DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amendment received on 06/18/2026.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) based upon an application filed in Japan on 08/05/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 06/18/2026 has/have been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”).
Regarding Claim 1. Lee discloses A display apparatus (Figure 5, [0076], organic light emitting display device where Figure 2 is a cross sectional view) comprising:
a first light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a first lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode), and
a first organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the first lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a second lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode), and
a second organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the second lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a common electrode (#250, Figure 2, cathode electrode) included in the first light-emitting device and the second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, [0054], #250 is formed over each light emitting device); and
an auxiliary wiring (#190 and #300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode and auxiliary line) electrically connected to the common electrode (Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected to #250 through direct contact between #190 and #250),
wherein end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #180s have a tapered shape on their left, right, and bottom end portions which extend into #170),
wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #240 extends into and along the tapered bottom portions of #180 in each pixel),
wherein the auxiliary wiring comprises a first wiring layer (#190, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode) and a second wiring layer (#300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary line),
wherein the second wiring layer is electrically connected to the first wiring layer through a contact hole in an insulating layer (#CH4 in #170, Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected through a fourth contact hole a planarization layer made of an insulating material according to [0043]), and
wherein the second wiring layer has a lattice shape in a top view (Figure 5, #300 has a lattice shape in top view).
Regarding Claim 2. Lee discloses A display apparatus (Figure 5, [0076], organic light emitting display device where Figure 2 is a cross sectional view) comprising:
a first light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a first lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode), and
a first organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the first lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a second lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode), and
a second organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the second lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a common electrode (#250, Figure 2, cathode electrode) included in the first light-emitting device and the second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, [0055], #250 is formed over each light emitting device); and
an auxiliary wiring (#190 and #300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode and auxiliary line) electrically connected to the common electrode (Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected to #250 through direct contact between #190 and #250),
wherein end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #180s have a tapered shape on their left, right, and bottom end portions which extend into #170),
wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #240 extends into and along the tapered bottom portions of #180 in each pixel),
wherein the auxiliary wiring comprises a first wiring layer (#300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary line) and a second wiring layer (#190, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode),
wherein the second wiring layer is electrically connected to the first wiring layer through a contact hole in an insulating layer (#CH4 in #170, Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected through a fourth contact hole a planarization layer made of an insulating material according to [0043]), and
wherein the first wiring layer has a lattice shape in a top view (Figure 5, #300 has a lattice shape in top view), and
wherein the first lower electrode, the second lower electrode, and the second wiring layer each comprise a region over the insulating layer (Figure 2, #180s and #190s all comprise a portion which extends over #170).
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”).
Regarding Claim 3. Lee discloses A display apparatus (Figure 5, [0076], organic light emitting display device where Figure 2 is a cross sectional view) comprising:
a first light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a first lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top left anode electrode), and
a first organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the first lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode #180 where a pixel is located) comprising:
a second lower electrode (#180, Figures 2 and 5, top middle anode electrode), and
a second organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) over the second lower electrode (Figure 2, #240 is located over #180),
a common electrode (#250, Figure 2, cathode electrode) included in the first light-emitting device and the second light-emitting device (Figures 2 and 5, [0055], #250 is formed over each light emitting device); and
an auxiliary wiring (#190 and #300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode and auxiliary line) electrically connected to the common electrode (Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected to #250 through direct contact between #190 and #250),
wherein end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #180s have a tapered shape on their left, right, and bottom end portions which extend into #170),
wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #240 extends into and along the tapered bottom portions of #180 in each pixel),
wherein the auxiliary wiring comprises a first wiring layer (#300, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary line) and a second wiring layer (#190, Figures 2 and 5, auxiliary electrode),
wherein the second wiring layer is electrically connected to the first wiring layer through a contact hole in an insulating layer (#CH4 in #170, Figure 2, #190 and #300 are electrically connected through a fourth contact hole a planarization layer made of an insulating material according to [0043]), and
wherein the first wiring layer . . . have a lattice shape in a top view (Figure 5, #300 has a lattice shape in top view),
wherein the first lower electrode, the second lower electrode, and the second wiring layer each comprise a region over the insulating layer (Figure 2, #180s and #190s all comprise a portion which extends over #170), and
wherein a width of the second wiring layer is smaller than a width of the first wiring layer (Figure 2, a horizontal width of #190 at the point where it contacts #300 is smaller than a greatest width of #300 in the horizontal direction).
Lee does not disclose that the second wiring layer has a lattice shape in the top view.
However, Shim teaches a display device (Figure 5, [0017], display panel) comprising a light emitting device (pixel, Figure 5) including a first electrode (#440, anode), an organic compound layer (#470, organic light emitting layer), and a common electrode (#480, cathode) electrically connected to an auxiliary wiring including a first wiring layer (#520, second auxiliary line) and a second wiring layer (#540, first auxiliary line) connected to one another through a contact hole in an insulating layer (#427, pacification layer) wherein the second wiring layer has a lattice shape in top view (Figure 17 embodiment, [0057], “the second auxiliary line 620 may be formed in the form of a mesh to overlap the first auxiliary line 640 in the vertical direction” and Figure 17 shows that the first auxiliary line (#540/#640) may have a lattice shape).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the second wiring layer in Lee in the form of a lattice or mesh, as was done in Shim, to overlap with the mesh of the first wiring layer since auxiliary lines are preferably formed in two directions (see [0082] of Shim) such that “where the auxiliary lines are configured to overlap each other in the form of a mesh, the auxiliary lines are applied with the base power similar to the cathode so that the base power is uniformly applied to the central area of the display panel as well as the edges of the display panel, to thereby improve the uniformity of the brightness in the display panel” (see [0062] of Shim).
Claim(s) 5, 6, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”), as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of US 2012/0273804 A1; Hatano, Kaoru; 11/2012; (“Hatano”).
Regarding Claim 5. Lee discloses The display apparatus according to claim 1.
Lee does not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the first organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near an angled light blocking spacer (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Regarding Claim 6. Lee discloses The display apparatus according to claim 1.
Lee does not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the second organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose that the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near a light blocking spacer which is angled (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Regarding Claim 8. Lee discloses The display apparatus according to claim 2.
Lee does not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the first organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose that the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near a light blocking spacer which is angled (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Regarding Claim 9. Lee discloses The display apparatus according to claim 2.
Lee does not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the second organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose that the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near a light blocking spacer which is angled (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US 2012/0273804 A1; Hatano, Kaoru; 11/2012; (“Hatano”).
Regarding Claim 11. Lee in view of Shim discloses The display apparatus according to claim 3.
Lee in view of Shim do not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the first organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near a light blocking spacer which is angled (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Regarding Claim 12. Lee in view of Shim discloses The display apparatus according to claim 3.
Lee in view of Shim do not explicitly disclose that a taper angle of an end face of the second organic compound layer is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90°. Lee does disclose the organic compound layer (#240, Figure 2, organic emission layer) has a tapered edge in the region of the partition wall (#230) between adjacent pixels in Figure 2.
Hatano teaches a light emitting device (Figure 1A, [0040]) comprising an organic compound layer (#815) which has a tapered end face near a light blocking spacer which is angled (Figure 1A, #815 has a tapered edge surface near the light blocking spacer, #819, due to the angle theta of the light blocking spacer), wherein the angle of the taper is greater than or equal to 45° and less than 90° ([0052], the angle theta may be greater than or equal to 90° and [0070] provides the specific example of 100° in the given embodiment; the tapered angle of the organic layer is supplementary and is therefore 80°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider forming the tapering angle of the organic compound layer of Lee to be in the claimed range of 45° and less than 90°, such as the 80° example of Hatano since, by doing so, “the cross section has such a shape, a first part of the layer containing an organic compound, which is formed on the side surface of the light-blocking spacer, is thinner than a second part of the layer containing an organic compound in a light-emitting region (a region overlapping with the first electrode) to have high resistance; accordingly, current is prevented from flowing into an adjacent pixel” (see [0023] of Hatano).
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 2, along with corresponding arguments, see pages 5-7 of the remarks, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections of claims 1 and 2 in view of US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. Claim(s) 1 and 2 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”).
Applicant argues that Lee does not disclose “wherein end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape, wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape” as recited in amended claims 1 and 2. In particular, applicant points to Figure 2 of Lee where the organic compound layer(s) (#240) do not extend down along, making contact with, the tapered left and right edges of the lower electrode layer(s) (#180) which the applicant interprets the amended claim limitation to require.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s interpretation of the requirements of the amendment under broadest reasonable interpretation. The first limitation requires end portions of the lower electrodes to have a tapered shape. The lower electrodes of Lee (#180, Figure 2) have a tapered structure on both their left and right end portions and also have a tapered structure on the bottom end portion that extends into #170. The second limitation requires the organic layer to extend along the tapered shape (singular) of each of the electrodes. As observed in Figure 2 of Lee, the organic layer(s) (#240) extend along and into the tapered bottom end portions of #180 that extends into #170 which meets the require limitation. The claim is not interpreted to require the organic layer to specifically extend along and make contact with the left and right end portions of the lower electrode as interpreted by the applicant. Therefore, Lee is interpreted to disclose “end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #180s have a tapered shape on their left, right, and bottom end portions which extend into #170), wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #240 extends into and along the tapered bottom portions of #180 in each pixel).
Claim(s) 1 and 2 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”).
Applicant’s amendments to claim 3, along with corresponding arguments, see pages 7-8 of the remarks, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 3 over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”) have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. Claim(s) 3 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”).
Applicant argues that Lee and Shim do not disclose “wherein end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape, wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape” as recited in amended claim 3. In particular, applicant argues a similar interpretation of Lee to the discussion of claims 1 and 2 above and further argues that Shim further fails to disclose the limitation.
As indicated above, it is the examiner’s interpretation that Lee does disclose the amended limitation. The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s interpretation of the requirements of the amendment under broadest reasonable interpretation. The first limitation requires end portions of the lower electrodes to have a tapered shape. The lower electrodes of Lee (#180, Figure 2) have a tapered structure on both their left and right end portions and also have a tapered structure on the bottom end portion that extends into #170. The second limitation requires the organic layer to extend along the tapered shape (singular) of each of the electrodes. As observed in Figure 2 of Lee, the organic layer(s) (#240) extend along and into the tapered bottom end portions of #180 that extends into #170 which meets the require limitation. The claim is not interpreted to require the organic layer to specifically extend along and make contact with the left and right end portions of the lower electrode as interpreted by the applicant. Therefore, Lee is interpreted to disclose “end portions of the first lower electrode and the second lower electrode each have a tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #180s have a tapered shape on their left, right, and bottom end portions which extend into #170), wherein the first organic compound layer and the second organic compound layer each have a shape along the tapered shape (Figures 2 and 5, #240 extends into and along the tapered bottom portions of #180 in each pixel).
Claim(s) 3 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”).
Applicant’s arguments regarding the allowability of dependent claims 5-6, 8-9, and 11-12, see page 8 of the remarks, filed 06/18/2026, at least for their dependence on independent claims 1, 2, and 3, respectively, have been fully considered but are not found persuasive. As described above, claims 1, 2, and 3, stand rejected as the amendments have not overcome the cited prior art.
Claim(s) 5, 6, 8, and 9 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”), as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of US 2012/0273804 A1; Hatano, Kaoru; 11/2012; (“Hatano”).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 stand(s) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0351636 A1; Lee et al.; 12/2016; (“Lee”) in view of US 2016/0293888 A1; Shim et al.; 10/2016; (“Shim”), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US 2012/0273804 A1; Hatano, Kaoru; 11/2012; (“Hatano”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2022/0359631 A1; Sun et al.; 11/2022 – Figure 3 discloses a light-emitting functional layer (#23) which extends down along the side surfaces of the underlying anode (#22) of the light emitting device. Sun teaches in [0076] that covering the edge portion of the anode pattern with an increased thickness of the light-emitting functional layer reduces the risk of leakage or short-circuit with adjacent anode and cathode electrodes.
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 TYLER JAMES WIEGAND whose telephone number is (571)270-0096. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8AM-5PM.
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, CHRISTINE KIM can be reached at (571) 272-8458. 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.
/TYLER J WIEGAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights