Detailed Action
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
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 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20140027724 to Lim et al. (Lim).
Regarding Claims 1 and 20, Lim teaches in Fig. 3 at least, a display device and panel, comprising:
a substrate 210;
a light-emitting device layer 220-260 arranged at a side of the substrate, wherein the light-emitting device layer comprises pixel apertures (between banks 230) and light-emitting devices, at least one of the light-emitting devices 220-240 is arranged in a respective one of the pixel apertures, and at least one of the light-emitting devices comprises an anode 220; and
a color resist layer 275 arranged at a side of the light-emitting device layer facing away from the substrate (facing up on page), wherein the color resist layer comprises color resist units 272R/G/B, at least one of the color resist units comprises a first portion (convex) and a second portion (planar), a projection of the first portion on the substrate is located within a projection of a respective one of the pixel apertures on the substrate, and along a direction paralleled to a plane of the substrate, the second portion is located at an peripheral area of the first portion (see Fig. 3, convex portion is over the aperture and planar portion is outside the aperture),
wherein along a direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, a distance between a surface of the first portion facing away from the substrate and a plane of a surface of the anode facing away from the substrate (between peak of convex portion and 220) is greater than a distance between a surface of the second portion facing away from the substrate and the plane of the surface of the anode facing away from the substrate (between planar portion and 220, see Fig. 3).
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 2, 3, 7 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20230422584 to Zhou.
Regarding Claim 2, Lim teaches the display panel according to claim 1, further comprising:
a light-shielding layer 271 arranged at a side of the color resist layer close to the substrate, wherein a projection of the light-shielding layer on the light-emitting device layer is located between adjacent pixel apertures;
but does not explicitly teach:
an auxiliary layer arranged between the light-shielding layer and the color resist layer, wherein a projection of the auxiliary layer on the substrate covers a projection of at least one of the color resist units on the substrate.
However, in analogous art, Zhou teaches in Fig. 4 at least, an auxiliary layer 104 between a black matrix 103 similarly situated and a color filter 105. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Zhou to provide an even surface for the color filter, as taught by Zhou to eliminate the horn phenomenon [0053].
Regarding Claim 3, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 2,
wherein the auxiliary layer comprises a first auxiliary unit (portions shown in Fig. 4 of Zhou);
wherein the light-emitting devices comprise a first-color light-emitting unit 240R, a second-color light-emitting unit 240G, and a third-color light-emitting unit 240B, a center wavelength of light emitted by the first-color light-emitting unit is λ1, a center wavelength of light emitted by the second-color light-emitting unit is λ2, and a center wavelength of light emitted by the third-color light-emitting unit is λ3, where λ1>λ2>λ3 (RGB left to right in Fig. 3 of Lim);
wherein the color resist units comprise a first-color resist unit 272R, and along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the first-color resist unit at least partially overlaps the first-color light-emitting unit (Fig. 3); and
wherein a projection of the first auxiliary unit on the substrate covers a projection of the first-color resist unit on the substrate (auxiliary unit of Zhou so positioned).
Regarding Claim 7, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 2, wherein the projection of the auxiliary layer on the substrate at least covers projections of a plurality ones of the light-emitting devices on the substrate (auxiliary unit of Zhou so positioned).
Regarding Claim 14, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 2, wherein a refractive index of the auxiliary layer is smaller than a refractive index of the resist layer (auxiliary layer 104 is transparent [0053] whereas color filters are not).
Regarding Claim 16, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 2, wherein the auxiliary layer is doped with scattering particles inside (Zhou, [0015]).
Regarding Claim 17, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 2, wherein along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, a thickness of the auxiliary layer is larger than or equal to a thickness of the light-shielding layer (Zhou, Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 18, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 1, wherein the color resist layer comprises a color resist planarization layer 273, wherein the color resist planarization layer is arranged at a side of the color resist units facing away from the substrate, and at least partially located between adjacent color resist units (Lim, Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 19, Lim teaches a display panel, comprising:
a substrate;
a light-emitting device layer arranged at a side of the substrate, wherein the light-emitting device layer comprises pixel apertures and light-emitting devices, and at least one of the light-emitting devices is located in a respective one of the pixel apertures;
a color resist layer arranged at a side of the light-emitting device layer facing away from the substrate, wherein the color resist layer comprises color resist units, at least one of the color resist units comprises a first portion and a second portion, a projection of the first portion on the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of a respective one of the pixel apertures on the substrate, and along a direction paralleled to a plane of the substrate, the second portion is located at an peripheral area of the first portion (see above rejection of Claim 1); but does not explicitly teach:
a touch function layer arranged between the light-emitting device layer and the color resist layer, wherein the touch function layer comprises touch electrodes and a touch insulation layer located between the touch electrodes, wherein along a direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, a distance between a surface of the first portion facing away from the substrate and a plane of a surface of the touch function layer facing away from the substrate is greater than a distance between a surface of the second portion facing away from the substrate and the plane of the surface of the touch function layer facing away from the substrate.
However, in analogous art, Zhou teaches in Fig. 1 at least:
a touch function layer 107 arranged between the light-emitting device layer 1021 and the color resist layer 105, wherein the touch function layer comprises touch electrodes 1071 and a touch insulation layer 1071 located between the touch electrodes. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Zhou to implement increased utility in the display by allowing a user to interact directly with the screen. In the combination of Lim and Zhou, the resulting structure would be such that along a direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, a distance between a surface of the first portion facing away from the substrate and a plane of a surface of the touch function layer facing away from the substrate is greater than a distance between a surface of the second portion facing away from the substrate and the plane of the surface of the touch function layer facing away from the substrate, given the convex and planar portions of the color filter of Lim.
Claims 4, 5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim and Zhao as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20200194504 to Xu et al.
Regarding Claim 4, Lim and Zhou teach the display panel according to claim 3, but do not explicitly teach that a first groove is provided at a surface of the first auxiliary unit facing away from the substrate; and wherein a projection of the first groove on the substrate overlaps the projection of the first-color resist unit on the substrate.
However, in analogous art, Xu teaches in Fig. 5 at least, color filters 231 formed in grooves 222 of an auxiliary layer 22. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Xu to control a depth of the color filters, as taught by Xu [0081].
Regarding Claim 5, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 4, wherein the light-shielding layer comprises a first aperture, and along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the first aperture at least partially overlaps one of the pixel apertures; and
wherein the projection of the first groove on the substrate at least covers a projection of the first aperture on the substrate (Lim, Zhou and Xu all teach apertures between BM, grooves of Xu are between BM 25).
Regarding Claim 7, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 4, wherein a bottom surface of the first groove comprises a curved surface or a multi-step surface (see Fig. 4b of Xu showing stepped color filter requiring stepped groove).
Regarding Claim 8, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 7, wherein a first groove is provided at a surface of the auxiliary layer facing away from the substrate; wherein the light-emitting devices comprises a first-color light-emitting unit, a second-color light-emitting unit, and a third-color light-emitting unit, a center wavelength of light emitted by the first-color light-emitting unit is λ1, a center wavelength of light emitted by the second-color light-emitting unit is λ2, and a center wavelength of light emitted by the third-color light-emitting unit is λ3, where λ1>λ2>λ3; wherein the color resist units comprise a first-color resist unit, and along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the first-color resist unit at least partially overlaps the first-color light-emitting unit; wherein the light-shielding layer comprises a first aperture, and along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the first aperture at least partially overlaps one of the pixel apertures; and wherein a projection of the first groove on the substrate overlaps a projection of the first first-color resist unit on the substrate (see combination of all above teachings; including Xu [0065]).
Regarding Claim 9, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 8, wherein the projection of the first groove on the substrate at least covers a projection of the first aperture on the substrate (color filters are placed in the grooves, necessitating that they be in the apertures where light emitting elements are formed).
Regarding Claim 10, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 8, wherein a second groove and a third groove are provided at the surface of the auxiliary layer facing away from the substrate; wherein the color resist units further comprise a second-color resist unit and a third-color resist unit, wherein along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the second-color resist unit at least partially overlaps the second-color light-emitting unit, and the third-color resist unit at least partially overlaps the third-color light-emitting unit; wherein a projection of the second groove on the substrate overlaps a projection of the second-color resist unit on the substrate; and wherein a projection of the third groove on the substrate overlaps a projection of the third-color resist unit on the substrate (see Fig. 6 of Xu).
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim, Zhao and Xu as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20210202585 to Chen.
Regarding Claim 11, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 10, but do not explicitly teach that along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, a depth h1 of the first groove is greater than a depth h2 of the second groove, or the depth h1 of the first groove is greater than a depth h3 of the third groove.
However, in analogous art, Chen teaches that different color filters have different light transmittances, requiring that they be of different thicknesses so that equal light transmittance is emitted from each subpixel [0058, 0070]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Chen to modify the depths of the grooves of Xu in order to have each color subpixel emit an equal amount of light.
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim, Zhao and Xu as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20180145113 to Sakari et al. (Sakari).
Regarding Claim 15, Lim, Zhou and Xu teach the display panel according to claim 10, but do not explicitly teach that a first region and a second region are provided at a surface of the auxiliary layer facing away from the substrate, wherein along the direction paralleled to the plane of the substrate, the second region is located at an peripheral area of the first region, and along the direction perpendicular to the plane of the substrate, the first region overlaps the first portion; and the first region has greater hydrophilicity than the second region has.
However, in analogous art, Sakari teaches regions for forming color filters having greater hydrophilicity than others [0088]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Sakari to utilize the wettability in the above manner makes it possible to vary (or decrease) a thickness of the color filter layer in a gradual manner from the central section toward the peripheral section [0089], similar to the decreased thickness toward the periphery of the color filters of Lim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the cited prior art does not teach fourth and fifth grooves as claimed in context with all of the superseding claim elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVREN SEVEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5666. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00- 5:00 Pacific.
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.
/EVREN SEVEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812