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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention Group I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed
on 7/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 15-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR
1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking
claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/13/2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 04/06/2024 has been acknowledged and a signed copy of the PTO-1449 is attached herein.
Claim 1 recites a pixel defining film including “a protrusion portion protruding from the body portion and exposing the first pixel electrode.”
Applicant’s disclosure does not describe the protrusion portion as exposing the first pixel electrode. To the contrary, it describes the protrusion portion as disposed on, and having a lower surface contacting, the edge portion of the first pixel electrode. That is a covering rather than exposing that electrode. Dependent claim 7 confirms this reading, reciting that the lower surface of the protrusion portion of the pixel defining layer contacts the edge portion of the first pixel electrode. It is the pixel defining layer as a whole, by way of its opening, that exposes the first pixel electrode. The claim attributing a function to the protrusion portion contradicting the specification, renders the metes and bounds of the recited structure unclear.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choung et al.
(US 2022/0077251 A1, hereinafter ‘Choung”) in view of Bae et al. (US 2022/0310728 A1,
hereinafter “Bae”).
In regards to claim 1, Choung discloses (See, for example, Fig. 1) a display device comprising:
a first pixel electrode (104) disposed on a substrate (102) and including: a main portion; and an edge portion surrounding the main portion; a pixel defining film (126) disposed on the substrate (102), including: a body portion (mainly the middle portion); and a protrusion portion protruding from the body portion (mainly the portion overlapping with the pixel electrode) and exposing the first pixel electrode (104); a first light-emitting layer (112) disposed on the first pixel electrode (104); a first common electrode (114) disposed on the first light-emitting layer (112); a first bank layer (110A) disposed on the pixel defining film (126); and a second bank layer (110B) disposed on the first bank layer (110A) and including a side surface protruding further than a side surface of the first bank layer (110A).
Choung does not expressly discloses wherein a thickness of the edge portion of the first pixel electrode is greater than a thickness of the main portion of the first pixel electrode, and a width of the protrusion portion of the pixel defining film is greater than a width of the edge portion of the first pixel electrode.
Bae while disclosing a display apparatus teaches (see, for example, Fig. 8) wherein a thickness (“t2”) of the edge portion of the first pixel electrode (2211) is greater than a thickness (“t1”) of the main portion of the first pixel electrode (2211), and width of the protrusion portion (the portion PDL overlapping the pixel electrode) of the pixel defining film (209) is greater than a width (“t2”) of the edge portion of the first pixel electrode (2011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Choung by Bae because this would provide a capability of having improved visibility due to lessening reflection of external light.
In regards to claim 2, Choung as modified above discloses all limitation of claim 1 but silent about that a difference between the thickness of the edge portion of the first pixel electrode and the thickness of the main portion of the first pixel electrode is about 150 angstroms to about 300
angstroms.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the recited difference of about 150 to about 300
angstrom is a routine optimization of a result effective variable absent a showing of criticality.
The extent of the anode recess directly controls the amount of etch damaged material removed and the residual electrode thickness. It is therefore result-effective, and discovery of an optimum range involves only routine skill. See MPEP §2144.05(II).
In regards to claims 3, 4 and 5, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 8, Bae) wherein the first pixel electrode (2211) includes a lower transparent electrode layer
(“comprising silver, magnesium, aluminum, platinum, palladium, gold, nickel,
neodymium…a transparent or semitransparent conductive layer formed over the reflection
layer. … 2211 may have a stack structure of ITO/Ag/ITO.”, See Par [0072]) disposed on the
substrate (100), a metal electrode layer (“Ag” from ITO/Ag/ITO) disposed on the lower
transparent electrode layer (first “ITO” from ITO/Ag/ITO), and an upper transparent electrode
layer (second “ITO” from ITO/Ag/ITO) disposed on the metal electrode layer (“Ag” from
ITO/Ag/ITO) except that a thickness of the edge portion of the upper transparent electrode layer is greater than a thickness of the main portion of the upper transparent electrode layer (claim 3); wherein the thickness of the edge portion of the upper transparent electrode layer is about 400
angstroms to about 700 angstroms, and the thickness of the main portion of the upper transparent
electrode layer is about 100 angstroms to about 500 angstroms (claim 4); and a thickness of
the lower transparent electrode layer is about 30 angstroms to about 100 angstroms, and a
thickness of the metal electrode layer is about 700 angstroms to about 1000 angstroms (Claim 5).
Notwithstanding, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice bounded by well-
known manufacturing constraints and ascertainable by routine experimentation and optimization
to choose these particular dimensions because applicant has not disclosed that the dimensions are or a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the process would possess utility using another dimension. Indeed, it
has been held that mere dimensional 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. See, for example, In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In
re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725
F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984);
In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, the specification
contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed thickness range or any
unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular
chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show that the
chosen dimensions are critical. See In re Woodruff, 919, f.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d, 1936
(Fed. Cir. 1990).
In regards to claim 6, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 8, Bae) wherein the lower transparent electrode layer and the upper transparent electrode layer include
indium tin oxide, and the metal electrode layer includes silver (Ag) (“comprising silver, magnesium, aluminum, platinum, palladium, gold, nickel, neodymium…a transparent or
semitransparent conductive layer formed over the reflection layer. … 2211 may have a
stack structure of ITO/Ag/ITO.”, See Par [0072]).
In regards to claim 7, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 8, Bae) a lower surface of the protrusion portion of the pixel defining film (209) contacts the edge portion of the first pixel electrode (20211) and the first light-emitting layer (2221b).
In regards to claim 8, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 1) that wherein a width at which a side surface of the protrusion portion of the pixel defining film (126)
protrudes further than the side surface of the first bank layer (110A) is greater than a width at which the side surface of the second bank layer (110B) protrudes further than the side surface of the first bank layer (110A).
In regards to claim 9, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig.1) wherein the
first bank layer (110A) includes aluminum (Al), and the second bank layer includes titanium (Ti)
(“A second configuration of the inorganic overhang structures 110 includes the upper portion 1106 of a conductive inorganic material and the lower portion 110A of a
conductive inorganic material. … he conductive inorganic material includes, but it not limited to, a metal-containing material. E.g., the metal-containing material includes copper,
titanium, aluminum, molybdenum, silver, indium tin oxide, indium zinc oxide, or combinations thereof.”, See Pars [0030] and [0031])
In regards to claim 10, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 1) wherein the first common electrode (114) contacts the first bank layer (110A).
In regards to claim 11, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 1) wherein a maximum distance from the substrate (102) to the first common electrode (114) is smaller than a maximum distance from the substrate (102) to the first bank layer (110A).
In regards to claim 12, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Figs. 1 and 2) further comprising a first inorganic layer (116) disposed on an upper surface of the first common
electrode (114), the side surface of the first bank layer (110A), and a lower surface and an upper
surface of the second bank layer (110B).
In regards to claim 13, Choung as modified above discloses (See, for example, Fig. 1) that further comprising: a second pixel electrode (104 corresponding to sub-pixel 108b) spaced
apart from the first pixel electrode (104 corresponding to sub-pixel 108a) on the substrate (102)
and including:
a main portion; and an edge portion surrounding the main portion; a second light-emitting layer
(OLED corresponding to sub-pixel 108b) disposed on the second pixel electrode (114
corresponding to sub-pixel 108b); a second common electrode (104 corresponding to sub-
pixel 108b) disposed on the second light-emitting layer (OLED corresponding to sub-pixel
108b) and spaced apart from the first common electrode (114 corresponding to sub-pixel
108a); and a second inorganic layer (116 corresponding to subpixel 108b) disposed on an
upper surface of the second common electrode (104 corresponding to sub-pixel 108b), the side
surface of the first bank layer (110A corresponding to subpixel 108a), and the lower surface
and the upper surface of the second bank layer (110B corresponding to subpixel 108b),
wherein the pixel defining film (126) exposes the second pixel electrode (104 corresponding to
sub-pixel 108b), the first inorganic layer (116 corresponding to subpixel 108a) and the second
inorganic layer (116 corresponding to subpixel 108b) are spaced apart from each other, and a
portion of the second bank layer (110B corresponding to subpixel 108b) is exposed in a space
between the first inorganic layer (116 corresponding to subpixel 108a) and the second
inorganic layer (116 corresponding to subpixel 108b) spaced apart from each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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:
In regards to claim 14, the closest prior art, Choung in view of Bae, fails to teach or suggest, in combination with the limitations of claim 1, a display device in which material of the light-emitting layer remains on the second bank layer as a discrete organic pattern, with material of the common electrode remaining thereover as a discrete electrode pattern, each such pattern being disconnected from its counterpart layer within the emission area.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERMIAS T WOLDEGEORGIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5350. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am - 5 pm E.S.T..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Britt Hanley can be reached on 571-270-3042. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERMIAS T WOLDEGEORGIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights