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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55, which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/23/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/6/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/11/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 8/23/2023. These drawings are considered acceptable by Examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 8-9, 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "about equal to or greater than about 2000Å on a cross-section." The term "about" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "about" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not provide any coefficient of variance (i.e., + 10 nanometers) or any means to determine the range within which to apply the term “about” thereto.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "a thickness of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 30Å." The term "about" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "about" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not provide any coefficient of variance (i.e., + 10 nanometers) or any means to determine the range within which to apply the term “about” thereto.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "a depth of the groove is about equal to or greater than a thickness of the bank layer." The term "about" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "about" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification does not provide any coefficient of variance (i.e., + 10 nanometers) or any means to determine the range within which to apply the term “about” thereto.
America Invents Act
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.
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 descri11bed 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.
1. Claim(s) 1-7, 10, 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim et al., (U.S. Pat. No. 11,610,954 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lin et al., teaches a display panel comprising: a bank layer (110, “overhang structures,” Col. 14, lines 5-65; see at least Fig. 4B) including a first pixel opening (108A) and a second pixel opening (108B); a first light-emitting element disposed in the first pixel opening (108A), and including a first anode (102), a first organic layer (404), and a first cathode (114), the first cathode (114) contacting the bank layer; a second light-emitting element disposed in the second pixel opening (108B), and including a second anode (404), a second organic layer (404), and a second cathode (114), the second cathode (114 of 108A) spaced apart from the first cathode (114 of 108B) and contacting the bank layer (110); and a barrier layer (110C) disposed between the bank layer (110) and the first anode, and exposing at least a part of the first anode, wherein the first anode is spaced apart from the bank layer (110) with the barrier layer (110C) disposed between the first anode (404 of 108A) and the bank layer (110) on a cross-section.
Regarding Claim 2, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer (110C) comprises a transparent conductive oxide (TCO, Col. 7, lines 15-35).
Regarding Claim 3, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 1, wherein a first surface of the bank layer (110) defining the first pixel opening (108A) protrudes from an inner surface of the barrier layer (110C) exposing the first anode (404), to define a tip part.
Regarding Claim 4, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 1, wherein the bank layer (110) comprises: a first bank layer (126B) including an inorganic material (inorganic, Col. 22, lines 50-65), and contacting the barrier layer (110C); and a second bank layer (110A) disposed on the first bank layer (126B), and including a conductive material (conductive materials of 110A, Col. 23, lines 10-35), wherein the second cathode (114) contacts the second bank layer (110A).
Regarding Claim 5, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 4, wherein the first pixel opening (108A) and the second pixel opening (108B) each have a substantially undercut shape on a cross-section, and the second bank layer (110A) has side surfaces defining the substantially undercut shape (as clearly depicted in Figs. 1-4B).
Regarding Claim 6, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 5, wherein the second bank layer (110A) comprises: a first layer (110A) having a conductive material and having a first inner surface defining the first pixel opening (108A); and a second layer (114 above 110B) disposed on the first layer and having a second inner surface defining the first pixel opening (108A), wherein the second inner surface protrudes from the first inner surface.
Regarding Claim 7, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 6, wherein the second bank layer (110A) further comprises a third layer (110B) disposed between the second layer (114 above 110B) and the first bank layer (126B), and having a third inner surface (surface of 110B) protruding from the first inner surface to define the first pixel opening (108A).
Regarding Claim 10, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 4, wherein the bank layer (110) further comprises a groove (groove/spacing between respective 116 above 110B, Fig. 4A) defined between the first pixel opening (108A) and the second pixel opening (108B).
Regarding Claim 13, Lim et al., teaches the display panel of claim 10, wherein the groove (groove/spacing between respective 116 above 110B, Fig. 4A) is recessed from an upper surface of the second bank layer (110A), and a depth of the groove is less than a thickness (as clearly depicted in Fig. 4A) of the second bank layer (110A).
Regarding Claim 14, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 1, further comprising: an inorganic film (116, encapsulation layer [Wingdings font/0xE0] inorganic, Col. 25, lines 10-30) covering the first light-emitting element (of 108A) and the second light-emitting element (108B), and having a substantially integrated shape.
Regarding Claim 15, Lin et al., the display panel of claim 14, further comprising: at least one deposition layer (150 above 110B) disposed on the bank layer, wherein the first organic layer (404) and the second organic layer (404), and the first cathode (114) and the second cathode (114) are separated from the deposition layer (150 above 110B), and the deposition layer is covered by the inorganic film (116).
Regarding Claim 16, Lin et al., teaches a display panel comprising: a bank layer including a first pixel opening (108A), a second pixel opening (108B), and a groove (groove/spacing between respective 116 above 110B, Fig. 4A) disposed between the first pixel opening (108A) and the second pixel opening (108B), and having a conductive material (conductive materials of 110A, Col. 23, lines 10-35); a first light-emitting element disposed in the first pixel opening (108A), and including a first anode (404), a first organic layer (150), and a first cathode (114); a second light-emitting element disposed in the second pixel opening (108B), and including a second anode (404), a second organic layer (150), and a second cathode (114); and a dummy layer (edge of 150 formed on 110B) disposed in the groove, having a same material as the first organic layer (150) or the first cathode (114), and separated from the first organic layer (150) and the first cathode (114), wherein the first cathode (114) and the second cathode (114) are spaced apart from each other, and contact the bank layer (110).
Regarding Claim 17, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 16, wherein the groove has a substantially mesh shape in a plan view (via repetition of grooves).
Regarding Claim 18, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 17, wherein a depth of the groove is less than a thickness (as clearly shown in Fig. 4B) of the bank layer (110).
Regarding Claim 19, Lin et al., teaches the display panel of claim 16, wherein the groove comprises groove patterns separated from each other in a plan view (plan view Figs. 1C, 1D).
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 of this title, 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.
2. Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lim et al.
Regarding Claim 8, Lim et al., teaches the claimed invention (see rejection in the claim above) except for the specific limitation of the height of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 2000Å on a cross-section.
However, Examiner reasonably contemplates that 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 height of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 2000Å on a cross-section, since optimization of workable ranges is considered within the skill of the art as it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would entertain the idea of providing the height of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 2000Å on a cross-section in order to improve the pixel per inch and provide improved OLED performance.
Regarding Claim 9, Lim et al., teaches the claimed invention (see rejection in the claim above) except for the specific limitation of a thickness of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 30Å.
However, Examiner reasonably contemplates that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify a thickness of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 30Å, since optimization of workable ranges is considered within the skill of the art as it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. It has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would entertain the idea of providing a thickness of a part in which the first cathode and the first inner surface are in contact is about equal to or greater than about 30Å in order to improve the pixel per inch and provide improved OLED performance.
3. Claim(s) 11-12, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lim et al., in view of Lee et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0006701 A1).
Regarding Claim(s) 11-12, 20, Lin et al., teaches the invention set forth above (see rejection in the corresponding claim(s) above). Lin is silent regarding the groove (or trench) penetrating the second bank layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al., teaches a display device including a groove (G1, “first groove,” ¶ [0063], Fig. 7) that penetrates a second bank layer (209 or 211) and the groove (G1) has a depth greater than a thickness of the bank layer (209) in order to ensure that functional layers may be effectively cut off with respect to the groove, thereby transmission of moisture in the lateral direction (x-direction) may be prevented (¶ [0094]).
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 groove to be more predominant, as disclosed by Lee et al., in the display of Lin et al., in order to ensure that functional layers may be effectively cut off with respect to the groove, thereby transmission of moisture in the lateral direction (x-direction) may be prevented (¶ [0094]).
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0312930 teach sacrificial barriers
U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0103385 teach sacrificial barriers
U.S. Pat. No. 6,137,220, element #104 teaches sacrificial barriers
Examiner's Note
The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply. In preparing a response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Hana Featherly whose telephone number is (571)-272-8654. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 10 AM - 2 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Greece can be reached on 571-272-3711. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-272-8300. 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).
/Hana Featherly/
USPTO Art Unit 2875
Patent Examiner Hana Featherly
/JAMES R GREECE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875