DETAILED ACTION
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 .
IDS
The IDS document(s) filed on April 15, 2024 has been considered. Copies of the PTO-1449 documents are herewith enclosed with this office action.
Specifications
The title is objected to because a more descriptive title is requested.
Claim Objections
As to claim 1, the Examiner suggests “the protrusion portion protrudes”.
As to claims 9, 13, and 19, the Examiner suggests a comma between all instances of “the second planarization layer” and “the third planarization layer”.
Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 16, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toya et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0102376 A1), hereafter “Toya”.
As to claim 1, Toya teaches:
A first display region 16, wherein the first display region comprises pixel regions P and light-transmissive regions (spaces between P and border of 16 in FIGS. 1, 3). See Toya, FIG. 1, FIG. 3.
A base substrate 10.
A planarization layer 73, wherein the planarization layer is disposed on one side of the base substrate and at least in the pixel regions.
A pixel defining layer 71, wherein the pixel defining layer is disposed on one side of the planarization layer facing away from the base substrate and in the pixel regions.
Wherein the planarization layer comprises a flat portion (portion to the left of HE1) and a protrusion portion (angled portion to the right of HG1), in a direction facing away from the base substrate, [the] protrusion portion protrudes from the flat portion, and the protrusion portion is at least partially located between the pixel defining layer and a light-transmissive region of the light-transmissive regions.
As to claim 3, Toya teaches the protrusion portion is disposed around one side of the pixel defining layer facing towards the light-transmissive region. Id. at FIG. 3.
As to claim 5, Toya teaches the flat portion is connected to the protrusion portion. Id.
As to claim 6, Toya teaches a groove HG1 formed between the flat portion and the protrusion portion. Id.
As to claim 12, Toya teaches the pixel defining layer 71 is partially located in the groove HG1. Id.
As to claim 16, Toya teaches:
A first display region 16, wherein the first display region comprises pixel regions P and light-transmissive regions (spaces between P and border of 16 in FIGS. 1, 3). Id. at FIG. 1, FIG. 3.
A base substrate 10.
A pixel circuit layer E2, wherein the pixel circuit layer is disposed on one side of the base substrate.
A planarization layer 73, wherein the planarization layer is disposed on one side of the pixel circuit layer facing away from the substrate and at least in the pixel regions.
A pixel defining layer 71, wherein the pixel defining layer is disposed on one side of the planarization layer facing away from the base substrate and in the pixel regions.
Wherein the pixel circuit layer and the planarization layer form a barrier wall, and the barrier wall is at least partially located between the pixel defining layer and a light-transmissive region (space between P and border of 16 in FIG. 3). of the light-transmissive regions.
As to claim 17, Toya teaches the barrier wall E2+73 are disposed on an underside of the pixel defining layer 71 and facing towards the light-transmissive region.
As to claim 19, Toya teaches:
A first display region 16, wherein the first display region comprises pixel regions P and light-transmissive regions (spaces between P and border of 16 in FIGS. 1, 3). Id. at FIG. 1, FIG. 3.
A base substrate 10.
A first planarization layer 72, a second planarization layer 71 and a third planarization layer 73, wherein the first planarization layer, the second planarization layer and the third planarization layer are all disposed on one side of the base substrate, and in a direction (vertical, facing upwards) facing away from the base substrate, the first planarization layer, the second planarization layer and the third planarization layer are sequentially laminated.
A pixel defining layer 65, wherein the pixel defining layer is disposed on one side of the planarization layer facing away from the base substrate and in the pixel regions.
Wherein in a direction from the pixel defining layer to an adjacent light-transmissive region (space between P and border of 16 in FIG. 3) of the light-transmissive regions, the third planarization layer protrudes from the pixel defining layer.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Toya as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Xu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0083099 A1), hereafter “Xu”.
As to claim 15, Toya does not teach inter alia a second display region.
On the other hand, Xu teaches a second display region AA2 that at least partially surrounds the first display region AA1 (corresponding to Toya’s display region), and transmittance of the second display region is less than transmittance of the first display region. See Xu, ¶ [0029].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the display having a second display region with a lower light transmittance as taught by Xu into the display panel with a first display region as taught by Toya, in order to yield the predictable benefit of enabling the integration of under-screen photosensitive devices to maximize display area. Id. at ¶ [0032].
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Toya as applied to claim 19, and further in view of Xu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0065812 A1), hereafter “Xu ‘812”.
As to claim 20, Toya does not teach inter alia an under-screen photosensitive element.
On the other hand, Xu ‘812 teaches an under-screen photosensitive element 930 and a display panel 900A (corresponding to Toya’s display panel), wherein in a direction perpendicular to a plane where the display panel is located, the under-screen photosensitive element overlaps the light-transmissive region. See Xu ‘812, FIG. 9A. Xu ‘812 teaches the photosensitive element 930 formed under a display region/display panel therefore the combination of Xu ‘812 and Toya also teaches it overlapping a light-transmissive region that is formed in Toya’s display region/display panel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the under-screen photosensitive element as taught by Xu ‘812 into the display panel as taught by Toya, in order to yield the predictable benefit of enabling fingerprint detection. Id. at ¶ [0003].
Claims Allowable If Rewritten in Independent Form
Claims 2, 4, 7-11, 13, 14, 18 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.
As to claim 2, Toya does not teach the protrusion portion comprises a plurality of protrusions because it is instead a single angled protrusion portion.
As to claim 4, Toya does not teach the pixel defining layer completely surrounded by the protrusion portion because the protrusion portion only partially borders the pixel defining layer on one side.
As to claim 7, Toya does not teach the groove HG1 disposed around one side of the pixel defining layer nor facing towards an adjacent light-transmissive region; instead HG1 merely contacts one portion of the pixel defining layer and faces upwards away from any light-transmissive regions.
As to claim 9, Toya does not teach additional first, second, and third planarization layer limitations.
As to claim 10, Toya does not teach additional first, second, and third planarization layers nor the groove formed at least in the third planarization layer.
As to claim 13, Toya does not teach additional first, second, and third planarization layer limitations.
As to claim 18, Toya does not teach the pixel defining layer completely surrounded by the barrier wall, only partially surrounded on an underside.
Prior Art Not Relied Upon
The following prior art was not relied upon but is made of record:
Song et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0292662 A1)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUBERR CHI whose telephone number is (571)270-3955. The examiner can normally be reached 10am to 6pm.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571) 272-1236. 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.
/SUBERR L CHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights