Notice of 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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “Display Device Including A plurality of Interconnected Slits In The Common Electrode”.
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 1-3 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 2020/0235194 A1) in view of Kimura et al. (US 2011/0157504 A1).
Regarding independent claim 1: Ito teaches (e.g., Figs. 1-7) a display device comprising:
a display area ([0074] and [0076]: area 103 of the display) which includes a plurality of subpixels ([0066] and [0073]: 109);
a plurality of lower electrodes ([0064] and [0068]: plurality of lower electrodes 225 spaced horizontally from each other) provided in the subpixels, respectively;
a plurality of organic layers ([0071]-[0073]: organic layers 227 are spaced horizontally from each other) which cover the lower electrodes ([0064] and [0068]: 225), respectively, and emit light ([0071]-[0073]: organic layer 227 emits light) based on applied voltage ([0071]: inherent function of light emitting layer); and
a common electrode ([0073]: 228) which covers the organic layers and overlaps the display area (103).
Ito does not expressly teach that the common electrode has a slit in which at least an end reaches an outer edge of the common electrode.
Kimura teaches (e.g., Figs. 13-15) a display device comprising:
a common electrode ([0098]-[0100]: CE) has a slit ([0098]-[0100]: CSL) in which at least an end reaches an outer edge of the common electrode ([0098]-[0100]: CE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include in the device of Ito, the common electrode having a slit in which at least an end reaches an outer edge of the common electrode, as taught by Kimura, for the benefits of suppressing an increase in the resistivity of the capacitance line due to the formation of the slit CSL.
Regarding claim 2: Ito and Kimura teach the claim limitation of the display device of claim 1, on which this claim depends,
wherein both ends of the slit (Kimura: CSL) reach the outer edge of the common electrode (Kimura: CE).
Regarding claim 3: Ito and Kimura teach the claim limitation of the display device of claim 1, on which this claim depends,
wherein an end of the slit (Kimura: CSL) reaches the outer edge of the common electrode (Kimura: CE), and the other end does not reach the outer edge (Fig. 15; [0098]-[0100]).
Regarding claim 13: Ito and Kimura teach the claim limitation of the display device of claim 1, on which this claim depends,
further comprising: a plurality of pixel circuits connected to the lower electrodes, respectively;
a plurality of scanning lines (Ito: [0053]-[0054] and [0062]: 141) which supply a scanning signal (Ito: [0043], [0045], [0053]-[0054] and [0062]: inherent function) to the pixel circuits; and
a plurality of signal lines (Ito: [0053]-[0054] and [0062]: 142) which supply a video signal to the pixel circuits,
wherein the slit (Kimura: SLC) extends parallel to the signal lines.
Regarding claim 14: Ito and Kimura teach the claim limitation of the display device of claim 1, on which this claim depends.
Ito as modified by Kimura further teach that the display device further comprises
a plurality of pixel circuits (Ito: Fig. 6; [0046 and [0060]: 210) connected to the lower electrodes (Ito: 225), respectively;
a plurality of scanning lines (Ito: [0043], [0045] and [0048]: 141) which supply a scanning signal to the pixel circuits (Ito: inherent function); and
a plurality of signal lines (Ito: [0043] and [0045]: 142) which supply a video signal to the pixel circuits (Ito: [0045]: “Each pixel 109 is supplied with a video signal corresponding to image data from the driver IC 106 via the signal line 142“; inherent function and intended use),
wherein the slit extends (Kimura: SLC is part of the common electrode) parallel to the scanning lines (Ito: the slit SLC of Kimura is part of the common electrode 228 of Ito; thus, the slit extends parallel to the scanning lines).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-12 and 15-16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4: the cited prior art of record, either singly or in proper combination, does not teach or make obvious, along with the other claimed features, a display device comprising:
“wherein the common electrode has a plurality of segments which are divided by the slit, and the segments are electrically connected to each other”.
Claims 5-12 depend from claim 4, and therefore, are allowable for the same reason as claim 4.
Regarding claim 15: the cited prior art of record, either singly or in proper combination, does not teach or make obvious, along with the other claimed features, a display device comprising:
“wherein the common electrode includes:
a conductive partition provided in boundaries of the subpixels; and
a plurality of upper electrodes which cover the organic layers, respectively, and are in contact with the partition”.
Claim 16 depends from claim 15, and therefore, is allowable for the same reason as claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HERVE-LOUIS Y ASSOUMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2606. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 08:30 AM-5:30 PM.
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, DAVIENNE MONBLEAU can be reached at 571-272-1945. 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.
/HERVE-LOUIS Y ASSOUMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights