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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (encompassing claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 3/6/26 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 11/16/23, 4/12/24, 12/9/24, 12/5/25, and 3/12/26. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the plurality of foam particles (subject matter of at least claim 1) and a second transparent resin layer on the first color conversion layer (subject matter of claim 10) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 states a second transparent resin layer is “on the first color conversion layer” (line 3). From the Drawings, the second transparent resin layer corresponds to layer 83 (Fig. 3) and the first color conversion layer corresponds to layer 81 (Fig. 3). However, layer 83 is not “on” or “on top of” layer 81. Therefore, it is unclear if “on” in line 3 of claim 10 has some other definition different from the ordinary definition of the term “on”. Alternatively, examiner interprets line 3 as containing an inadvertent error where “the first color conversion layer” was intended to be “the first transparent resin layer” since this is supported by the Figures (see e.g., second transparent resin 83 on first transparent resin 81, Fig. 3) and associated descriptions in the Specification. For the purposes of examination, the examiner interprets the latter interpretation. Said another way, line 3 of claim 10 is interpreted as - - a second transparent resin layer on the first transparent resin layer - -. However, appropriate correction and/or clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 described 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), or alternatively under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2), as being anticipated by Takiguchi et al. (U.S. 2022/0093833 A1; “Takiguchi”).
Regarding claim 1, Takiguchi discloses a display module comprising:
A substrate (41, Fig. 6) ([0102]); and
A plurality of pixels on the substrate, wherein each of the plurality of pixels comprises:
A first self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1), a second self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1), and a third self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1B, Fig. 6, 1) configured to emit lights of a first wavelength band, respectively ([0098]-[0100]);
A first color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) configured to be disposed on the first self- luminescence element, and comprise a plurality of first quantum dots (331 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) to absorb the light of the first wavelength emitted from the first self-luminescence element, and emit a light of a second wavelength band ([0101]); and
A second color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) configured to be disposed on the second self-luminescence element, and comprise a plurality of second quantum dots (331 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) to absorb the light of the first wavelength emitted from the second self-luminescence element, and emit a light of a third wavelength band ([0101]), and
Wherein the first color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) and the second color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) comprise a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) configured to scatter the light emitted from the first self- luminescence element and the light emitted from the second self-luminescence element ([0086]).
Regarding claim 7, Takiguchi discloses the first self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1), the second self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1), and the third self-luminescence element (10 corresponding to 1B, Fig. 6, 1) are blue micro light emitting diodes ([0098]-[0100], [0103]).
Regarding claim 8, Takiguchi discloses the plurality of first quantum dots (331 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) are configured to absorb a light of a blue wavelength band and emit a light of a red wavelength band, and wherein the plurality of second quantum dots (331 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) are configured to absorb a light of a blue wavelength band and emit a light of a green wavelength band ([0101]).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takiguchi et al. (U.S. 2022/0093833 A1; “Takiguchi”) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 2, Takiguchi discloses a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) ([0086]) but does not disclose a diameter of each foam particle among the plurality of foam particles is between 0. 74 µm and 1.26 µm. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select a diameter or each foam particle to be between 0. 74 µm and 1.26 µm, since 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. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 4, Takiguchi discloses a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) ([0086]) but does not disclose a volume fraction of the plurality of foam particles for each of the first color conversion layer and the second color conversion layer is between 5.3% and 9%. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to volume fraction of the plurality of foam particles to be between 5.3% and 9%, since 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. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takiguchi et al. (U.S. 2022/0093833 A1; “Takiguchi”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (U.S. 2002/0085601 A1; “Wang”).
Regarding claim 3, Takiguchi discloses a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) ([0086]) but does not disclose the foam particles are from an inert gas. However, Wang discloses a plurality of foam particles from an inert gas ([0034]). Because both Takiguchi and Wang teach methods using a plurality of foam particles for light scattering, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute one method for the other to achieve the predictable result of the plurality of foam particles from an inert gas. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 5, Takiguchi discloses the first color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) and the second color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) comprise a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) or scattering particles ([0086]). Yet, Takiguchi does not disclose a plurality of foam particles simultaneously with scattering particles. However, Wang discloses a color conversion layer comprising a plurality of foam particles simultaneously with scattering particles ([0034]). This has the advantage of providing additional light scattering within the color conversion layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Takiguchi with further including scattering particles, as taught by Wang, so as to add additional light scattering to the first and second color conversion layers.
Regarding claim 6, Takiguchi and Wang disclose the first color conversion layer comprises the first plurality of quantum dots (Takiguchi: 331 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1; [0101]) and a plurality of scattering particles (Wang: [0034]) and the second color conversion layer comprises the second plurality of quantum dots (Takiguchi: 331 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1; [0101]) and a plurality of scattering particles (Wang: [0034]).
Yet, Takiguchi and Wang do not disclose the mass ratio between the plurality of first quantum dots and the plurality of scattering particles is between 1:0.04 and 1:0.14 and the mass ratio between the plurality of second quantum dots and the plurality of scattering particles is between 1:0.04 and 1:0.14. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select a mass ratio between each of the plurality of first/second quantum dots and the plurality of scattering particles to be between 1:0.04 and 1:0.14, since 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. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 1 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (U.S. 2022/0020900 A1; “Kuo”) in view of Takiguchi et al. (U.S. 2022/0093833 A1; “Takiguchi”).
Regarding claim 1, Kuo discloses a display module comprising:
A substrate (202, Fig. 3) ([0038]); and
A plurality of pixels on the substrate, wherein each of the plurality of pixels comprises:
A first self-luminescence element (206a, Fig. 3), a second self-luminescence element (206b, Fig. 3), and a third self-luminescence element (206c, Fig. 3) configured to emit lights of a first wavelength band, respectively ([0038]);
A first color conversion layer (208a, Fig. 3) configured to be disposed on the first self- luminescence element, and comprise a plurality of first quantum dots (210a, Fig. 3) to absorb the light of the first wavelength emitted from the first self-luminescence element, and emit a light of a second wavelength band ([0039]); and
A second color conversion layer (208b, Fig. 3) configured to be disposed on the second self-luminescence element, and comprise a plurality of second quantum dots (210b, Fig. 3) to absorb the light of the first wavelength emitted from the second self-luminescence element, and emit a light of a third wavelength band ([0040]).
Yet, Kuo does not disclose the first color conversion layer and the second color conversion layer comprise a plurality of foam particles. However, Takiguchi discloses a first color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1R, Fig. 6, 1) and a second color conversion layer (33 corresponding to 1G, Fig. 6, 1) comprise a plurality of foam particles (332, Fig. 6, 1) ([0086]). This has the advantage of scattering the light emitted from the first self-luminescence element and the light emitted from a second self-luminescence element. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Kuo with the first color conversion layer and the second color conversion layer comprising a plurality of foam particles, as taught by Takiguchi, so as to scatter the light emitted from the first self-luminescence element and the second self-luminescence element.
Regarding claim 9, Kuo discloses a first color filter (212 over 208a, Fig. 3) on the first color conversion layer (208a, Fig. 3) ([0039]); and a second color filter (212 over 210a, Fig. 3) on the second color conversion layer (208b, Fig. 3) ([0040]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (U.S. 2022/0020900 A1; “Kuo”) as modified by Takiguchi et al. (U.S. 2022/0093833 A1; “Takiguchi”) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Suh et al. (U.S. 2022/0246672 A1; “Suh”).
Regarding claim 10, Kuo and Takiguchi disclose a first transparent layer (204c, Fig. 3) on the third self-luminescence element (206c, Fig. 3) and a second transparent layer (212’, Fig. 3) on the first transparent layer (204, Fig. 3), wherein the second transparent layer (212’, Fig. 3), the first color filter (212 over 208a, Fig. 3), and the second color filter (212 over 210a, Fig. 3) are on a same plane. Yet, Kuo and Takiguchi do not disclose the first transparent layer and the second transparent layer are resins. However, Suh discloses a first transparent layer (73, Fig. 3) and a second transparent layer (83, Fig. 3) being resins ([0112]-[0113]). Because both Kuo as modified by Takiguchi and Suh teach methods of forming display modules, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute one method for the other to achieve the predictable result of the first transparent layer and the second transparent layer being resins. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REEMA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1436. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm EST.
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, Christine Kim can be reached at (571)272-8458. 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.
/REEMA PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 4/27/2026
Prosecution Insights