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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/14/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8 and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamamoto (US 2008/0309232).
Regarding claim 1, Yamamoto discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, a display device comprising:
a substrate (11, [61]);
a pixel electrode (16, [66]) on the substrate (11, [61]);
a bank (17/18, [94]) on the pixel electrode (16, [66]), and defining an emission area (area of 19, [95]);
a first transistor (Tr12, [97]) connected to the pixel electrode (16, [66]); and
a driving electrode (Lv, [64], [68], [83]) connected to the first transistor (Tr12, [97]), and comprising:
a main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) extended in a direction (horizontal direction, figure 3); and
a sub-electrode (Lv connected to Tr12 and branched from main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) branching off from the main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3),
wherein at least one of the main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) or the sub-electrode (Lv connected to Tr12 and branched from main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) overlaps with the emission area (area of 19, [95]) to divide the emission area (area of 19, [95]) into at least two sub-emission areas (two areas of 19 not overlapped with Lv and area of 19 overlapped with Lv, figures 3-5) in a plan view.
Regarding claim 7, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, a data line (Ld, [80]) adjacent to the driving electrode (Lv, [64], [68], [83]), and located at the same layer as that of the driving electrode (Lv, [64], [68], [83]).
Regarding claim 8, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 7 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, a gate connection electrode (Eca, [90]) connected to a gate electrode (Tr12g, [80]) of the first transistor (Tr12, [97]), and located under the driving electrode (Lv, [64], [68], [83]).
Regarding claim 12, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 7 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, the data line (Ld, [80]) overlaps with the emission area (area of 19, [95]).
Regarding claim 13, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 12 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, the emission area (area of 19, [95]) comprises a plurality of sub-emission areas divided by at least one of the main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) or the sub-electrode, and divided by the data line (Ld, [80]) in a plan view.
Regarding claim 14, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, the sub-electrode (Lv connected to Tr12 and branched from main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) is parallel to the main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3).
Regarding claim 15, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, a gap is located between the main electrode (main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3) and the sub-electrode (Lv connected to Tr12 and branched from main Lv extending in horizontal direction, figure 3), and has a U shape (figure 3).
Regarding claim 16, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto further discloses, in at least figures 1-5 and related text, a first driving voltage line (PLv, [62]) connected to the driving electrode (Lv, [64], [68], [83]).
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) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US 2008/0309232) in view of Choi (US 2014/0124751).
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose a gap is located between the main electrode and the sub-electrode to overlap with the emission area.
Choi teaches, in at least figures 1-3 and related text, the device comprising a gap is located between the main electrode (172, [29]) and the sub-electrode (176b/178, [44]) to overlap with the emission area (area of 720, [59]) (figures), for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of preventing an organic emission layer from coming off when transferred ([81]).
Yamamoto and Choi are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Yamamoto with the specified features of Choi because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Yamamoto to have the gap being located between the main electrode and the sub-electrode to overlap with the emission area, as taught by Choi, for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of preventing an organic emission layer from coming off when transferred ([81], Choi).
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto in view of Choi discloses the display device of claim 2 as described above.
Choi further teaches, in at least figures 1-3 and related text, an edge of the bank (350, [52]) defining the emission area (area of 720, [59]) overlaps with the gap (gap between 172 and 176b/178, figures), for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of preventing an organic emission layer from coming off when transferred ([81]).
Regarding claim 4, Yamamoto in view of Choi discloses the display device of claim 3 as described above.
Choi further teaches, in at least figures 1-3 and related text, a second transistor (T1, [49]) connected to the first transistor (T2, [49]), and comprising an oxide-based active layer (135a, [37]), for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of preventing an organic emission layer from coming off when transferred ([81]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US 2008/0309232) in view of Choi (US 2014/0124751), and in view of Lee (US 2016/0210905).
Regarding claim 5, Yamamoto in view of Choi discloses the display device of claim 4 as described above.
Yamamoto in view of Choi does not explicitly disclose a third transistor connected to the second transistor, and comprising an oxide-based active layer.
Lee teaches, in at least figures 1, 5, and related text, the device comprising a third transistor connected (T3, [86]) to the second transistor (T1, [86]), and comprising an oxide-based active layer ([86]), for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of reducing or minimizing vertical crosstalk in a high resolution structure ([11]).
Yamamoto, Choi, and Lee are analogous art because they all are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Yamamoto in view of Choi with the specified features of Lee because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Yamamoto in view of Choi to have the third transistor connected to the second transistor, and comprising an oxide-based active layer, as taught by Lee, for the purpose of providing an organic light emitting diode display capable of reducing or minimizing vertical crosstalk in a high resolution structure ([11], Lee).
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US 2008/0309232) in view of Bang (US 2022/0189373).
Regarding claim 17, Yamamoto discloses the display device of claim 1 as described above.
Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose the emission area is located between adjacent transmissive areas.
Bang teaches, in at least figure 24B and related text, the device comprising the emission area (31, [76]) is located between adjacent transmissive areas (32, [74]) (figure), for the purpose of providing display apparatus which may include various sensors and have a reduced non-display area ([4]) thereby improving density of integration.
Yamamoto and Bang are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Yamamoto with the specified features of Bang because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Yamamoto to have the emission area being located between adjacent transmissive areas, as taught by Bang, for the purpose of providing display apparatus which may include various sensors and have a reduced non-display area ([4], Bang) thereby improving density of integration.
Regarding claim 18, Yamamoto in view of Bang discloses the display device of claim 17 as described above.
Bang further teaches, in at least figure 24B and related text, an electronic component (303/304, [166], [168]) under the substrate (1, [60]), and overlapping with the emission area (31, [76]) and the transmissive areas (32, [74]) (figure), for the purpose of providing display apparatus which may include various sensors and have a reduced non-display area ([4]) thereby improving density of integration.
Regarding claim 19, Yamamoto in view of Bang discloses the display device of claim 18 as described above.
Bang further teaches, in at least figure 24B and related text, a light-blocking layer (20A/20B, [191]) on the substrate (1, [60]), and overlapping with the emission area (31, [76]) (figure), for the purpose of providing display apparatus which may include various sensors and have a reduced non-display area ([4]) thereby improving density of integration.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto (US 2008/0309232) in view of Bang (US 2022/0189373), and further in view of Jeon (US 2020/0381495).
Regarding claim 20, Yamamoto in view of Bang discloses the display device of claim 19 as described above.
Yamamoto in view of Bang does not explicitly disclose the light-blocking layer does not overlap with the transmissive areas.
Jeon teaches, in at least figure 8 and related text, the device comprising the light-blocking layer (BSM, [76]) does not overlap with the transmissive areas (TA, [142]) (figure), for the purpose of providing high light transmittance and high quality of display apparatuses for use in thinner and lighter displays ([4]).
Yamamoto, Bang, and Jeon are analogous art because they all are directed to semiconductor device and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Yamamoto in view of Bang with the specified features of Jeon because they are from the same field of endeavor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the structure disclosed in Yamamoto in view of Bang to have the light-blocking layer doing not overlap with the transmissive areas, as taught by Jeon, for the purpose of providing high light transmittance and high quality of display apparatuses for use in thinner and lighter displays ([4], Jeon).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is 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 because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1-5 and 6 that recite "the sub-electrode overlaps with at least one of the second transistor or the third transistor" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1-5 and 6.
Claims 9-10 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 because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1, 7-8 and 9 that recite "an initialization voltage line adjacent to the gate connection electrode, and located at the same layer as that of the gate connection electrode" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1, 7-8 and 9.
Claim 11 is 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 because the prior art of record neither anticipates nor render obvious the limitations of the base claims 1, 7-8 and 11 that recite "the gate connection electrode overlaps with the main electrode of the driving electrode" in combination with other elements of the base claims 1, 7-8 and 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONG-HO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at 571-272-1670. 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.
/TONG-HO KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811