DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Remarks filed on 07/01/2026.
Currently, claims 1, 4-15, and 21-22 are pending in the application. Currently, claims 4, 10, and 15 are withdrawn.
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 .
Response to Amendments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, and 11-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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.
Claims 1, 5-7, 9, 11-12, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over KIM et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0226174 A1) in view of ISHIZUYA (US Pub. No. 2020/0274103 A1) and further in view of HAN et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0115770 A1) and further in view of Li et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0234124 A1) and further in view of AOMORI et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0344412 A1)
Regarding independent claim 1, Kim teaches a display device (Fig. 13) comprising:
a display part (Fig. 13, EML, ¶ [0116]) including a light emitting element (¶ [0116]) on a base layer (Fig. 13, SUB, ¶ [0113]); and
a sensor part (Fig. 13, SL, ¶ [0112]) on the display part and including a conductive pattern (Fig. 13, SCL1 + SCL2, ¶ [0231]) including an upper conductive pattern (Fig. 13, SCL2, ¶ [0231]), and an inorganic layer (Fig. 13, SPVX, ¶ [0172] teaches that SPVX can be an inorganic film) covering the upper conductive pattern; and an organic layer (Fig. 13, CF2, ¶ [0260]) including an organic material on the sensor part, and overlapping the inorganic layer in a plan view.
However, Kim does not explicitly teach the material of their color filters and that the inorganic layer includes a plurality of inorganic layers, the plurality of inorganic layers including a first inorganic layer having a first refractive index and a second inorganic layer having a second refractive index less than the first refractive index, and
the second inorganic layer is outside the first inorganic layer with respect to the base layer, a third refractive index of the organic layer is less than the second refractive index, and a lower surface of the first inorganic layer and an upper surface of the upper conductive pattern contact each other, and the second inorganic layer is an uppermost layer of the plurality of inorganic layers.
However, it is known in the art that color filters can be a dye or pigment dispersed in an organic material such as an acrylic resin (see Ishizuya Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301, ¶¶ [0048] & [0054]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Kim’s color filter can include an organic material such as acrylic resin in a similar manner to Ishizuya’s color filter (Ishizuya Fig. 2). Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
However, Kim does not explicitly teach, the inorganic layer includes a plurality of inorganic layers, the plurality of inorganic layers including a first inorganic layer having a first refractive index and a second inorganic layer having a second refractive index less than the first refractive index, and
the second inorganic layer is outside the first inorganic layer with respect to the base layer, a third refractive index of the organic layer is less than the second refractive index, and a lower surface of the first inorganic layer and an upper surface of the upper conductive pattern contact each other, and the second inorganic layer is an uppermost layer of the plurality of inorganic layers.
However, Han is a pertinent art that teaches that the inorganic layer (Fig. 10, 450 + 442, ¶ [0073]) includes a plurality of inorganic layers, the plurality of inorganic layers including a first inorganic layer (Fig. 10, 442, ¶ [0072] teaches that 442 can be silicon nitride) having a first refractive index (silicon nitride has a refractive index of about 1.9-2.2, see ¶ [0040] of prior art Li) and a second inorganic layer (Fig. 10, 450, ¶ [0073 teaches that 450 can be silicon oxynitride]) having a second refractive index (silicon oxynitride has a refractive index of about 1.5-1.7, see ¶ [0040] of prior art Li) less than the first refractive index, and
the second inorganic layer is outside the first inorganic layer with respect to the base layer (Fig. 3, 200, ¶ [0036]), a third refractive index of the organic layer (acrylic resin has a refractive index of about 1.49, see ¶ [0145] of prior art Aomori) is less than the second refractive index, and a lower surface of the first inorganic layer and an upper surface of the upper conductive pattern (Fig. 10, 13, ¶ [0059] teaches an upper titanium layer) contact each other (Fig. 10, bottom surface of 442 contacts top surface of 13), and the second inorganic layer is an uppermost layer of the plurality of inorganic layers (Fig. 10, 450 is uppermost layer of 442+450).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim modified by Ishizuka’s device to further comprise multiple inorganic layers above the top conductive layer of Kim’s sensing electrode according to the teaching of Han (Fig. 10) in order to reduce reflectance (Han ¶ [0073]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 2, and Ishizuya teaches that the organic layer (Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301, ¶¶ [0048] & [0054] teaches that Ishizuya’s color filters can include a dye or pigment) includes a reflection adjust layer (Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301, ¶¶ [0048] & [0054] teaches that Ishizuya’s color filters can include a dye or pigment) including at least one of a dye or a pigment capable of selectively absorbing light of one wavelength band (It would be obvious that Ishizuya’s color filters would be able to selectively absorb at least one wavelength band).
Regarding claim 6, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 5, and Ishizuya teaches that the reflection adjust layer (Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301, ¶¶ [0048] & [0054] teaches that Ishizuya’s color filters can include a dye or pigment) includes at least one of a group of a tetraazaporphyrin compound, a porphyrin compound, an oxazine compound, a squarylium compound, a triarylmethane compound, a polymethine (cyanine) compound, an anthraquinone compound, a phtalocyanine compound, an azo compound, a perylene compound, an xanthene compound, a diimmonium compound, or a dipyrromethene compound (¶ [0054] teaches that Ishizuya’s color filters can include a perylene or anthraquinone based material).
Regarding claim 7, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1, and Ishizuya teaches that the organic layer (Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301, ¶¶ [0048] & [0054] teaches that Ishizuya’s color filters can include a dye or pigment) includes a color filter layer (Fig. 2, 101 + 201 + 301) configured to selectively transmit light of one color (¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1, and Kim teaches that the sensor part (Fig. 13, SL, ¶ [0112]) further includes a lower conductive pattern (Fig. 13, SCL1, ¶ [0231]) and an insulating layer (Fig. 13, SCNT, ¶ [0168]) between the lower conductive pattern and the upper conductive pattern, and the insulating layer includes an organic material (¶¶ [0162] & [0168] teaches that SCNT can include an organic film).
Regarding claim 11, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1, and Kim teaches that at least one layer (Fig. 14, BM1, ¶ [0242]) is interposed between the first inorganic layer (bottommost portion of Kim modified by Han’s inorganic layer) and the organic layer (Fig. 13, CF2, ¶ [0260]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device of claim 1, and Han teaches that the first inorganic layer Fig. 10, 442, ¶ [0072] teaches that 442 can be silicon nitride) and the second inorganic layer (Fig. 10, 450, ¶ [0073] teaches that 450 can be silicon oxynitride) include materials different from each other.
Regarding claim 21, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device of claim 1, and Han teaches that an upper surface of the first inorganic layer (Fig. 10, 442, ¶ [0072] teaches that 442 can be silicon nitride) and a lower surface of the second inorganic layer Fig. 10, 442, ¶ [0072] teaches that 442 can be silicon nitride) contact each other, and an upper surface of the second inorganic layer and a lower surface of the organic layer contact each other (a top surface of Kim modified by Han’s plurality of inorganic layers would be directly below and in contact with at least a portion of a bottom surface of CF2).
Regarding claim 22, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches an electronic device (Kim Fig. 1, ¶ [0055] teaches that Kim’s device can be a smart phone with a display screen) comprising the display device of claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over KIM et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0226174 A1) in view of ISHIZUYA (US Pub. No. 2020/0274103 A1) and further in view of HAN et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0115770 A1) and further in view of Li et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0234124 A1) and further in view of AOMORI et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0344412 A1) and further in view of JU et al. (US Pub. No. 2018/0083227 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1, and Kim teaches that the light emitting element (Fig. 13, EML, ¶ [0116]) includes a first electrode (Fig. 13, ANO, ¶ [0199]), a second electrode (Fig. 13, CAT, ¶ [0199]), and an emission layer (Fig. 13, EL, ¶ [0199]) between the first electrode and the second electrode,
the display part further includes a low reflection inorganic layer (Fig. 13, TFE1, ¶ [0222]) on the second electrode and a thin film encapsulation layer (Fig. 13, TFE3, ¶ [0221]) on the low reflection inorganic layer.
However, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han does not explicitly teach that the low reflection inorganic layer includes at least one of a metal or a metal compound.
However, Ju is a pertinent art that teaches that the low reflection inorganic layer (Fig. 2, 311, ¶ [0064]) includes at least one of a metal or a metal compound (¶¶ [0064]-[0065] teaches that inorganic layer 311 can be a metal oxide such as aluminum oxide or titanium oxide).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of Kim’s inorganic layer to be a metal oxide according to teaching of Ju (Fig. 2) in order to reduce light reflection (Ju ¶ [0062]). Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over KIM et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0226174 A1) in view of ISHIZUYA (US Pub. No. 2020/0274103 A1) and further in view of HAN et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0115770 A1) and further in view of AOMORI et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0344412 A1) and further in view of CHUNG et al. (US Pub. No. 2019/0148467 A1) and further in view of FAN et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0310969 A1) and further in view of LI et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0234124 A1)
Regarding claim 13, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1.
However, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han does not explicitly teach that the first inorganic layer and the second inorganic layer include a same material having compositions different from each other (the Examiner notes that Han does teach an embodiment with 2 inorganic layers of a same material, see Han Fig. 12 ¶ [0072]).
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Han’s insulating layer 442 (Fig. 10, ¶ [0075]) to also comprise silicon oxynitride in order to reduce manufacturing costs. Further, it is known in the art that both silicon nitride and silicon oxynitride can be used as inorganic insulation layer material above a sensing electrode (see ¶¶ [0011]-[0012] of prior art Chung).
However, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han modified by Chung does not explicitly teach that the first inorganic layer and the second inorganic layer have compositions different from each other.
However, it is known in the art that the refractive index of silicon oxynitride can be adjusted by adjusting the ratios between nitrogen, oxygen, and silicon (see ¶ [0063] of prior art Fan).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han modified by Chung’s inorganic silicon oxynitride layers to have different ratios of nitrogen, oxygen, and silicon according to the teaching of Fan (¶ [0063]) in order to vary a refractive index while simplifying manufacturing (Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han modified by Chung would require less overall deposition steps because a single deposition step could form multiple layers by adjusting the gas ratios during formation). One of ordinary skill would want to vary a refractive index in order to achieve a sequentially increasing refractive index that reduces ambient light reflection (see Fig. 3, ¶ [0011] of prior art Li).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over KIM et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0226174 A1) in view of ISHIZUYA (US Pub. No. 2020/0274103 A1) and further in view of HAN et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0115770 A1) and further in view of Li et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0234124 A1) and further in view of AOMORI et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0344412 A1) and further in view of AN et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0328107 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han teaches the display device according to claim 1.
However, Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han does not explicitly teach a pad in a pad area on the base layer,
wherein:
the pad includes a first pad layer and a second pad layer on the first pad layer, and
the second pad layer is on a same layer as the upper conductive pattern.
However, An is a pertinent art that teaches a pad (Fig. 6, 171 + 530 + 531, ) in a pad area (Fig. 5, 30, ¶ [0081]) on the base layer (Fig. 6, 100, ¶ [0081]),
wherein:
the pad includes a first pad layer (Fig. 6, 171, ¶ [0128]) and a second pad layer (Fig. 6, 530/531, ¶ [0127]) on the first pad layer, and
the second pad layer is on a same layer (¶ [0133]) as the upper conductive pattern (Fig. 3, 540/520, ¶ [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim modified by Ishizuya modified by Han’s device to further comprise a pad and pad portion according to the teaching of An (Fig. 6) in order to transfer voltages and signals to pixel disposed in the display area (An ¶ [0083]).
Cited Prior Art
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant.
Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RHYS P. SHEKER whose telephone number is (703)756-1348. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am to 5 pm.
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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached on 571-270-0373. 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.
/R.P.S./
Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights