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, drawn to claims 1-23 in the reply filed on 05/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the first electrode is formed has a single layer” appears to contain an extra “is formed” term, or “has” should be “as”. Appropriate correction is needed.
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 20-22 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 20 appears to be in contradiction with the given figures and specification. The 1-2th electrode ELT1-2 does not appear to be contacting the second electrode ELT2 in the figures, and the specification does not provide the requisite detail needed to determine what configuration of components might constitute this contact. Furthermore, as claims 21 and 22 are dependent on claim 20, they are also rejected. However, the limitation of “comprises a 1-1th electrode, a 1-2th electrode, and a 1-3th electrode” is examined.
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, 5, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Im et al.(US 20170062755 A1, hereafter Im)
Regarding Claim 1, Im discloses:
A display device(Fig. 3J), comprising:
A pixel circuit layer(Fig. 3J [100/T]) comprising:
a base layer(Fig. 3J [100]),
a pixel circuit(Fig. 3J [T]) disposed on the base layer(Fig. 3J [100]), and
a passivation layer(Fig. 3J [172/171]) disposed on the pixel circuit(Fig. 3J [T]), the passivation layer(Fig. 3J [172/171]) comprising a well area(See Fig. 3J below) and a protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below); and
a light-emitting-element layer(Fig. 3J [200/240/250]) disposed on the pixel circuit layer(Fig. 3J [T]), the light-emitting-element layer(Fig. 3J [200/240/250]) comprising:
a light emitting element(Fig. 3J [200/240/250]) comprising:
a first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]),
a second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]), and
an emission part(Fig. 3J [240]) between the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) and the second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]), and
a connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]), wherein
the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) is disposed on the protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
at least a portion(Fig. 3J [213]) of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) overlaps the well area(Fig. 3J See figure below) in a plan view and does not contact the passivation layer(Fig. 3J [171/172]),
the emission part(Fig. 3J [240]) comprises:
a hole layer(See paragraph 0091, “hole injecting layer, hole transporting layer”),
an electron layer(See paragraph 0091, “electron transporting layer, electron injecting layer”), and
an emission layer(See paragraph 0091, “emitting layer”) provided between the hole layer(See above) and the electron layer(See above), and
each of the hole layer(See above) and the second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]) has an end portion on the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]).
While Im does not explicitly lay out that the hole layer electrically connects the first electrode and the emission layer to each other, the electron layer electrically connects the second electrode and the emission layer to each other, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the flow of electrons and holes to understand that the disclosure of Im necessarily implies that the second electrode, which is referred to as a cathode, would be the side of the electron layer and the first electrode, which is referred as the anode, would be the side of the hole layer.
Regarding Claim 5, Im further discloses:
The hole layer comprises a hole injection layer and a hole transport layer, and the electron layer comprises an electron injection layer and an electron transport layer(See above).
Regarding Claim 13, Im further discloses:
The protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below) surrounds at least a portion of the well area(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
The protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below) comprises:
A first protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below) in which the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) is disposed, and
A second protrusion area(Fig. 3J See figure below) in which the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) is disposed.
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) 2-4, 6, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im in view of Zhang et al.(US 20220115481 A1, hereafter Zhang).
Regarding Claim 2, Im further discloses:
The first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) is an anode electrode(See paragraph 0080),
The second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]) is a cathode electrode(See paragraph 0068),
The pixel circuit(Fig. 3J [T]) is electrically connected to the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]), and
The connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) is electrically connected to the second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]).
Im does not teach or disclose the pixel circuit comprises a first power line and a second power line, the pixel circuit is connected to the first power line, and the connecting electrode is electrically connected to the second power line.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses a first power line(Fig. 1 [15]) electrically connected to the pixel circuit(Fig. 3 [11], See paragraph 0116, “configured to transmit a positive voltage signal to the first electrode Fig. 3 [1131])”) and a second power line(Fig. 15 [17]) electrically connected to the second electrode(Fig. 15 [1133]) and a connecting electrode(Fig. 15 [18]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to modify the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Zhang. One might have been motivated to include such power lines as to operate the light emitting element provided by Im to perform a function as a pixel. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with circuit connections to a power source external to the pixel.
Regarding Claim 3,
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(See above). Im does not teach or disclose a second power line electrically connected to the connecting electrode through a contactor formed in the passivation layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses that a negative power line(Fig. 15 [171]) is connected to a connecting electrode(Fig. 15 [18]) through a contactor(negative power via, see paragraph 0113).
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to produce the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Zhang. One might have been motivated to connect the connecting electrode and the power line in order to connect the two vertically, as in a horizontal plane space is limited by the necessity of minimizing non light-emitting area when producing a light-emitting device. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in Im’s device having a connector between the connecting electrode and the second power line.
Regarding Claim 4, Im further discloses:
A display area and a non-display area(Fig. 3J See figure below), wherein
A portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) is disposed in a perimeter of the display area(Fig. 3J See figure below).
Furthermore, the limitation of “a portion of the connecting electrode…is electrically connected to the second power line” has been addressed in claim 2.
However, Im does not teach or disclose the second power line is disposed in the non-display area.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses a second power line(Fig. 15 [17]) which is disposed in a non-display area(Fig. 1 See figure below).
It would have been further obvious at the time the application at hand was filed to modify the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Zhang. One might have been motivated to dispose the second power line in the non-display area as this would be the area of which the connection electrode is located, and as the connecting electrode as shown by Zhang is in a periphery of the display region, it would only be natural to place the line designed to connect to the connecting electrode in the non-display area as well. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with a power line structure as disclosed by Zhang.
Regarding Claim 6, Im further discloses:
The emission layer(Fig. 3J [240]) comprises:
A first emission layer(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
A second emission layer(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
The connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) is disposed between the first emission layer(Fig. 3J See figure below) and the second emission layer(Fig. 3J See figure below).
Im does not explicitly teach or disclose these two emission layers form separate first and second sub-pixels. However, as is ordinary practice in the art, formation of a plurality of sub-pixels with separate emission layers is disclosed, such as in the prior art of Zhang(See Fig. 1 [11] of Zhang). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to implement the design of the pixel structure disclosed by Zhang in such a way that the two emission layers disclosed by Im form separate sub-pixels. One might have been motivated to produce Im’s device in this way in order to create a light-emitting device capable of emitting different colors, as is regular practice in the production of pixels in devices. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device in the form of a plurality of sub-pixels.
Regarding Claim 9, Im further discloses:
The light-emitting-element layer(Fig. 3J [200/240/250]) comprises a pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J [220]) covering the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) and at least a portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]), and
The pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J [220]) exposes a portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) that is disposed in a peripheral region of the emission layer(Fig. 3J [240]), and covers another portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]).
Regarding Claim 10, Im further discloses:
The pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J [220]) comprises a first pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J See figure below) and a second pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J See figure below),
The first pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J See figure below) covers an end portion of the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) of the second sub-pixel(Fig. 3J See figure below), and exposes an end portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]), and
The second pixel defining layer(Fig. 3J See figure below) covers an end portion of the first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) of the first sub-pixel(Fig. 3J), and covers another end portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im and Zhang, further in view of Xu et al.(CN 114464755 A, hereafter Xu).
Regarding Claim 7,
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(See above rejection).
Neither Im nor Zhang teach or disclose a first and second portion of the connecting electrode surrounding the first and second emission layers respectively, and the first portion and the second portion of the connecting electrode are integral with each other.
In the same field of endeavor, Xu discloses a plurality of integral connecting electrode portions(See Fig. 3 [PLZ] below) wherein a first and second portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3 [PLZ]) surround first and second emission layers(Fig. 1 [ANO]), and the first portion and the second portion of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3 [PLZ]) are integral with each other.
It would have been further obvious to produce the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Xu. One might have been motivated to produce the connecting electrode in the manner of Xu in order to provide an outlet for the light emitting device routing signals away from the second electrode of each sub-pixel after passing through the emission layer. Producing this device would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with a sub-pixel structure as disclosed by Xu.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im in view of Xu.
Regarding Claim 8,
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(See above).
Im does not teach or disclose the connecting electrode has a mesh shape and forms a closed loop surrounding an area.
In the same field of endeavor, Xu discloses a connecting electrode(Fig. 3 [PLZ]) having a mesh shape and forming a closed loop surrounding an area.
It would have been further obvious to produce the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Xu. One might have been motivated to produce the connecting electrode in the manner of Xu in order to provide an outlet for the light emitting device routing signals away from the second electrode of each sub-pixel after passing through the emission layer. Producing this device would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with a sub-pixel structure as disclosed by Xu.
PNG
media_image1.png
843
849
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Above: Fig. 3 of Xu with the first and second portions of the connecting electrode denoted by examiner.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im and Zhang, further in view of Liu et al.(CN 114497160 A, hereafter Liu).
Regarding Claim 11, Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(See above rejection).
Neither Im nor Zhang teach or disclose the second pixel defining layer has a width greater than a width of the first pixel defining layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses a minimum width(Fig. 1 [d2]) of which a pixel defining layer must be greater than in order to avoid shorting of the sub-pixel(See paragraph 17 of the description).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to produce a device in accordance with the claim at hand under the device disclosed by Im and the guidance provided by Liu. Firstly, it is known in the art that maximizing light-emitting area is necessary in order for the creation of pixels with sufficient brightness. Secondly, as shown by Im, the first pixel defining layer contains no internal features, while the second pixel defining layer contains internal features with components necessary to keep separate from the pixel circuit. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, in pursuit of producing a device with a minimum non-display area, would naturally be drawn to shortening the width of the first pixel defining layer over the second, thus arriving at a device wherein the second pixel defining layer is greater than the first. However, as with the teaching of Liu, thus resulting width would be necessary over a minimum in order to avoid shorting components.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im and Zhang, further in view of Lin et al.(US 20200343315 A1, hereafter Lin).
Regarding Claim 12,
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(See above).
Neither Im nor Zhang teach or disclose a portion of a lower surface of the connecting electrode contacts the pixel defining layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Lin discloses a connecting electrode(Fig. 12 [AE]) with a lower surface in contact with a pixel defining layer(Fig. 12 [PDL]).
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to modify the device disclosed by Im and Zhang along the lines of Lin. One might have been motivated to shape the connection electrode in such a way that the lower surface of the connection electrode is in contact with the pixel defining layer to better promote the resulting cavity structure of which is the basis for Im’s light-emitting device. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with a modified connection electrode.
Claim(s) 14-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im, further in view of Sim et al.(US 20200373366 A1, hereafter Sim).
Regarding Claim 14, Im further discloses:
The connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]) comprises a protrusion(Fig 3J See figure below),
The protrusion overlaps the well area(Fig. 3J See figure below) in a plan view, and
The passivation layer(Fig. 3J [172/171]) forms an area overlapping the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below) in plan view.
Im does not teach or disclose the area is curved.
In the same field of endeavor, Sim discloses a protrusion(Fig. 2 See figure below) overlapping a well area(Fig. 2 [132a]), wherein the passivation layer(Fig. 2 [130]) forms a curved area overlapping the protrusion(Fig. 2 See figure below) in a plan view.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application at hand was filed to modify the device disclosed by Im along the lines of Sim. One might have been motivated to produce a curved area in order to direct incident light in a desirable direction, as such direction is necessary for the improvement of display quality. Performing this modification would have generated a predictable result in the creation of Im’s device with a curved well area.
PNG
media_image2.png
624
890
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Above: Fig. 2 of Sim with protrusion denoted by examiner.
Regarding Claim 15, Im further discloses:
At least a portion of the hole layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091) is disposed on the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
At least another portion of the hole layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091) is disposed in the area that overlaps the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below) in plan view.
Regarding Claim 16, Im further discloses:
At least a portion of the electron layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091) is disposed on the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
At least another portion of the electron layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091) is disposed in the area that overlaps the protrusion(Fig. 3J [240]) in plan view.
Regarding Claim 17, Im further discloses:
At least a portion of the second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]) is disposed on the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below), and
At least another portion of the second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]) is disposed in the area that overlaps the protrusion(Fig. 3J See figure below) in a plan view.
Regarding Claim 18, Im further discloses:
The electron layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091) disposed in the area covers the hole layer(Fig. 3J [240], See paragraph 0091 and rejection of claim 1).
Regarding Claim 19, Im further discloses:
The second electrode(Fig. 3J [250]) is electrically connected to a side surface of the connecting electrode(Fig. 3J [210]).
Regarding Claim 20, Im further discloses:
The first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) comprises a 1-1th electrode(Fig. 3J [203]), a 1-2th electrode(Fig. 3J [202]), and a 1-3th electrode(Fig. 3J [201]).
Regarding Claim 21, Im further discloses:
The 1-3th electrode(Fig. 3J [201]) protrudes longer than the 1-1th electrode(Fig. 3J [203]) and the 1-2th electrode(Fig. 3J [202]).
Regarding Claim 22, Im further disclose:
Each of the 1-1th electrode(Fig. 3J [203]) and the 1-3th electrode(Fig. 3J [201]) comprises transparent conductive oxide(See paragraph 0077, 0079),
The 1-2th electrode(Fig. 3J [202]) comprises a reflective material(See paragraph 0078, “high reflectance”),
The 1-1th electrode(Fig. 3J [203]) is disposed on a surface of the 1-2th electrode(Fig. 3J [202]), and
The 1-3th electrode(Fig. 3J [201]) is disposed on another surface of the 1-2th electrode(Fig. 3J [202]).
Regarding Claim 23, Im further discloses:
The first electrode(Fig. 3J [200]) has a single layer(Fig. 3J [201]) comprising transparent conductive oxide(See paragraph 0077).
PNG
media_image3.png
775
1162
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Above: Fig. 3J of Im with various features denoted by examiner. NOTE: the second sub-pixel is taken as off of the diagram, as explained in the above rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lin(US 20230189570 A1) discloses a connecting electrode in a passivation layer. Lee(US 20210296537 A1) discloses a connection electrode connected to a second electrode. Jang et al.(US 20170179208 A1) discloses a connection electrode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARSHALL MU-NUO HATFIELD whose telephone number is (703)756-1506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 11:00 AM-9:00PM 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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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.
/FERNANDO L TOLEDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/MARSHALL MU-NUO HATFIELD/Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights