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 Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, line 16, filed 09 July 2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-3 and 5-22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa et al. (Chinese Patent Publication No. WO 2023/067908 A1), hereinafter Ishikawa; Claims 4 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Ishikawa et al. (Chinese Patent Publication No. WO 2023/067908 A1), hereinafter Ishikawa, and in further view of Fujimoto et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2012-014053 A), hereinafter Fujimoto; have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Ishikawa fails to teach a cardo-based resin within the scope of the claim. But as mentioned previously, the cardo-based resin is an optional component of the claimed composition. Thus, the prior art could teach a different resin within the scope of the claim and still reject all limitations of the claims of the present application. Applicant further argues that the prior art of record fails to teach the claimed aperture ratio. MPEP § 2112.01(I) states: “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).” Thus, given the prior art of record teaches all structural claim limitations of the present application, it would at minimum be obvious to arrive at the claimed aperture ratio. Applicant claims that the present application represents unexpected results, but the present claims are not commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support. Whether the unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, the "objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 716.02. Given that the composition far broader than the data provided, this argument is not persuasive. As such, the rejection of record is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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:
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 16-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa et al. (Chinese Patent Publication No. WO 2023/067908 A1), hereinafter Ishikawa.
5. Regarding Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 16-22, Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0109 and 0179]) applying and coating a photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0109 and 0179]) pre-baking the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0110 and 0179]) exposing to light the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0111 and 0179]) developing the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0112 and 0179]) post-baking, therein curing, the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the major axis of Red pixel is 15.8 μm to 16 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the minor axis of Red pixel is 11.0 μm to 15.0 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the converted aperture ratio of Red pixel exceeds 25%. Herein, MPEP 2112.01 states: “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).” Given that the prior art teaches all limitations of the claimed method to fabricate a product, the claimed property of the product is found to be inherent. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the major axis of Red pixel is 16.2 μm to 18 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the minor axis of Red pixel is 11.6 μm to 14.5 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the major axis of Green pixel is 9.8 μm to 12.4 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0020 and 0038]) the length of the minor axis of Green pixel is 6.2 μm to 8.3 μm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0013, 0020, and 0038]) the pixel is in a shape that can show the size of the major axis and the minor axis. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0013, 0020, and 0038]) the pixel has one or more shapes among a square, a rectangle, an ellipse, and a circle. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0112 and 0179]) an oven temperature in the post-baking step is 250° C. to 270° C. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0112 and 0179]) the post-baking step is performed for 60 minutes. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0009-0011]) the photosensitive composition comprises a colorant. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0053-0054]) the colorant comprises one or more among inorganic dyes, organic dyes, inorganic pigments, and organic pigments. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0055]) the colorant is included in an amount of 10 wt % to 40 wt % based on the total amount of the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0066]) the colorant is pretreated with a dispersant. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0113]) an average particle diameter of the colorant is 20 nm to 100 nm. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0064-0067]) the photosensitive composition comprises a patterning resin which comprises an acryl-based binder resin. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0064-0067]) the optional cardo-based binder resin comprises a repeat structure of Formula 1 of the present application. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0064-0067]) an average molecular weight of the optional cardo-based resin is 1,000 g/mol to 100,000 g/mol. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0064-0067]) the optional cardo-based resin is included in an amount of 1 wt % to 30 wt % based on the total amount of the photosensitive composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0064-0067]) a reactive unsaturated compound is included in the photosensitive composition in an amount of 10 wt % to 40 wt % based on the total amount of the composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0062]) a photoinitiator is included in the photosensitive composition in an amount of 1 wt % to 10 wt % based on the total amount of the composition. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraphs [0107-0114]) a pixel defining layer. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0106]) an organic light emitting display device comprising the pixel defining layer. Ishikawa teaches (Paragraph [0232]) an electronic device comprising the display device and a control unit for operating the display device.
6. However, Ishikawa fails to explicitly teach all components of the composition limited by the present application with a single experimental example. That said, all components of the composition are described with sufficient detail by the prior art. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art in view of Ishikawa would have found it obvious to try the combinations of components herein limited with a reasonable expectation of success.
7. Claims 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Ishikawa et al. (Chinese Patent Publication No. WO 2023/067908 A1), hereinafter Ishikawa, and in further view of Fujimoto et al. (Japanese Patent Publication No. JP 2012-014053 A), hereinafter Fujimoto.
8. Regarding Claim 4, An teaches all limitations of Claim 1 above. However, Ishikawa fails to explicitly teach the length of the major axis of Blue pixel is 21.3 μm to 25 μm and the length of the minor axis of Blue pixel is 15.6 μm to 18.5 μm.
9. Fujimoto teaches (Paragraphs [0068 and 0187]) the length of the major axis of Blue pixel is 21.3 μm to 25 μm and the length of the minor axis of Blue pixel is 15.6 μm to 18.5 μm. Fujimoto teaches (Paragraph [0018]) pixels of such size are useful in the fabrication of LCD display devices.
10. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ishikawa to incorporate the teachings of Fujimoto wherein the length of the major axis of Blue pixel is 21.3 μm to 25 μm and the length of the minor axis of Blue pixel is 15.6 μm to 18.5 μm. Doing so would be useful in the fabrication of LCD display devices, as recognized by Fujimoto.
Conclusion
11. 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).
12. 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.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to RICHARD D CHAMPION at telephone number (571) 272-0750. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. Mon-Fri EST.
14. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KEITH D HENDRICKS can be reached at (571) 272-1401. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
15. 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
16. 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.
/Keith D. Hendricks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1733
/R.D.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1737
