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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/02/2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baisl et al. (US. Pub: 2015/0027541 A1~ hereinafter “Baisl”).
Regarding claim 1, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0052]-[0109]) a display device comprising: a display element disposed on a substrate (102) and including a pixel electrode (108), an emission layer (114; [0074]), and an opposite electrode (112); an inorganic functional layer (120; [0085]-[0086]; [0094]- [0096]) disposed on the opposite electrode (112) and including a first element ([0096]); and a thin-film encapsulation layer (122, 124) disposed on the inorganic functional layer (120), wherein the inorganic functional layer (120) includes at least one first film and at least one second film disposed on the at least one first film (see at least fig. 1), in each of the at least one first film and the at least one second film (see at least fig. 1; [0116]), and the first element is selected from a group consisting of silicon (Si), titanium (Ti), aluminum (Al), hafnium (Hf), indium (In), tin (Sn), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), tantalum (Ta), zinc (Zn), and a combination thereof ([0030]; [0032]; [0096]).
Baisl does not expressly disclose a stoichiometric ratio of the first element decreases as distance from the substrate increases.
However, Baisl discloses (in at least figs. 1-6; [0005]) “The moisture bather layer (120) includes a plurality of layers composed of the same material having different stoichiometric compositions.” Basil also discloses (in at least [0014]) “By way of example, at least one layer of the plurality of layers can consist of silicon nitride. Expressed illustratively, by way of example, one layer of the plurality of layers can consist of silicon nitride and at least one further layer of the plurality of layers can consist of silicon dioxide, for example.” Baisl further discloses (in at least [0030]) “the respective stoichiometric composition of the respective layer of the moisture barrier layer can be determined by the concentration of silane.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the stoichiometric ratio of the first element of Baisl such that it decreases as distance from the substrate increases in order to prevent dark spot and to improve the life expectancy of the display device ([0003]-[0004] Baisl).
Regarding claim 2, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0014]) the at least one first film and the at least one second film have different refractive indices from each other (i.e. silicon nitride and silicon dioxide have different refractive indices).
Regarding claim 3, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0008]) a thickness of the inorganic functional layer is greater than or equal to about 10 Å and less than or equal to about 2000 Å.
Regarding claim 4, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0007]; [0109]; [0118]) thickness uniformity of the inorganic functional layer is greater than about 0% and less than or equal to about 2% (it is understood from the cited paragraphs above that the inorganic functional layer has a thickness uniformity that is greater than about 0%).
Regarding claim 5, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0014]) the inorganic functional layer comprises a nitride, an oxide, an oxynitride, or a combination thereof of the first element.
Regarding claim 6, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0014]; [0016]) the at least one first film includes a plurality of first films, the at least one second film includes a plurality of second films, and the plurality of first films and the plurality of second films are alternately disposed on each other (see at least fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1; [0098-[0099]; [0103]]) an organic functional layer (122) in contact with at least one of an upper surface and a lower surface of the inorganic functional layer (120).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baisl et al. (US. Pub: 2015/0027541 A1~ hereinafter “Baisl”) in view of OH et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0273927 A1~hereinafter “OH”).
Regarding claim 8, Baisl discloses (in at least fig. 1) the thin-film encapsulation layer comprises a first encapsulation layer (122), an organic encapsulation layer (124; [0104]-[0105]), and a second inorganic encapsulation layer (126; [0104]), and the first encapsulation layer is in contact with the inorganic functional layer.
Baisl does not expressly disclose the first encapsulation layer is inorganic.
OH in the same field of endeavor discloses (in at least fig. 5C) a thin-film encapsulation layer comprises a first inorganic encapsulation layer (310; [0073]), an organic encapsulation layer (320; [0074]), and a second inorganic encapsulation layer (330; [0073]), and the first inorganic layer is in contact with the inorganic function layer (250; [0133]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the first inorganic material of OH to form the first encapsulation layer of Baisl, since it has been held that simple substitution of one known material for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. Furthermore, it has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination.
Regarding claim 9, OH discloses (in at least fig. 5C) a pixel-defining layer (119) exposing a part of the pixel electrode (221).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875