DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1- 3, 6 and 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0119114 A1~ hereinafter “Kim”). Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) a display panel, comprising: a base substrate (100) ; a first electrode layer (211) located on a side of the base substrate and comprising a plurality of first electrodes (211) ; a pixel definition layer (120) located on a side of the first electrode layer facing away from the base substrate and comprising a plurality of sub-pixel opening regions (see fig. 4) ; a common layer (130) located on a side of the first electrode (211) facing away from the base substrate and covering the pixel definition layer (120) for transferring holes or electrons ([0087]-[0088] ; a second electrode layer (231, 232, 233) located on a side of the common layer facing away from the base substrate; the display panel further comprises: an extension structure (150 ; [0095] ) located between the common layer (130) and the base substrate (100) , and between adjacent sub-pixel opening regions (see fig. 4) ; the extension structure (150) is configured to increase a difficulty in transferring the holes or the electrons. Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) the extension structure (150) is covered by the common layer (130) , the extension structure (150) at least partially surrounds a sub-pixel opening region (see fig. 4) . Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) the extension structure (150) is an extension part located between the pixel definition layer (120) and the common layer (130) ; a distance between a surface of the extension part away from the base substrate (100) and the base substrate (100) is greater than a distance between a surface of the pixel definition layer (120) away from the base substrate and the base substrate (see fig. 4) . Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) a plurality of extension structures (150) are comprised between adjacent sub-pixel opening regions. Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses (in at least fig s . 1 and 4) the plurality of sub-pixel opening regions comprise: first color sub-pixel opening regions (see fig. 4; [0056]) , second color sub-pixel opening regions (see at least fig. 4; [0056]) , and third color sub-pixel opening regions (see at least fig. 4; [0056]) ; the plurality of sub-pixel opening regions are arranged into a plurality of sub-pixel columns (see at least figs. 1 and 4) ; the plurality of sub-pixel columns are arranged in a first direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) , each of the sub-pixel columns extends in a second direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) , and the first direction intersects with the second direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) ; the plurality of sub-pixel columns comprises: a plurality of first sub-pixel columns and second sub-pixel columns provided to be spaced apart from the first sub-pixel columns (as evident by at least figs. 1 and 4) ; in each first sub-pixel column, first color sub-pixel opening regions and second color sub-pixel opening regions are alternately provided along the second direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) ; in each second sub-pixel column, first color sub-pixel opening regions and third color sub-pixel opening regions are alternately provided along the second direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) ; in the first direction, each second color sub-pixel opening region is adjacent to a first color sub-pixel opening region (see at least figs. 1 and 4) , and each third color sub-pixel opening region is adjacent to a first color sub-pixel opening region (see at least figs. 1 and 4) ; in the first sub-pixel column (see figs. 1 and 4) , a minimum distance between an edge of a first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of a side of a first electrode in the second direction is greater than a minimum distance between an edge of the first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of the first electrode in the first direction (see figs. 1 and 4) ; and in the second sub-pixel column, a minimum distance between an edge of a first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of a first electrode in the first direction is smaller than a minimum distance between an edge of the first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of a side of the first electrode in the second direction (see at least figs. 1 and 4) . Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses (in at least fig s . 1 and 4) a minimum distance between an edge of the first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of the first electrode is greater than a minimum distance between an edge of the third color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of the first electrode. Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses (in at least fig s . 1 and 4) a minimum distance between an edge of a first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of an adjacent third color sub-pixel opening region is greater than a minimum distance between an edge of the first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of another adjacent third color sub-pixel opening region. Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1 and 4) a minimum distance between an edge of a first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of an adjacent second color sub-pixel opening region is greater than a minimum distance between an edge of the first color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of another adjacent second color sub-pixel opening region. Regarding claim 13, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1 and 4) a minimum distance between an edge of a second color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of a first electrode is greater than a minimum distance between an edge of a third color sub-pixel opening region and an edge of the first electrode. Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1 and 4) an edge of a side of the first color sub-pixel opening region close to a second color sub-pixel opening region is recessed toward the first color sub-pixel opening region. Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1 and 4) a display apparatus, comprising the display panel according to claim 1. 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. Claim(s) 4-5 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0119114 A1~ hereinafter “Kim”). Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses all the claim limitations except for the extension structure is a recessed structure provided on the pixel definition layer; in a direction from the base substrate towards the pixel definition layer, a cross-sectional area of the recessed structure gradually decreases. However, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) the extension structure (150) is a spacer provided on the pixel definition layer (120); in a direction from the base substrate (100) towards the pixel definition (120), a cross-sectional area of the spacer structure gradually decreases. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to contemplate replacing the spacer extension structure of Kim with a recessed structure, since it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. Regarding claim s 5 and 16-18 , Kim discloses (in at least fig. 4) extension structures (150) surrounding different sub-pixel opening regions (see fig. 4) but fails to expressly disclose they are integrally connected. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider forming the extension structures of Kim to integrally connected in order to reduce the manufacturing steps of the display device. Furthermore, it has been held that making an old device portable or movable without producing any new and unexpected result involves only routine skill in the art. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7-8, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim s 7 , 19 and 20 , the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a plurality of support parts located between the pixel definition layer and the common layer; an orthographic projection of the support parts on the base substrate is not overlapped with an orthographic projection of the extension structure on the base substrate. Claim 8 is allowed due to their dependency upon claims 8 and 20. Conclusio n Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3099 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-Th~ 7:30-5:30 . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT James R. Greece can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3711 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT ELMITO BREVAL Primary Examiner Art Unit 2875 /ELMITO BREVAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875