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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/01/2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 07/01/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal in applicant’s “response to restriction requirement” is found persuasive. Therefore, the restriction requirement as set forth in the Office action mailed on 05/06/2026 is hereby withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
At the end of line 6 of claim 13, “;” should be “:”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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) 1-7, 10, 11, 13-17, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yamada US 2023/0273452.
Regarding claim 1, Yamada discloses a display device, in at least figs.1-7, comprising:
a display panel (150 with Encap1, see fig.7) including a light-emitting layer (OLED);
an optical layer (130, 120, 110 and 211) disposed on the display panel; and
an optical lens (200 without 211) disposed on the optical layer and including an optical lens phase retardation layer (221) in which circularly polarized light provided from the optical layer is converted into linearly polarized light (see fig.4),
wherein the optical layer comprises:
a first phase retardation layer (130) disposed on the display panel (see fig.4);
a selective reflection layer (120) disposed on the first phase retardation layer and configured to output linearly polarized light by transmitting light coincident with a polarization axis and to reflect light not coincident with the polarization axis (see fig.4 and para.64); and
a second phase retardation layer (211) disposed on the selective reflection layer in which the linearly polarized light incident from the selective reflection layer is converted into the circularly polarized light (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 2, Yamada discloses the optical lens comprises a reflective mirror (212) disposed on the optical layer.
Regarding claim 3, Yamada discloses the optical layer comprises a polarization layer (110) disposed between the selective reflection layer and the second phase retardation layer (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 4, Yamada discloses the polarization layer comprises a linear polarizer which linearly polarizes incident light, and absorbs light reflected by the reflective mirror (see fig.5).
Regarding claim 5, Yamada discloses an intersection angle at which an optical axis of the first phase retardation layer and a polarization axis of the polarization layer cross each other is about 45° (para.76).
Regarding claim 6, Yamada discloses the reflective mirror comprises a focus lens (210) which controls a focal length (see fig.1).
Regarding claim 7, Yamada discloses the optical lens comprises a wire grid polarization layer (222, para.57) disposed on the optical lens phase retardation layer.
Regarding claim 10, Yamada discloses a portion of light (RCP) incident on the optical lens from the optical layer is reflected by the optical lens (see fig.5), and the optical lens changes a phase of the light reflected to have an opposite phase from the light incident on the optical lens from the optical layer (see fig.5).
Regarding claim 11, Yamada discloses each of the first phase retardation layer and the second phase retardation layer comprises a λ/4 phase retarder (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 13, Yamada discloses a display device, in at least figs.1-7, comprising:
a display panel (150 with Encap1, see fig.7) including a light-emitting layer (OLED);
an optical layer (130, 120, 110 and 211) disposed on the display panel; and
an optical lens (200 without 211) disposed on the optical layer and including a reflective mirror (212) which reflects a portion of light (RCP) provided from the optical layer (see fig.5),
wherein the optical layer comprises:
a first phase retardation layer (130) disposed on the display panel (see fig.4);
a selective reflection layer (120) disposed on the first phase retardation layer and configured to output linearly polarized light by transmitting light coincident with a polarization axis and to reflect light not coincident with the polarization axis (see fig.4 and para.64); and
a polarization layer (110) disposed on the selective reflection layer and configured to absorb light reflected by the reflective mirror (see fig.5).
Regarding claim 14, Yamada discloses the optical layer further comprises a second phase retardation layer (211) in which the linearly polarized light incident from the selective reflection layer is converted into circularly polarized light (see fig.4), wherein the second phase retardation layer is disposed on the selective reflection layer (see figs.4 and 5).
Regarding claim 15, Yamada discloses the optical lens further comprises a phase retardation layer (221) in which the circularly polarized light provided from the reflective mirror is converted into linearly polarized light (see fig.4), wherein the phase retardation layer is disposed on the reflective mirror (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 16, Yamada discloses the phase retardation layer comprises a λ/4 phase retarder (see fig.4), and the optical lens further comprises a wire grid polarization layer (222, para.57) disposed on the phase retardation layer (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 17, Yamada discloses the polarization layer comprises a linear polarizer which linearly polarizes incident light, and absorbs light reflected by the reflective mirror (see fig.5), and the reflective mirror comprises a focus lens (210) which controls a focal length (see fig.1).
Regarding claim 19, Yamada discloses a display device, in at least figs.1-7, comprising:
a display panel (150 with Encap1, see fig.7) including a light-emitting layer (OLED);
an optical layer (130, 120, 110 and 211) disposed on the display panel; and
an optical lens (200 without 211) disposed on the optical layer and including an optical lens phase retardation layer (221) in which circularly polarized light provided from the optical layer is converted into linearly polarized light (see fig.4) and output by the display device (see figs.4-6),
wherein the optical layer comprises:
a selective reflection layer (120) disposed on the display panel and configured to output linearly polarized light by transmitting light coincident with a polarization axis and to reflect light not coincident with the polarization axis (see fig.4 and para.64); and
a second phase retardation layer (211) disposed on the selective reflection layer in which the linearly polarized light incident from the selective reflection layer is converted into the circularly polarized light (see fig.4).
Regarding claim 20, Yamada discloses the optical layer comprises a polarization layer (110) disposed between the selective reflection layer and the second phase retardation layer (see fig.4), wherein the polarization layer comprises a linear polarizer which linearly polarizes incident light, and absorbs light reflected by the reflective mirror (see fig.5).
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada US 2023/0273452 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim US 20170336675 and Joo KR 20120019737A (see document of 18624306_2026-07-16_KR_20120019737_A_M.pdf).
Regarding claim 8, Yamada discloses the selective reflection layer comprises a reflective film layer (para.62).
Yamada does not explicitly disclose the selective reflection layer comprises a first protective coating layer, a reflective film layer, and a second protective coating layer, sequentially stacked, and the reflective film layer comprises a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices that are alternately stacked.
Kim discloses a display device, in at least fig.2, the reflective film layer (120) comprises a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices are alternately stacked (para.66) for the purpose of forming a reflective polarizing element (para.66).
Joo discloses analogous art, in fig.1, a reflection layer comprises a first protective coating layer, a reflective film layer, and a second protective coating layer (see first claim and fig.1) for the purpose forming a reflective film and protecting the reflective film layer (see first claim and fig.1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the reflective film layer comprises a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices that are alternately stacked and a reflection layer comprises a first protective coating layer, a reflective film layer, and a second protective coating layer as taught by Kim and Joo respectively in the display device of Yamada in order to have the selective reflection layer comprises a first protective coating layer, a reflective film layer, and a second protective coating layer, sequentially stacked, and the reflective film layer comprises a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices that are alternately stacked for the purpose of forming a reflective polarizing element and protecting the reflective film layer.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada US 2023/0273452 as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Yamada does not explicitly disclose the selective reflection layer has a thickness of about 350 micrometers to about 450 micrometers.
However, Yamada discloses the selective reflection layer has a thickness (see fig.4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Yamada’s display device to have the thickness of the selective reflection layer is about 350 micrometers to about 450 micrometers. One would have chosen the value of the thickness of the selective reflection layer according to a result effective variable balancing the need to form a display device with a thickness of the selective reflection layer while not making the thickness of the selective reflection layer overly large or small to make the display device unreliable. One would have been motivated to form the display device to have the thickness of the selective reflection layer within the claimed range for the purpose of improving light efficiency (para.2 and 6) in order to have the display device with high reliability. In addition, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to have the selective reflection layer has a thickness of about 350 micrometers to about 450 micrometers through routine experimentation and optimization, in re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The Applicant has not disclosed that the range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another range. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the selective reflection layer has a thickness of about 350 micrometers to about 450 micrometers in the display device of Yamada for the purpose of improving light efficiency (para.2 and 6).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada US 2023/0273452 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jang US 2019/0137766.
Regarding claim 12, Yamada does not explicitly disclose the display panel further comprises a color filter layer disposed on the light-emitting layer.
Jang discloses a display device, in at least figs.1-7, the display panel (200) further comprises a color filter layer (CF) disposed on the light-emitting layer (OLED)(see fig.3) for the purpose of forming a display panel with a color filter layer to display different colors (para.59 and 60).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the display panel further comprises a color filter layer disposed on the light-emitting layer as taught by Jang in the display device of Yamada for the purpose of forming a display panel with a color filter layer to display different colors.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada US 2023/0273452 as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kim US 20170336675.
Regarding claim 18, Yamada discloses the selective reflection layer comprises a reflective film layer (para.62).
Yamada does not explicitly disclose the reflective film layer in which a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices are alternately stacked.
Kim discloses a display device, in at least fig.2, the reflective film layer (120) in which a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices are alternately stacked (para.66) for the purpose of forming a reflective polarizing element (para.66).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the reflective film layer in which a plurality of layers having respectively different refractive indices are alternately stacked as taught by Kim in the display device of Yamada for the purpose of forming a reflective polarizing element.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIA X PAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at (571)272-2286. 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.
/JIA X PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
Prosecution Insights