DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filed 06/23/2026 has been considered. Claims 1-20 were previously pending. Examiner notes the cancellation of Claims 12-20. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 6 -9 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 6-10 of Remarks filed 06/23/2026 , with respect to the rejection(s) of independent claim(s) 1 (and dependent claims 2, and 5) under Baek regarding polyimide have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: claimed elements are not described or given a reference numeral in the specification.
In view of the amendments to Claims 6-9, regarding “the first organic layer” and the “second organic layer”, no such description or reference numerals, in accordance with the drawings, is presented in the specification. It is unclear how the first organic layer and second organic layer is distinguishable from “organic layer”. Applicant must provide reference numerals in accordance with the written description and drawings. No new matter should be added.
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 “the first organic layer” and “the second organic layer” 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.
Claim 6-9 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding independent Claim 6,
Claim 6, line 10 recites: “a first organic layer”. In view of the drawings and the specification, the corresponding structure cannot be determined. It has been interpreted to mean any layer. Claims 7-11 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on Claim 6. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding dependent Claim 7,
Claim 7, line 1 recites: “the first organic layer”. In view of the drawings and the specification, the corresponding structure cannot be determined. It has been interpreted to mean any layer. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding dependent Claim 8,
Claim 8, line 4 recites: “the first organic layer”. In view of the drawings and the specification, the corresponding structure cannot be determined. It has been interpreted to mean any layer. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding dependent Claim 9,
Claim 9, line 4 recites: “a second organic layer”. In view of the drawings and the specification, the corresponding structure cannot be determined. It has been interpreted to mean any layer. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 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 of this title, 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) 1-3, 5, 21 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 20220037620 A1) in view of Xing (2014).
Re: Independent Claim 1, Baek discloses:
A display device (Baek, display panel; Fig. 5, element DP) comprising:
a base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL) including a first surface (Baek, first surface; Fig. 5, element BS1) and a second surface (Baek, second surface; Fig. 5, element BS2);
a first backplane layer (Baek, pixel circuit layer; Fig. 5, element PCL) disposed on the first surface of the base layer and including a pixel circuit (Baek, ¶ [0060]);
a second backplane layer (Baek, lower protective layer; Fig. 5, element BPRL) disposed on the second surface of the base layer and including a rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082]); and
a light-emitting-element layer (Baek, display element layer; Fig. 5, element DPL) disposed on the first backplane layer and including a light emitting element (Baek, light emitting element; Fig. 5, element LD, ¶ [0061]),
Baek further discloses:
BSL is implemented as being a polyimide (Baek, ¶ [0059]).
Baek does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the base layer has a transmittance of about 15 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less.
Xing (2014) discloses:
wherein the base layer (Xing, polyimide film; Fig. 2) has a transmittance of about 15 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less (Xing, Fig. 2 shows various transmittance spectra for polyimide films, which have a transmittance of 15% or less).
While Baek discloses a base layer as polyimide, Baek does not explicitly disclose that the base layer has a transmittance of about 15% or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less. Xing (2014) discloses the transmittance spectra of polyimide films having a transmittance of about 15 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less. Both disclose polyimide and are therefore analogous art. It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) before the effective filing date to select the polyimide film, as disclosed by Xing, in the invention of Baek, arriving at the invention as claimed, as polyimide is highly researched and widely used in microelectronics industry (Xing, introduction, ¶ [1]) and for controlling/tuning thermal properties (Xing, results and discussion, pg.3).
Re: Dependent Claim 2, Baek and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Xing, further discloses:
a driving circuit portion (Baek, Fig. 4 ¶ [0049]), electrically connected (Baek, ¶ [0084]) to the rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082]);
a front wire (Baek, first line; Fig. 5, element FL) disposed on the first surface (Baek, first surface; Fig. 5, element BS1) of the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL);
and a side wire (Baek, base hole; Fig. 5, element BSH, ¶ [0077] covering a side surface (Baek; Fig. 5, BSH is on a side surface of BSL) of the base layer and electrically connected to the front wire and the rear wire (Baek, ¶ [0077]).
Re: Dependent Claim 3, Baek and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Xing, further discloses:
wherein the rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082]) includes a multi-layered member (Baek, RL includes rear gate line, GL_R, rear data line, DL_R, and second driving voltage line, VDD_R, making it a multi-layered member)
Baek is silent regarding:
wherein the rear wire including an aluminum layer.
Baek discloses that the second line RL may be integrally formed with the conductive material CM of the base hole BSH but does not explicitly disclose this multi-layered member to include an aluminum layer. Baek discloses that a conductive material may include aluminum (Baek, ¶ [0018]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) before the effective filing date to use aluminum as the conductive material for forming the second RL line, thereby meeting the claimed invention, to reduce manufacturing costs (Baek, ¶ [0160]).
Re: Dependent Claim 5, Baek and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Xing, further discloses:
wherein the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL) has a transmittance of about 10 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less (Baek, ¶ [0059] the embodiment where the BSL is implemented as being a polyimide, which has a transmittance of about 10% or less at about 290 nm or less, see also Fig. 2 of Xing).
Re: Dependent Claim 21, Baek and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Xing, further discloses:
An electronic device comprising the display device of claim 1 (Baek, multi-screen display device; Fig. 1, element TDD, can be considered an electronic device. Also, as there are no further structural limitations on “an electronic device”, Baek, as modified by Xing, discloses the display device of Claim 1, and therefore discloses an electronic device comprising the display device).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 20220037620 A1) in view of Xing (2014) and in further view of Hwang (US 2018/0265399 A1).
Re: Dependent Claim 4, Baek and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Xing, further discloses:
wherein the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL) includes glass (Baek, ¶ [0059]),
Baek is silent regarding:
wherein the base layer includes borosilicate doped with a dopant.
Hwang discloses:
borosilicate glass (Hwang, borosilicate glass; Fig. 2, element 115) doped with a dopant (Hwang, ¶ [0052]).
Baek, as modified by Xing, discloses the base layer may include glass, but does not explicitly disclose this glass to be borosilicate doped with a dopant. Hwang discloses the use of borosilicate glass with a dopant (composition) giving it high-temperature stability (Hwang, ¶ [0027]). Baek, as modified by Xing, and Hwang disclose the use of glass as a base layer for use in display devices and are therefore analogous art. It would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to include borosilicate glass doped with a dopant in the glass base layer of Baek for the advantage of borosilicate glass having a low coefficient of thermal expansion, causing less deformation within the display device (Hwang, ¶ [0029]).
Claim(s) 6-8, 10 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 20220037620 A1) in view of Lan (US 9614101 B2) and in further view of Xing (2014).
Re: Independent Claim 6, Baek discloses:
A display device (Baek, display panel; Fig. 5, element DP) comprising:
a base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL) including a first surface (Baek, first surface; Fig. 5, element BS1) and a second surface (Baek, second surface; Fig. 5, element BS2);
a first backplane layer (Baek, pixel circuit layer; Fig. 5, element PCL) disposed on the first surface of the base layer and including a pixel circuit (Baek, ¶ [0060]);
a second backplane layer (Baek, lower protective layer; Fig. 5, element BPRL) disposed on the second surface of the base layer and including a rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082]);
and a light-emitting-element layer (Baek, display element layer; Fig. 5, element DPL) disposed on the first backplane layer and including a light emitting element (Baek, light emitting element; Fig. 5, element LD, ¶ [0061]),
wherein the first backplane layer is disposed between the pixel circuit and the rear wire (Baek, Fig. 5) and includes an layer (Baek, gate insulating layer, Fig. 5, element GI, ¶ [0091])
Baek is silent regarding:
Wherein the first backplane layer includes an organic layer having a transmittance of about 10 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less.
Lan discloses:
includes an organic layer (Lan, organic insulating layer; Fig. 1B, element 150) having a transmittance of about 10 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less (Lan, in the embodiment that the organic insulating layer is made of polyimide, Col. 3, lines 55- 61).
Baek discloses a layer disposed in the first backplane layer, but does not explicitly disclose that this gate insulating layer is an organic layer. Lan discloses an organic insulating layer as a gate insulating layer (Lan, Col. 2, lines 27 -30) for use in an array substrate for display devices. Both Baek and Lan disclose semiconductor configurations for use in display devices and are therefore analogous art. It would have been obvious to a POSITA to replace the gate insulating layer of Baek with the organic gate insulating layer made of polyimide, as disclosed by Lan, A POSITA would recognize that an organic insulating can be formed at a lower temperature (Lan, Col. 3, lines 55- 61).
Baek, as modified by Lan, does not explicitly disclose:
having a transmittance of about 10 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less.
Xing (2014) discloses:
polyimide (Xing, polyimide film; Fig. 2) has a transmittance of about 10 % or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less (Xing, Fig. 2 shows various transmittance spectra for polyimide films, which have a transmittance of 10% or less).
While Baek, as modified by Lan, discloses a layer as polyimide, Baek, as modified by Lan, does not explicitly disclose that the layer has a transmittance of about 10% or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less. Xing (2014) discloses the transmittance spectra of polyimide films having a transmittance of about 10% or less with respect to light having a wavelength of about 290 nm or less. All references disclose polyimide and are therefore analogous art. It would be obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to select the polyimide film, as disclosed by Xing, in the invention of Baek, as modified by Lan, arriving at the invention as claimed, as polyimide is highly researched and widely used in microelectronics industry (Xing, introduction, ¶ [1]) and for controlling/tuning thermal properties (Xing, results and discussion, pg. 3).
Re: Dependent Claim 7, Baek, Lan, and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 6 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, further discloses:
wherein the first organic layer (Lan, organic insulating layer; Fig. 1B, element 150) includes polyimide (Lan, Col. 3, lines 55- 61).
Re: Dependent Claim 8, Baek, Lan, and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 6 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, further discloses:
wherein
the first backplane layer (Baek, pixel circuit layer; Fig. 5, element PCL) further includes a buffer layer (Baek, first interlayer insulating layer; Fig. 5, element ILD1) disposed between the pixel circuit (Baek, ¶ [0060]) and the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL), and
the first organic layer (Baek, gate insulating layer, Fig. 5, element GI, ¶ [0091]) is disposed between the buffer layer and the base layer.
Re: Dependent Claim 10, Baek, Lan, and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 6 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, further discloses:
wherein
the second backplane layer (Baek, lower protective layer; Fig. 5, element BPRL) further includes a rear via layer (Baek, first bridge portion; Fig. 5, element BRP1) that is disposed on the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL) and covers a portion of the rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082], BRP1 covers VDD_R, which is a portion of the rear wire),
the organic layer (Baek, gate insulating layer, Fig. 5, element GI, ¶ [0091]) has a first thickness (Baek, the element exists and therefore must have a thickness)
the rear via layer has a second thickness (Baek, the element exists, therefore it has some thickness),
Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, is silent regarding:
and the second thickness (rear via layer) is greater than the first thickness (organic layer).
Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, discloses an layer via with a first thickness and a rear via layer with a second thickness, but does not explicitly disclose that the second thickness is greater than the first thickness. The claimed thickness relationship is a result-effective variable used to change the size of the display area (Baek, ¶ [0051]). In the absence of any indication that the claimed relationship is critical or produces unexpected results, it would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to adjust the thicknesses of the organic layer and rear via layer to achieve the desired relationship as a matter of routine optimization.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 20220037620 A1) in view of Lan (US 9614101 B2), in further view of Xing (2014), and in further in view of Yu (US 20240431184 A1).
Re: Dependent Claim 9, Baek, Lan, and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 6 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, further discloses:
wherein
the second backplane layer (Baek, lower protective layer; Fig. 5, element BPRL) further includes rear wire (Baek, second line; Fig. 5, element RL, ¶ [0082]) and the base layer (Baek, base layer; Fig. 5, element BSL),
Baek, Lan, and Xing are silent regarding:
the second backplane layer further includes an insulating layer disposed between the rear wire and the base layer
and a second organic layer is disposed between the insulating layer and the base layer.
Yu discloses:
wherein the second backplane layer (Yu, light-emitting substrate; Fig. 6, element 200) further includes an insulating layer (Yu, second electrode layer; Fig. 6, element 24, ¶ [0121]) disposed between the rear wire (Yu, connection wires; Fig. 14, element 242, which are within layer 241 ¶ [0068]) and the base layer (Yu, driving backplane layer; Fig. 6, element 100), and
a second organic layer (Yu, pixel definition layer; Fig. 6, element 22, can be considered a layer) is disposed between the insulating layer and the base layer.
Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, discloses a second backplane layer, a rear wire, and a base layer but does not explicitly disclose an insulating layer disposed between the rear wire and the base layer. Yu discloses an insulating layer in the second backplane disposed between the rear wire and the base layer for wire connections (Yu, ¶ [0099]) and a layer between the insulating layer and base layer. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, and Yu disclose structural configurations of layers within display devices, and are therefore analogous art. It would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to replace the backplane layer structure of Baek, as modified by Lan, to provide a better, more unified signal within the display device (Yu, ¶ [0122]).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (US 20220037620 A1) in view of Lan (US 9614101 B2), in view of Xing (2014), and in further view of Lee (US 8664649 B2).
Re: Dependent Claim 11, Baek, Lan, and Xing disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 6 on which this claim depends. Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, is silent regarding:
wherein the first thickness is about 0.5 μm to about 2.0 μm.
Lee discloses:
wherein the first thickness (Lee, organic film; Fig. 2, element 30, has a thickness) is about 0.5 μm to about 2.0 μm (Lee, Col.5, Table 1, shows the thickness of the organic film between 1000 angstroms to 20000 angstroms).
Baek, as modified by Lan and Xing, discloses an organic layer but does not disclose this organic layer to have a thickness of about 0.5 microns to 2.0 microns. Lee discloses an organic film used to encapsulate the light emitting diode. Baek, Lan, and Lee disclose configurations within display devices and are therefore analogous art. It would have been obvious to a POSITA before the effective filing date to modify the thickness of the organic layer (the first thickness) of Baek, as modified by Lan, for preventing permeating of moisture and oxygen by shielding or protecting elements from external conditions (Lee, Col. 4, lines 57 - 64).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIMARTA KAUR CHOWDHARY whose telephone number is (571)272-7679. The examiner can normally be reached usually Monday - Thursday, 6:45 AM - 4:45 PM (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, Leonard Chang can be reached at (571) 270-3691. 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.
/NIMARTA KAUR CHOWDHARY/ Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/Leonard Chang/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
