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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s submission of June 5, 2026, including claim amendments, has been entered. No claims are added or canceled. Claims 1-11,13-14,18,20-21,23 and 25-27 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Independent claims 1 and 26 have been amended to better describe portions of the claimed separation structure. Applicants arguments essentially assert that the previous rejections do not meet the new claim limitations. These arguments are moot in light of the rejections below.
Examiner notes that the newly added claim language “in a cross-sectional view of the display substrate, a portion of the second separation part close to a top surface of the separation structure is arc-shaped” is not found in the present specification. Applicant’s remarks did not explain in detail where this feature is found in either the specification or drawings as originally filed. From the Examiner’s understanding, it appears that what is being described with this claim language is the shape of the second separation part 12 as shown in figs. 7 and 8 where the top surface SF2 appears to be flat and the side surfaces SF3 appears to have a curvature. It is with this understanding that the amended claims are being interpreted for the examination below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 4 is dependent on claim 1 which has been amended to describe the second separation part having an arc-shape, consistent with figs. 7 and 8. Claim 4 describes the separation structure has having two V-shapes, which is shown in figs. 9A and 9B. There is no disclosure as originally filed that shows these two different shapes together as currently described by claim 4.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-14, 18, 23 and 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0239192 A1, in view of Hatano et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0103385 A1.
With regard to claim 1, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses a display substrate (30), comprising:
a base substrate (30); a plurality of sub-pixels (10) located on a main surface of the base substrate (30), wherein each of the plurality of sub-pixels comprises a light-emitting element, the light-emitting element has a light-emitting region (11), the light-emitting element comprises a first electrode (111), a light-emitting functional layer (112), and a second electrode (113), the second electrode (113) is located on a side of the light-emitting functional layer (112) facing away from the base substrate (30), the first electrode (111) is located on a side of the light-emitting functional layer (112) close to the base substrate (30), and the light-emitting functional layer (112) comprises a plurality of sub- functional layers [0098];
and a separation structure (40) located between light-emitting regions of adjacent sub-pixels among the plurality of sub-pixels and comprising a first separation part (41) and a second separation part (42) which are stacked, wherein the first separation part (41) is located on a side of the second separation part (42) close to the base substrate (30), wherein the second separation part (42) has a protruding part, the protruding part protrudes relative to a side of the first separation part (41) close to the second separation part, at least one sub- functional layer of the light-emitting functional layer is disconnected at the protruding part, a material of the first separation part comprises an organic material, a material of the second separation part comprises an organic material, and along a direction from the first electrode to the second electrode, an orthographic projection of the separation structure (40) on the base substrate gradually decreases and then gradually increases [0048-0099].
Zhang does not expressly disclose that in a cross-sectional view of the display substrate, a portion of the second separation part close to a top surface of the separation structure is arc-shaped, and in the cross-sectional view of the display substrate, an included angle between the top surface and a tangent of the portion of the second separation part close to the top surface of the separation structure is an obtuse angle.
Hatano, in at least figs. 2C and 3B, teach an organic light emitting display having sub-pixels a two part separation structure 150/155 where in the top portion of the separation structure 150 (equivalent to Zhang 42 and claimed second separation part) has a curved or arc-shaped side surface and has an angle between the top surface and a tangent of the portion of the second separation part close to the top surface of the separation structure that is an obtuse angle. The curved shape of the second separation part is an alternative to the Zhang shape, which is equally capable of proving sub-pixel separation and discontinuity of the upper electrode and the organic layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the shape the second separation part of Zhang with a curved surface, as taught by Hatano as an alternative design that is equally capable of proving sub-pixel separation and discontinuity of the upper electrode and the organic layers.
With regard to claim 2, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the second separation part (42) is in contact with the first separation part (41).
With regard to claim 3, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that in the cross-sectional view of the display substrate, the separation structure (40) is in the shape of an inverted gourd or an hourglass.
Neither Zhang nor Hatano expressly disclose the relative heights of the first and second separation parts, however Hatano shows the second separation part 150 having a greater thickness than the first separation part 155 and explains the purpose of the thickness of each of the separation parts is to create discontinuity in the layers of the light emitting portions [0088].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention where a maximum thickness of the second separation part is more than three times a maximum thickness of the first separation part to cause discontinuity in the layers of the light emitting portions, as taught by Hatano.
With regard to claim 4, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the separation structure (40) comprises a bottom surface, a top surface, and two side surfaces located between the bottom surface and the top surface, in the cross-sectional view of the display substrate, the side surfaces are V-shaped, and the bottoms of the two V characters are arranged opposite to each other.
With regard to claims 5, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, and Hatano, figs. 2C and 3B, disclose separation structures nearly identical to the shape of the disclosed separation structure, but Zhang and Hatano does not expressly disclose an included angle between side surfaces.
It has been held that discovering optimal ranges for values or relative proportions of elements such as shape and relative angle is obvious to one skilled in the art through routine optimization, to optimize performance of the display (In re Scherl, 156 F.2d 72, 74-75, 70 USPQ 204, 205-206 (CCPA 1946); MPEP 2144.05). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the separation structure such that on the same side of the separation structure, an included angle between a side surface of the first separation part and a side surface of the second separation part is greater than or equal to 60 degrees and less than or equal to 150 degrees, to optimize performance of the display.
With regard to claim 7, the combined Zhang/Hatano meets the claim limitation that the obtuse angle is greater than 110 degrees and less than or equal to 160 degrees because the Zhang/Hatano separation structures have a curved surface.
With regard to claim 8, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses a display substrate further comprising: a pixel-defining pattern, comprising a plurality of openings, each of the plurality of openings being configured to define the light-emitting region of the sub-pixel and configured to expose at least a portion of the first electrode, wherein the pixel-defining pattern comprises a portion located in the same layer as the first separation part.
With regard to claim 9, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the pixel-defining pattern is at least partially separated from the first separation part, and both the pixel-defining pattern and the first separation part are in contact with the same insulating layer and located on the insulating layer.
With regard to claim 10, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the pixel-defining pattern comprises a first pixel-defining part and a second pixel-defining part between two adjacent ones of the plurality of openings, the separation structure is located between the first pixel-defining part and the second pixel-defining part, a first recess is provided between the separation structure and the first pixel-defining part, and a second recess is provided between the separation structure and the second pixel-defining part.
With regard to claim 11, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that an orthographic projection of the protruding part on the base substrate at least partially overlaps an orthographic projection of the first electrode on the base substrate, wherein the pixel-defining pattern and the separation structure are of an integral structure.
With regard to claim 13, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that a material of the first separation part comprises a positive photoresist, and a material of the second separation structure comprises a negative photoresist.
With regard to claim 14, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the light-emitting functional layer comprises a charge generation layer, a first light-emitting layer, and a second light-emitting layer which are stacked, the first light-emitting layer is located between the first electrode and the charge generation layer, the second light-emitting layer is located between the second electrode and the charge generation layer, and the charge generation layer is disconnected at the protruding part wherein the light-emitting functional layer further comprises a first charge transport layer located between the first electrode and the first light-emitting layer and a second charge transport layer located between the first light-emitting layer and the charge generation layer, and the first charge transport layer and the second charge transport layer are disconnected at the protruding part.
With regard to claim 23, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that the minimum dimension of the separation structure in a plane parallel to the main surface is greater than a spacing between the first electrodes of adjacent sub-pixels among the plurality of sub-pixels, wherein the maximum dimension of the separation structure in a plane parallel to the main surface is greater than or equal to one fifth of a spacing between the first electrodes of adjacent sub- pixels among the plurality of sub-pixels.
With regard to claim 25, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses a display device, comprising the display substrate according to claim 1.
With regard to claim 26, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses a manufacturing method of a display substrate, comprising:
forming a plurality of sub-pixels on a main surface of a base substrate (30), wherein the sub-pixel comprises a light-emitting element (11), the light-emitting element has a light-emitting region, the light- emitting element comprises a first electrode (111), a light-emitting functional layer (112), and a second electrode (113), the second electrode (113) is located on a side of the light-emitting functional layer (112) facing away from the base substrate (30), the first electrode (111) is located on a side of the light-emitting functional layer (112) close to the base substrate (30), and the light-emitting functional layer comprises a plurality of sub- functional layers [0098];
and forming a separation structure (40) between light-emitting regions of adjacent sub-pixels, wherein forming the separation structure comprises forming a first separation part (41) and a second separation part (42) which are stacked, and the first separation part (41) is located on a side of the second separation part (40) close to the base substrate (30), wherein the second separation part (42) has a protruding part, the protruding part protrudes relative to a side of the first separation part (41) close to the second separation part (42), at least one sub- functional layer of the light-emitting functional layer is disconnected at the protruding part, a material of the first separation part comprises an organic material, a material of the second separation part comprises an organic material, and along a direction from the first electrode (111) to the second electrode (113), an orthographic projection of the separation structure on the base substrate gradually decreases and then gradually increases [0048-0099].
Zhang does not expressly disclose that in a cross-sectional view of the display substrate, a portion of the second separation part close to a top surface of the separation structure is arc-shaped, and in the cross-sectional view of the display substrate, an included angle between the top surface and a tangent of the portion of the second separation part close to the top surface of the separation structure is an obtuse angle.
Hatano, in at least figs. 2C and 3B, teach an organic light emitting display having sub-pixels a two part separation structure 150/155 where in the top portion of the separation structure 150 (equivalent to Zhang 42 and claimed second separation part) has a curved or arc-shaped side surface and has an angle between the top surface and a tangent of the portion of the second separation part close to the top surface of the separation structure that is an obtuse angle. The curved shape of the second separation part is an alternative to the Zhang shape, which is equally capable of proving sub-pixel separation and discontinuity of the upper electrode and the organic layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the shape the second separation part of Zhang with a curved surface, as taught by Hatano as an alternative design that is equally capable of proving sub-pixel separation and discontinuity of the upper electrode and the organic layers.
With regard to claim 27, Zhang, in figures 2-5b, discloses that forming the first separation part (41) and the second separation part (42) which are stacked comprises: forming a positive photoresist film; forming a negative photoresist film on the positive photoresist film; patterning the negative photoresist film to form the second separation part (42); and patterning the positive photoresist film by using the second separation part as a mask to form the first separation part.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang and Hatano, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Ko et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0033084 A1.
With regard to claim 6, the Zhang/Hatano combination teach all of the claim limitations including the separation structure shape, however they do not expressly teach that the separation structure comprises a plurality of separation sub-structures, the plurality of separation sub-structures surrounds one of the plurality of sub-pixels, and a gap is provided between adjacent ones of the plurality of separation sub-structures.
Ko, in fig. 2B teaches an OLED display having separation structures (labeled “b”) where the separation structure comprises a plurality of separation sub-structures, the plurality of separation sub-structures surrounds one of the plurality of sub-pixels, and a gap is provided between adjacent ones of the plurality of separation sub-structures.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention construct the Zhang/Hatano OLED display where the separation structure comprises a plurality of separation sub-structures, the plurality of separation sub-structures surrounds one of the plurality of sub-pixels, and a gap is provided between adjacent ones of the plurality of separation sub-structures, as taught by Ko, for improved manufacture processes (see Ko [0026-0036].
Claims 18, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang and Hatano, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Yamazaki, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0208303 A1.
With regard to claim 18, Zhang/Hatano, discloses all of the limitations of the parent claims, including that the substrate is a circuit substrate for driving the sub-pixels [0073]. However Zhang/Hatano do not expressly disclose the details of the circuit substrate.
Yamazaki, in figs. 3B, 5C and 7A-7C, teaches a pixel circuit, wherein the pixel circuit (120) is configured to drive the light-emitting element to emit light, the display substrate further comprises a planarization layer (133), the first electrode (103) is connected to the pixel circuit (120) through a via hole running through the planarization layer (133), and both the first electrode (103) and the first separation part (109) are located on the planarization layer (133), wherein both the first electrode (103) and the first separation part (109) are in contact with the planarization layer (133).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the pixel circuit and planarization structures of Yamazaki into the Zhang/Hatano device, because this is a standard pixel circuit structure, which would providing circuitry to drive the various sub-pixels.
With regard to claims 20 and 21, the combination of Zhang/Hatano and Yamazaki would include that the pixel circuit comprises a capacitor, and an orthographic projection of the capacitor on the base substrate at least partially overlaps an orthographic projection of the separation structure on the base substrate; and a conductive structure, wherein the conductive structure is configured to provide a signal to the pixel circuit, the conductive structure is located between the separation structure and the base substrate, and an orthographic projection of the conductive structure on the base substrate overlaps the orthographic projection of the separation structure on the base substrate, wherein the conductive structure is located between light-emitting regions of adjacent sub- pixels, and the conductive structure is electrically connected to the second electrode, as standard elements of display pixel driving circuits.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas A Hollweg whose telephone number is (571)270-1739. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Kiesha R Bryant can be reached at (571)272-3606. 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
Prosecution Insights