Attorney’s Docket Number: 8071-1081 (OPP20236200US)
Filing Date: 04/01/2024
Claimed Foreign Priority Date: 12/05/2023 (KR10-2023-0174666)
08/23/2023 (KR10-2023-0110506)
Applicants: Choi et al.
Examiner: Younes Boulghassoul
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the Preliminary Amendment filed of 04/28/2026
and to the Election filed on 06/19/2026.
Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s Preliminary Amendment filed of 04/28/2026 has been entered. Furthermore, Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 (drawn to Figs. 6 and 49), in the reply filed on 06/19/2026, is acknowledged. Applicant indicated that claims 1-10 read on the elected Species. The examiner agrees.
Accordingly, pending in this application are claims 1-20, with claims 11-20 standing withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the arrangement recited in Claim 1, L. 16-17, wherein “the light emitting area of the first color has a diamond shape, and the light emitting areas of the second color and the third color each have a rectangular shape”, must be shown or the features canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
- Claim 1, L. 16-17 recites the limitations “wherein the light emitting area of the first color has a diamond shape, and the light emitting areas of the second color and the third color each have a rectangular shape”. However, the original application (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Page 36, L. 2-14) differently discloses that “four adjacent green-light emitting areas have a diamond shape, and four adjacent red- and blue-light emitting areas each have a rectangular shape.”
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the light emitting area of the first color has a diamond shape, and the light emitting areas of the second color and the third color each have a rectangular shape” at L. 16-17. However, said light emitting areas are subjected to earlier recited limitations at L. 13-15, requiring “one unit pixel includes four light emitting areas, wherein the four light emitting areas include two light emitting areas of a first color, one light emitting area of a second color, and one light emitting area of a third color”, and the disclosure as originally filed fails to support an arrangement of light emitting areas included in one unit pixel and having shapes as claimed.
Instead, while the original disclosure (see, e.g., Fig. 7 and Page 36, L. 2-14) supports having one unit pixel including four light emitting areas, wherein the four light emitting areas include two light emitting areas of a first color (G), one light emitting area of a second color (B), and one light emitting area of a third color (R), it is four adjacent green-light emitting areas (defined in three adjacent unit pixels) that are arranged in a diamond shape, and four adjacent red- and blue-light emitting areas (defined in four adjacent unit pixels) that are respectively arranged in a rectangular shape.
The applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim, or demonstrate explicit written description support for the claimed subject matter in the original disclosure (e.g., by citing specific excerpts from Specification or features in Drawings related to the claimed embodiment, as originally filed). A broad statement alleging written description support for the claimed subject matter will be considered non-persuasive.
Claims 2-10 depend from claim 1 thus inherit the deficiencies identified supra.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the light emitting area of the first color has a diamond shape” at L. 16. However, the claim already recites “wherein the four light emitting areas include two light emitting areas of a first color” in L. 14, and it is unclear to which of the two light emitting areas of the first color is the limitation directed to, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims 2-10 depend from claim 1 thus inherit the deficiencies identified supra.
Claim 3 recites “the oval shape is a light emitting display device having …”. The claim is nonsensical and cannot be construed for the purpose of examination, as it is unclear how one skilled in the art would understand an “oval shape” as a “light emitting display device”.
Claim 5 recites “the elliptical shape is a light emitting display device having…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the claim 1 from which claim 5 depends, is devoid of any prior recitation of an “elliptical shape” feature. Additionally, the claim is nonsensical and cannot be construed for the purpose of examination, as it is unclear how one skilled in the art would understand an “elliptical shape” as a “light emitting display device”.
Claim 6 depends from claim 5 thus inherit the deficiencies identified supra, in addition to raising similar issues as claim 5.
Claim 9 recites “the first opening and the second opening are in contact with each other.”. The claim is indefinite because the term “in contact” is used contrary to how one skilled in the art would understand the term in view of applicant’s disclosure (see, e.g., Fig. 6), which clearly shows that opening OP and opening OPBM are separated in direction DR3 by at least encapsulation layer 400, thus cannot be understood as “in contact”, as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Younes Boulghassoul at (571) 270-5514. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-6pm EST (Eastern Standard Time), or by e-mail via younes.boulghassoul@uspto.gov. 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached at (571) 272-1705. 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.
/YOUNES BOULGHASSOUL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights