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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/8/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: CW’ (fig. 7). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 5, there are extra spaces near the end of the line between “and” and “the”. The examiner suggests that the extra spaces be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 15-20 are objected to because they inherit the deficiencies of claim 14 through their dependencies.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 and 9-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (US 2021/0385314) (hereafter An), in view of Cho et al. (US 2008/0218064) (hereafter Cho).
Regarding claim 1, An discloses a foldable display device (see at least paragraph [0079], where the display can be a foldable display) comprising: a display panel including a display area and a non-display area (see at least Fig. 6), wherein the display panel includes a light-emitting element (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where the display panel includes an organic light emitting diode (OLED)), an encapsulation layer on the light- emitting element (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where 1040 is an encapsulation layer), and color filters on the encapsulation layer (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where 1070 are color filters); and a cover window assembly on the display panel (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where the device includes a cover window 1050).
An does not specifically disclose that the cover window assembly includes a protective film and a multi-functional layer under the protective film, wherein the multi-functional layer includes: a light-transmissive portion overlapping the display area of the display panel; and a light-blocking portion overlapping both the display area and the non-display area of the display panel, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion.
However, Cho teaches an OLED display device (see at least the abstract) comprising a display panel (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0091], where the organic light emitting device 20 is a display panel) and a cover window assembly (see at least Fig. 3), the cover window assembly including a protective film (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0093], where 42 is a protective film) and a multi-functional layer under the protective film (see at least Fig. 3), wherein the multi-functional layer includes: a light-transmissive portion overlapping the display area of the display panel (see at least Fig. 3, where either the layer 30 or the open area beneath layer 52 can be the light-transmissive portion); and a light-blocking portion overlapping both the display area and the non-display area of the display panel, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0094], where selective light absorbing layer 52 is a light-blocking portion that overlaps the display area and the non-display area, the area defined by the black matrix layer 62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the foldable display device of An to include the teachings of Cho so that the cover window assembly includes a protective film and a multi-functional layer under the protective film, wherein the multi-functional layer includes: a light-transmissive portion overlapping the display area of the display panel; and a light-blocking portion overlapping both the display area and the non-display area of the display panel, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion for the purpose of providing greater protection for the display panel by providing additional layers above the display panel (see at least Fig. 3 of Cho) and for reducing reflection of external light (see at least paragraph [0076] of Cho).
Regarding claim 2, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion comprises: an outer light-blocking portion surrounding side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion; and an inner light-blocking portion covering at least one of an upper surface or a lower surface of the light-transmissive portion, wherein a light-transmittance of the inner light-blocking portion is greater than a light- transmittance of the outer light-blocking portion (see at least Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the further teachings of Cho so that the light-blocking portion comprises: an outer light-blocking portion surrounding side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion; and an inner light-blocking portion covering at least one of an upper surface or a lower surface of the light-transmissive portion, wherein a light-transmittance of the inner light-blocking portion is greater than a light- transmittance of the outer light-blocking portion for the purpose of reducing reflection of external light (see at least paragraph [0076] of Cho).
Regarding claim 9, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 2.
Cho also teaches that a thickness of the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is greater than a thickness of the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion (see at least Fig. 3, where the outer light-blocking portion includes the black matrix and thus has a greater thickness than the inner light-blocking portion).
Regarding claim 10, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 9.
Cho also teaches that a thickness of the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 10 μm to 25 μm (see at least paragraphs [0075] and [0082], where the selective light absorbing layer has a thickness of about 5 μm and the black matrix has a thickness of about 5 μm to 20 μm), and the thickness of the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 0.5 μm to 10 μm (see at least paragraphs [0075], where the selective light absorbing layer has a thickness of about 5 μm).
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that a thickness of the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 50 μm to 120 μm.
However, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955). Among the benefits of a thickness of the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion being in a range of 50 μm to 120 μm include increasing the absorption of light (see at least paragraph [0083] of Cho).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho so that a thickness of the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 50 μm to 120 μm for the purpose of increasing the absorption of light (see at least paragraph [0083] of Cho).
Regarding claim 11, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 2.
Cho also discloses that a thickness of the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is less than a thickness of the light-transmissive portion (see at least Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Cho also teaches that the multi-functional layer of the cover window assembly is directly coated on a lower surface of the protective film (see at least Fig. 3, where the multi-functional layer can include all layers beneath the protective film) and is attached to an upper surface of the display panel (see at least Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the further teachings of Cho so that the multi-functional layer of the cover window assembly is directly coated on a lower surface of the protective film and is attached to an upper surface of the display panel for the purpose of assembling the device and making it compact.
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that the multifunctional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel via an adhesive layer.
However, Official Notice is taken that adhesive layers are old and well-known in the art for attaching layers within a display device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho so that the multifunctional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel via an adhesive layer for the purpose of firmly assembling the pieces of the device since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Regarding claim 13, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 1.
Cho also teaches that the cover window assembly further comprises a cover window between the protective film and the multi-functional layer (see at least Fig. 3, where 41 can be the cover window), and that the multi-functional layer of the cover window assembly is directly coated on a lower surface of the cover window (see at least Fig. 3) and is attached to an upper surface of the display panel (see at least Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the further teachings of Cho so that the cover window assembly further comprises a cover window between the protective film and the multi-functional layer, and that the multi-functional layer of the cover window assembly is directly coated on a lower surface of the cover window and is attached to an upper surface of the display panel for the purpose of assembling the device and making it compact.
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that the multifunctional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel via an adhesive layer.
However, Official Notice is taken that adhesive layers are old and well-known in the art for attaching layers within a display device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho so that the multifunctional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel via an adhesive layer for the purpose of firmly assembling the pieces of the device since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results.
Regarding claim 14, An discloses a foldable display device (see at least paragraph [0079], where the display can be a foldable display) comprising: a display panel including a light-emitting element (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where the display panel includes an organic light emitting diode (OLED)), an encapsulation layer on the light- emitting element (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where 1040 is an encapsulation layer), and color filters on the encapsulation layer (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where 1070 are color filters); and a protective film on the display panel (see at least Fig. 15 and paragraph [0117], where the device includes a cover window 1050, which can be a protective film).
An does not specifically disclose a multi-functional layer between the protective film and the display panel, and the multi-functional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel, the multi-functional layer including: a light-transmissive portion having an area size that is smaller than an area size of the display panel; and a light-blocking portion covering at least one of a lower surface or an upper surface of the light-transmissive portion, and side surfaces of the light transmittance portion, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion.
However, Cho teaches an OLED display device (see at least the abstract) comprising a display panel (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0091], where the organic light emitting device 20 is a display panel); a protective film (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0093], where 42 is a protective film) and a multi-functional layer under the protective film and attached to an upper surface of the display panel (see at least Fig. 3), wherein the multi-functional layer includes: a light-transmissive portion having an area size that is smaller than an area size of the display panel (see at least Fig. 3, where the open area beneath layer 52 can be the light-transmissive portion); and a light-blocking portion covering at least one of a lower surface or an upper surface of the light-transmissive portion, and side surfaces of the light transmittance portion, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraph [0094], where selective light absorbing layer 52 is a light-blocking portion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the foldable display device of An to include the teachings of Cho so that the device comprises a multi-functional layer between the protective film and the display panel, and the multi-functional layer is attached to an upper surface of the display panel, the multi-functional layer including: a light-transmissive portion having an area size that is smaller than an area size of the display panel; and a light-blocking portion covering at least one of a lower surface or an upper surface of the light-transmissive portion, and side surfaces of the light transmittance portion, the light-blocking portion having a light- transmittance that is less than a light-transmittance of the light- transmissive portion for the purpose of providing greater protection for the display panel by providing additional layers above the display panel (see at least Fig. 3 of Cho) and for reducing reflection of external light (see at least paragraph [0076] of Cho).
Regarding claim 15, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 14.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion of the multi-functional layer covers the upper surface and the side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion, and the light-blocking portion contacts a lower surface of a sealing layer, which is layered with the protective film (see at least fig. 3).
Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion covers the lower surface of the light-transmissive portion and the light-transmissive portion directly contacts a lower surface of the protective film.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the layers of the device, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to rearrange the layers such that the light-blocking portion covers the lower surface of the light-transmissive portion and the light-transmissive portion directly contacts a lower surface of the protective film, for the purpose of combining functionalities and ease of manufacture. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding claim 16, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 14.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion of the multi-functional layer covers the upper surface and the side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion, and the light-blocking portion contacts a lower surface of a sealing layer, which is layered with the protective film (see at least fig. 3).
Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion directly contacts a lower surface of the protective film.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine several of the layers of the device, since it has been held that making elements integral without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to combine the layers so that the sealing layer is also the protective film such that the light-blocking portion directly contacts a lower surface of the protective film, for the purpose of combining functionalities and ease of manufacture. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Regarding claim 17, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 14.
Cho also teaches a cover window between the protective film and the multi-functional layer (see at least Fig. 3, layer 30), wherein the light-blocking portion of the multi-functional layer covers the upper surface and the side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion, and the light-blocking portion contacts a lower surface of the cover window (see at least fig. 3).
Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion covers the lower surface of the light-transmissive portion and the light-transmissive portion directly contacts a lower surface of the cover window.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the layers of the device, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to rearrange the layers such that the light-blocking portion covers the lower surface of the light-transmissive portion and the light-transmissive portion directly contacts a lower surface of the cover window, for the purpose of combining functionalities and ease of manufacture. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding claim 18, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 14.
Cho also teaches a cover window between the protective film and the multi-functional layer (see at least Fig. 3, layer 30), wherein the light-blocking portion of the multi-functional layer covers the upper surface and the side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion, and the light-blocking portion contacts a lower surface of the cover window (see at least fig. 3).
Claims 3 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (US 2021/0385314) (hereafter An), in view of Cho et al. (US 2008/0218064) (hereafter Cho) as applied to claims 2 or 14 above, and further in view of Nagahama (US 2020/0088916) (hereafter Nagahama).
Regarding claim 3, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 2.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion include a binder resin and a pigment or dye (see at least paragraph [0075]).
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color.
However, Nagahama teaches a light-blocking film comprising a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color (see at least paragraphs [0032]-[0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the teachings of Nagahama so that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color for the purpose of efficiently blocking undesired light such as external reflections.
Regarding claim 19, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 14.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion include a binder resin and a pigment or dye (see at least paragraph [0075]).
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color.
However, Nagahama teaches a light-blocking film comprising a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color (see at least paragraphs [0032]-[0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the teachings of Nagahama so that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color for the purpose of efficiently blocking undesired light such as external reflections.
Regarding claim 20, An as modified by Cho and Nagahama discloses all of the limitations of claim 19.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion includes: an outer light-blocking portion surrounding side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion; and an inner light-blocking portion covering at least one of an upper surface or a lower surface of the light-transmissive portion (see at least Fig. 3), wherein a content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is greater than a content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion (see at least fig. 3, where the outer light-blocking portion includes the black matrix 62 and thus has a greater content of the pigment or dye that the inner light-blocking portion that is only the layer 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Nagahama to include the further teachings of Cho so that the light-blocking portion includes: an outer light-blocking portion surrounding side surfaces of the light-transmissive portion; and an inner light-blocking portion covering at least one of an upper surface or a lower surface of the light-transmissive portion, wherein a content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is greater than a content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion for the purpose of providing the black matrix around the display area in order to block the view of display components arranged in the non-display area.
Claims 3-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (US 2021/0385314) (hereafter An), in view of Cho et al. (US 2008/0218064) (hereafter Cho) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Masuyama et al. (US 2022/0347976) (hereafter Masuyama).
Regarding claims 3-4, An as modified by Cho discloses all of the limitations of claim 2.
Cho also teaches that the light-blocking portion include a binder resin and a pigment or dye (see at least paragraph [0075]).
An as modified by Cho does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer containing a pigment or dye that render a black color.
However, Masuyama teaches a colored film comprising a thermoplastic elastomer, specifically a thermoplastic polyurethane, containing a black pigment or dye that rends a black color (see at least paragraphs [0364] and [0366]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho to include the teachings of Masuyama so that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic elastomer, specifically a thermoplastic polyurethane, containing a black pigment or dye that render a black color for the purpose of efficiently blocking undesired light such as external reflections.
Regarding claim 6, An as modified by Cho and Masuyama discloses all of the limitations of claim 3.
Cho also teaches that a content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is greater than a content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion (see at least fig. 3, where the outer light-blocking portion includes the black matrix 62 and thus has a greater content of the pigment or dye that the inner light-blocking portion that is only the layer 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Masuyama to include the further teachings of Cho so that a content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is greater than a content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion for the purpose of blocking the view of components arranged in the non-display area of the device.
Regarding claim 7, An as modified by Cho and Masuyama discloses all of the limitations of claim 6.
Cho also teaches that the content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 0.05 wt% to 2 wt% (see at least paragraph [0075]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Masuyama to include the further teachings of Cho so that the content of the pigment or dye contained in the inner light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 0.05 wt% to 2 wt% for the purpose of reducing reflection of external light, while still allowing for display light to be transmitted (see at least paragraph [0076] of Cho).
An as modified by Cho and Masuyama does not specifically disclose that the content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 0.5 wt% to 5 wt%.
However, 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 (C.C.P.A. 1955). Among the benefits of the content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion being in a range of 0.5 wt% to 5 wt% include making the outer light-blocking portion appear blacker, thus providing greater light blocking for the black matrix.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Masuyama so that the content of the pigment or dye contained in the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion is in a range of 0.5 wt% to 5 wt% for the purpose of making the outer light-blocking portion appear blacker, thus providing greater light blocking for the black matrix.
Regarding claim 8, An as modified by Cho and Masuyama discloses all of the limitations of claim 3.
Cho also teaches that the outer light-blocking portion of the light-blocking portion includes two layers having different contents of the pigment or dye (see at least Fig. 3 and paragraphs [0075]-[0076], [0088], and [0094], where the outer-light blocking portion includes the selective light absorbing layer 52 and the black matrix 62).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An et al. (US 2021/0385314) (hereafter An), in view of Cho et al. (US 2008/0218064) (hereafter Cho) and Masuyama et al. (US 2022/0347976) (hereafter Masuyama) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2022/0208904) (hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 5, An as modified by Cho and Masuyama discloses all of the limitations of claim 3.
Masuyama also discloses that the light-blocking portion includes a thermoplastic polyurethane and a black pigment or dye (see at least paragraphs [0364] and [0366]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Masuyama to include the further teachings of Masuyama so that the light-blocking portion include a thermoplastic polyurethane containing a black pigment or dye for the purpose of efficiently blocking undesired light such as external reflections.
An as modified by Cho and Masuyama does not specifically disclose that the light-blocking portion includes a red pigment or dye, a green pigment or dye, and a blue pigment or dye.
However, Lee teaches an OLED display device (see at least the abstract) comprising a layer comprising a black pigment that is formed by mixing a red pigment, a blue pigment, and a green pigment (see at least paragraph [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of An as modified by Cho and Masuyama to include the teachings of Lee so that the light-blocking portion includes a red pigment or dye, a green pigment or dye, and a blue pigment or dye for the purpose of using a known combination of pigments to achieve the desired black pigment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM W BOOHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0573. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 8:00am - 4:00pm.
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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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.
/ADAM W BOOHER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872