which teaches that disconnecting OLED functional layers in a recess prevents crosstalk between adjacent subpixels and improves display uniformity. Lee further teaches, in Fig. 5 and ¶ [0105], leaving a portion of auxiliary electrodes ES exposed for electrical connection with second electrode E2. Accordingly, in the modified structure, it would have been obvious to provide Li’s redistribution/ floating OLED functional-layer material along side surfaces of the electrode layer while leaving at least a portion of the upper surface of the electrode layer exposed to maintain the electrical connection taught by Lee.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI whose telephone number is (571)272-4149. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:30am-7:30pm.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571) 272-2339. 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.
/BIPANA ADHIKARI DAWADI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights