DETAILED ACTION 501
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-9 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al (Chinese Pub. No. CN 113471384, English machine translation attached).
Regarding Claim 1, Yuan discloses, at least in figure 12: A display panel (title) comprising: a base layer (103, pg. 13, 2nd para); a first electrode (110, pg. 13, 5th para. 111=110) on the base layer (103) ; a pixel defining layer (160, pg. `13, 5th para.), on the base layer (103) and having a light-emitting opening (pg. 13, 5th para.) through the pixel defining layer (160) over a portion of the first electrode (110); a conductive wall (LP, pg. 12, 5th para.) on the pixel defining layer (160) and having a partition opening in the conductive wall (LP) corresponding to the light-emitting opening (see fig. 12); a second electrode (120, pg. 8, last paragraph) in the partition opening; and a light-emitting pattern (EL, pg. 12, 2nd paragraph) in the partition opening and between the first electrode (110) and the second electrode (120), wherein: the conductive wall (LP) comprises a first layer (133), a second layer (132) on the first layer (133) , and a third layer (131) on the second layer (132)(pg. 13, 3rd and 4th para.) ; the second electrode (120) contacts the second layer (132) ;
Yuan fails to disclose: and a thickness of the third layer (131) is greater than a thickness of the first layer (133).
However, since the conductive wall of Yuan has a third layer (131) that has an unsupported portion at one end, and the first layer (133) is fully supported, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a third layer (131) that is thicker than the first to ensure that it does not break off.
Regarding Claim 2, Yuan fails to disclose: wherein the thickness of the third layer (131) is 3000 angstroms or more and the thickness of the first layer (133) is 2000 angstroms or less. However, in figure 12, (pg. 13,4th, paragraph), Yuan discloses that the second layer may be 960nm (9600 angstroms). Therefore, it appears that the claimed amounts would be reasonable for the first and third layers of Yuan.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the claimed values for the first and third layers of Yuan, as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding Claim 3, Yuan discloses in figure 12: wherein: the first layer (133) comprises a first inner side surface (top) defining a first region of the partition opening; the second layer (132) comprises a second inner side surface (left side) defining a second region of the partition opening; and the third layer (131) comprises a third inner side surface (bottom) defining a third region of the partition opening.
Regarding Claim 4, Yuan discloses in figure 12: wherein: the second inner side surface (of 132) is more inward than the first inner side surface (top of 133) and the third inner side surface (bottom of 131); and the second electrode (120) contacts the second inner side surface (of 132).
Regarding Claim 5, Yuan discloses: wherein: the second layer (132) comprises copper (Cu); and each of the first layer (133) and the third layer (131) comprises titanium (Ti) (. pg.17, 1st para.) (the next paragraph gives a specific example but does not disqualify the previous paragraph).
Regarding Claim 6, Yuan discloses in figure 12: further comprising an auxiliary electrode (130, pg. 15, 3rd para.) on the second electrode (120) that contacts the second inner side surface, and is thicker than the second electrode (120).
Regarding Claim 8, Yuan discloses: wherein: the second layer (132) comprises silver (Ag); and each of the first layer (133) and the third layer (131) comprises a transparent conductive oxide (page 11, 1st. paragraph, LP includes 132 and 133 and pg. 12, last paragraph, discloses layer 131 may contain same material as 133).
Regarding Claim 9, Yuan discloses: wherein the second layer (132) comprises a same material (pg. 17, 1st para.) as the second electrode (120) (pg. 9, 2nd para) (aluminum, ITO, IZO, etc.).
Regarding Claim 24, Yuan discloses: wherein the second electrode (120) comprises silver (Ag) or an alloy comprising silver (Ag). (Page 9, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding Claim 25, Yuan discloses in figure 12: further comprising a dummy pattern (2 layers on 131) on the conductive wall (LP) and spaced apart from the second electrode (120), wherein the dummy pattern comprises: a first layer (EL-1) comprising a same material as the light-emitting pattern (EL1); and a second layer (on EL-1) comprising a same material as the second electrode (120)(it is 120 but separated from power, non-operable)..
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan (384) in view of Kim et al (US PG Pub. No. 2016/0365398).
Regarding Claim 7, Yuan fails to disclose: wherein the auxiliary electrode comprises a transparent conductive oxide.
Kim teaches in paragraph [0069] that “ITO” (indium tin oxide, a transparent oxide) is known for use in an auxiliary electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a transparent oxide for the auxiliary electrode of Yuan, as taught by Kim (398) since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin,125USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan (384) in view of Yeh et al (US Patent No. 11,910,654).
Regarding Claim 23, Yuan fails to disclose: wherein the conductive wall (LP) is configured to receive a bias voltage.
Yeh in claim 19 (column 34 at bottom) teaches applying bias voltage to a conductor portion on a bank to serve as a current sink for leaking current.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply a bias voltage to the conducting portion of the conductive wall (LP) of Yuan, as taught by Yeh, to serve as a current sink for leaking current.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 10, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 10 , and specifically comprising the limitation of “wherein the conductive wall further comprises a first intermediate layer between the second layer and the third layer and comprising a material different from that of the third layer, wherein the first intermediate layer comprises a fourth inner side surface defining a fourth region of the partition opening and more inward than each of the second inner side surface and the third inner side surface” including the remaining limitations
Claims 11-14 are allowable, at least, because of their dependencies on claim 10.
Examiner Note: Wang et al (CN114335121, English machine translation attached, listed on attached PTO-892) discloses what appears to be a similar structure in figures 11. Wang’s figures 11 show 4 pixel definition layers 501-504 (1st,2nd, 3rd and intermediate layers), but all are insulative material, none are conductive (page 16, paragraph one).
Similarly, Regarding Claim 15, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 15 , and specifically comprising the limitation of “wherein the conductive wall further comprises: a first intermediate layer between the first layer and the second layer and comprising a fourth inner side surface defining a fourth region of the partition opening; and a second intermediate layer between the second layer and the third layer and comprising a fifth inner side surface defining a fifth region of the partition opening, wherein the second inner side surface protrudes toward the inside of the partition opening from each of the fourth inner side surface and the fifth inner side surface” including the remaining limitations.
Claims 16-22 are allowable, at least, because of their dependencies on claim 15.
Examiner Note: Wang et al (CN114335121, English machine translation attached, also on PTO-892 form) discloses what appears to be a similar structure in figures 11. However, Wang’s figures 11 only show 4 layers in the stack; instant claim 15 requires 5 layers.
Wang does disclose that there can be more layers (pg. 16, para. One) but none of Wang’s pixel definition layers 501-504 are conductive, as claimed, (they are all insulators, see page 16, paragraph one).
There is no motivation to make Wang’s PDL’s conductive.
OTHER RELEVANT REFERENCES OF THE PRIOR ART
Gao (Chinese Pub. No. CN 114 765 208, English machine translation attached), discloses, at least in figure 7: A display panel (20, comprising: a base layer (10,; a first electrode (E12, on the base layer (10) ; a pixel defining layer (12), on the base layer (10) and having a light-emitting opening through the pixel defining layer (12) over a portion of the first electrode (E12); a conductive wall on the pixel defining layer (12) and having a partition opening in the conductive wall (s12/s11/32) corresponding to the light-emitting opening (see fig. 7); a second electrode (E21 in the partition opening; and a light-emitting pattern (EL1 in the partition opening and between the first electrode (E12) and the second electrode (E21), wherein: the conductive wall (s12/s11/32) comprises a first layer (s12), a second layer (s11) on (the side of) the first layer (s11), and a third layer (32) on the second layer (s11); the second electrode (E21) contacts the second layer (s11);
Gao fails to disclose: and a thickness of the third layer (32) is greater than a thickness of the first layer (s12).
(Applicant discloses in paragraph [0129] of the specification that making the third layer thicker than the first layer prevents damage to the conductive wall PW. In any case, the third layer obviously must be thick enough to support the layers above it but in the structure of Gao, it would not be reasonable to make the third layer (32) thicker than the first layer (s12) (see figure, s12 is much thicker).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD L RALEIGH whose telephone number is (571)270-3407. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM -3 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, 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.
/DONALD L RALEIGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875