Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected device species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on November 25, 2025.
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0199677 A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a display device comprising: a display area (fig. 8; pixel area PXL, figs. 4A and 4B) where an image is displayed; a non-display area (area without pixel, figs. 4A and 4B) disposed adjacent to the display area; a first sub-pixel (EMA1, fig. 8) disposed in the display area; and a second sub-pixel (EMA2) disposed adjacent to the first sub-pixel in the display area, wherein each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes (any of EL1 to EL4) spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements (LD1/LD2) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity (figs. 1-3); and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity (figs. 1-3), an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical (LD1 orientated in one direction while LD2 oriented in the opposite direction, thus, they are symmetrical: paragraphs [0363][0364]), and the first sub-pixel comprises an identification pattern (see fig. 8 attached) for distinguishing the first sub-pixel from the second sub-pixel.
PNG
media_image1.png
734
670
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of alignment electrodes comprise: a first alignment electrode (EL3) and a second alignment electrode (EL4) spaced apart from each other in the first sub-pixel; and a third alignment (EL1) electrode and a fourth alignment electrode (EL2) spaced apart from each other in the second sub-pixel, and at least one of the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode comprises a portion protruding (see fig. 8 above) in a direction as the identification pattern.
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the first sub-pixel comprises an emission area (circled LD2 in fig. 8 above) in which the plurality of light emitting elements are disposed, and the identification pattern does not overlap (fig. 8 above) the emission area in a plan view.
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches the display device of claim 3, wherein the second alignment electrode is disposed between the first alignment electrode and the third alignment electrode, the third alignment electrode is disposed between the second alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 8), the plurality of light emitting elements comprise: a first light emitting element disposed between the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode; and a second light emitting element disposed between the third alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 8), a first end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the first alignment electrode, a second end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the second alignment electrode, a first end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the fourth alignment electrode, and a second end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the third alignment electrode (paragraphs [0363][0364]).
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0254816 A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a display device comprising: a display area (fig. 7; pixel area PXL, fig. 4) where an image is displayed; a non-display area (area without pixel, fig. 4) disposed adjacent to the display area; a first sub-pixel (EMA1, fig. 7) disposed in the display area; and a second sub-pixel (EMA2) disposed adjacent to the first sub-pixel in the display area, wherein each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes (any of EL1 to EL4) spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements (LD1/LD2) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity (figs. 1-3); and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity (figs. 1-3), an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical (LD1 orientated in one direction while LD2 oriented in the opposite direction, thus, they are symmetrical: paragraphs [0330][0331]), and the first sub-pixel comprises an identification pattern (see fig. 7 attached) for distinguishing the first sub-pixel from the second sub-pixel.
PNG
media_image2.png
758
636
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of alignment electrodes comprise: a first alignment electrode (EL3) and a second alignment electrode (EL4) spaced apart from each other in the first sub-pixel; and a third alignment (EL1) electrode and a fourth alignment electrode (EL2) spaced apart from each other in the second sub-pixel, and at least one of the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode comprises a portion protruding (see fig. 7 above) in a direction as the identification pattern.
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the first sub-pixel comprises an emission area (circled LD2 in fig. 7 above) in which the plurality of light emitting elements are disposed, and the identification pattern does not overlap (fig. 7 above) the emission area in a plan view.
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches the display device of claim 3, wherein the second alignment electrode is disposed between the first alignment electrode and the third alignment electrode, the third alignment electrode is disposed between the second alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 7), the plurality of light emitting elements comprise: a first light emitting element disposed between the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode; and a second light emitting element disposed between the third alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 7), a first end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the first alignment electrode, a second end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the second alignment electrode, a first end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the fourth alignment electrode, and a second end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the third alignment electrode (paragraphs [0330][0331]).
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al (PG Pub 2021/0335883 A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a display device comprising: a display area (fig. 2; pixel area PX, fig. 1) where an image is displayed; a non-display area (area without pixel, fig. 1) disposed adjacent to the display area; a first sub-pixel (PX1, fig. 2) disposed in the display area; and a second sub-pixel (PX2) disposed adjacent to the first sub-pixel in the display area, wherein each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes (RME1 and RME2) spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements (ED1/ED2) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity (fig. 5); and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity (fig. 5), an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical (ED1 orientated in one direction while ED2 oriented in the opposite direction, thus, they are symmetrical: paragraph [0116]), and the first sub-pixel comprises an identification pattern (paragraph [0117]) for distinguishing the first sub-pixel from the second sub-pixel.
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of alignment electrodes comprise: a first alignment electrode (RME1) and a second alignment electrode (RME2) spaced apart from each other in the first sub-pixel; and a third alignment (RME1) electrode and a fourth alignment electrode (RME2) spaced apart from each other in the second sub-pixel, and at least one of the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode comprises a portion protruding (RM_E) in a direction as the identification pattern.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0011487 A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a display device comprising: a display area (fig. 7; pixel area PXL, fig. 3) where an image is displayed; a non-display area (area without pixel, fig. 4) disposed adjacent to the display area; a first sub-pixel (A1, fig. 7) disposed in the display area; and a second sub-pixel (A2) disposed adjacent to the first sub-pixel in the display area, wherein each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes (any of EL1 to EL4) spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements (LD1/LD2) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity (figs. 1-2); and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity (figs. 1-2), an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical (LD1 orientated in one direction while LD2 oriented in the opposite direction, thus, they are symmetrical: paragraphs [0280][0281]), and the first sub-pixel comprises an identification pattern (see fig. 7 attached) for distinguishing the first sub-pixel from the second sub-pixel.
PNG
media_image3.png
734
614
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of alignment electrodes comprise: a first alignment electrode (EL3) and a second alignment electrode (EL4) spaced apart from each other in the first sub-pixel; and a third alignment (EL1) electrode and a fourth alignment electrode (EL2) spaced apart from each other in the second sub-pixel, and at least one of the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode comprises a portion protruding (see fig. 7 above) in a direction as the identification pattern.
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the first sub-pixel comprises an emission area (circled LD2 in fig. 7 above) in which the plurality of light emitting elements are disposed, and the identification pattern does not overlap (fig. 7 above) the emission area in a plan view.
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches the display device of claim 3, wherein the second alignment electrode is disposed between the first alignment electrode and the third alignment electrode, the third alignment electrode is disposed between the second alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 7), the plurality of light emitting elements comprise: a first light emitting element disposed between the first alignment electrode and the second alignment electrode; and a second light emitting element disposed between the third alignment electrode and the fourth alignment electrode (fig. 7), a first end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the first alignment electrode, a second end of the first light emitting element is disposed on the second alignment electrode, a first end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the fourth alignment electrode, and a second end of the second light emitting element is disposed on the third alignment electrode (paragraphs [0280][0281]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu et al (PG Pub 2015/0362165 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chu teaches a display device comprising: a display area (areas with overlapping color filters, fig. 35) where an image is displayed; a non-display area (areas not overlapping color filters) disposed adjacent to the display area; a first sub-pixel (the area overlapping one of the color filter) disposed in the display area; and a second sub-pixel (the area overlapping another of the color filter) disposed adjacent to the first sub-pixel in the display area, and the first sub-pixel comprises an identification pattern (BM, fig. 5, paragraph [0056]) for distinguishing the first sub-pixel from the second sub-pixel.
Fig. 35 does not teach wherein each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity; and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity, an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical.
Chu teaches each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel comprises: a plurality of alignment electrodes (150a, 150b, and 156, fig. 16) spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements (154a and 154b) disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprises: a first end having a first polarity (the end attached to anode 156, fig. 16, paragraph [0111]); and a second end having a second polarity (the end attached to cathodes 150a and 150b, paragraph [0111]) different from the first polarity, an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel are symmetrical (fig. 6 shows three subpixels, two adjacent ones are symmetrical; figs. 7A and 7B show a subpixel), for the benefit of increasing yield (paragraph [0108]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make each of the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel to comprise: a plurality of alignment electrodes spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of light emitting elements disposed between adjacent ones of the plurality of alignment electrodes, each of the plurality of light emitting elements comprised: a first end having a first polarity; and a second end having a second polarity different from the first polarity, an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the first sub-pixel and an orientation of the plurality of light emitting elements in the second sub-pixel were symmetrical, for the benefit of increasing yield.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0199677 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Park remains as applied in claim 4.
Park does not teach in fig. 8 that the display device of claim 4, wherein the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel are alternately and repeatedly arranged in the display area.
It would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to alternately and repeatedly arrange the first sub-pixel and the second in the display area, for the known benefit of providing more pixels to the display to display large images.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0254816 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Park remains as applied in claim 4.
Park does not teach in fig. 7 that the display device of claim 4, wherein the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel are alternately and repeatedly arranged in the display area.
It would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to alternately and repeatedly arrange the first sub-pixel and the second in the display area, for the known benefit of providing more pixels to the display to display large images.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (PG Pub 2022/0011487 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Park remains as applied in claim 4.
Park does not teach in fig. 7 that the display device of claim 4, wherein the first sub-pixel and the second sub-pixel are alternately and repeatedly arranged in the display area.
It would have been obvious to the skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to alternately and repeatedly arrange the first sub-pixel and the second in the display area, for the known benefit of providing more pixels to the display to display large images.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1882. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8am to 4pm 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, Dale Page can be reached at 571 270 7877. 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.
/FEIFEI YEUNG LOPEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899