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. 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. Claims 1 , 3-6 and 10 -16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ozawa, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0287028 A1 . With regard to claim 1 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s a n organic light emitting diode display device, comprising: a substrate (11) having first, second and third subpixels; a first electrode (13) disposed in each of the first, second and third subpixels on the substrate (11) ; a first bank layer (15A) disposed on the first electrode (13) , the first bank layer ( 15A ) having a first trench (fig. 4, gap between adjacent banks 15A) along a first direction (fig. 3, up-down direction) ; a second bank layer (15B) disposed on the first bank layer (15A) , the second bank layer (15B) having a second trench (fig. 4, gap between adjacent banks 15 B ) along a second direction (fig. 3, left-right direction) crossing the first direction; an emitting layer (16) disposed on the first electrode (13) and the first (15A) and second (15B) bank layers; and a second electrode (17) disposed on the emitting layer (16) [0042-0057] . With regard to claim 3 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the first bank layer (15A) covers an edge portion of the first electrode (13) and has an opening exposing a central portion of the first electrode (13) to have a net shape [0042-0057] . With regard to claim 4 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the second bank layer (15B) has a bar shape. With regard to claim 5 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the first bank layer (15A) has first and second parts along the first and second directions, respectively, and wherein the first trench is disposed in a central portion of the first part. With regard to claim 6 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the second bank layer (15B) is disposed on the second part between the two adjacent first trenches to expose the first trench, and wherein the second trench is disposed in a central portion of the second bank layer (15B) . With regard to claim 1 0 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the first, second and third subpixels are arranged in one of a delta type, a stripe type, a mosaic type and a pentile type. With regard to claim 1 1 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s a n organic light emitting diode display device, comprising: a substrate (11) , on which a plurality of subpixels in a matrix form disposed; a first electrode (13) disposed in each of plurality of subpixels on the substrate (11) ; a first bank layer (15A) disposed on the first electrode (13) ; a second bank layer (15B) disposed on the first bank layer (15A) ; an emitting layer (16) disposed on the first electrode (11) and the first (15A) and second (15B) bank layers; and a second electrode (17) disposed on the emitting layer (16) , wherein the first bank layer (15A) has a first trench (fig. 4, gap between adjacent banks 15A) extending along a first direction, and first electrodes (13) of adjacent two subpixel rows are separated from each other by the first trench [0042-0057] . With regard to claim 1 2 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the second bank layer (15B) is disposed between two adjacent first trenches along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, and wherein the second bank layer (15B) has a second trench (fig. 4, gap between adjacent banks 15 B ) extending along the second direction, and emitting layers (16) of adjacent two subpixels are separated from each other by the second trench. With regard to claim 1 3 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the first bank layer (15A) covers an edge portion of the first electrode (13) and has an opening exposing a central portion of the first electrode to have a net shape. With regard to claim 1 4 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the second bank layer has a bar shape. With regard to claim 1 5 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the first bank layer (15A) has first and second parts disposed along the first and second directions, respectively, and wherein the first trench is disposed at a central line of the first part. With regard to claim 1 6 , Ozawa, in figs. 3 and 4, disclose s that the second trench is disposed at a central line of the second bank layer. 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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa . With regard to claim 2 , Ozawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, however it does not expressly disclose the relative thicknesses of the first and second bank layers. However it teaches that the second bank layer is intended to provide spacing between the organic display and the cover substrate [0052], therefore any thickness which would enable this purpose would be obvious, including a thickness of the second bank layer which is greater than the first bank layer. Therefore, i t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in the Ozawa organic display, a thickness of the second bank layer is greater than a thickness of the first bank layer , so that the second bank layer can provide adequate spacing for the cover substrate. With regard to claim 7 , Ozawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 5, however it does not expressly disclose the relative widths of the first and second bank layers. Ozawa discloses that the widths of the first and second bank layers is similar (width taken from pixel to pixel including trench), however the figures do not appear to show that the width is the same. However, the purpose of the second bank layer is to provide spacing between the organic display and the cover substrate, therefore the width of the second bank layer can be any suitable width, up to the width of the first bank layer, as long as the thickness/height of the second bank layer is sufficient to accomplish the purpose. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that in the Ozawa organic display that a width of the second part is the same as a width of the second bank layer , so long as the thickness of the second bank layer is sufficient to provide adequate spacing between the organic display and the cover substrate. Claim s 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa , as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Lim et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20200185650 A1 . With regard to claim 8 , Ozawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, however it does not expressly disclose reflecting layers below the subpixels. Lim, in fig. 4, teaches an organic light emitting display having reflecting layers (311, 321, 331) below the first pixels (312, 322, 332) to provide a resonant cavity to improve light emission [0039-0042]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Ozawa organic display to include first, second and third reflecting layers disposed in each of the first, second and third subpixels between the substrate and the first electrode, wherein a distance between the second electrode and the second reflecting layer is smaller than a distance between the second electrode and the first reflecting layer and is greater than a distance between the second electrode and the third reflecting layer , as taught by Lim, to provide a resonant cavity to improve light emission . With regard to claim 9 , Ozawa discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, however it does not expressly disclose an encapsulating layer or color filter layers. Lim, in fig. 4, teaches an organic light emitting display having an encapsulation layer (710) to protect the organic layers, and color filter layers (910, 920, 930) to purify the emitted light. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the Ozawa organic display to include an encapsulating layer disposed on the second electrode; and first, second and third color filter layers disposed in the first, second and third subpixels, respectively, on the encapsulating layer , to provide protection and purify the emitted light. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Thomas A Hollweg whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1739 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8-4 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Matthew W Such can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1570 . 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. /THOMAS A HOLLWEG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874