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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on August 25th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant has argued the secondary reference Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0089465) does not disclose the limitation “a third bank on upper and lower surfaces of the second bank”, which is the deficiencies of primary reference Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0280063). The examiner is now attaching the reproduced Fig. 3 of Li to explain how the limitation is disclosed by Li. Please see the attached figure below.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning of selecting fluorine, from among known materials, as a component of the third bank, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
PNG
media_image1.png
838
1293
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 1-10, 12-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0280063) in view of Li et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0089465).
Regarding to claim 1, Lee teaches a display device comprising:
a first pixel electrode on a substrate (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 101, [0046], lines 1-2);
a pixel defining layer on the substrate and exposing the first pixel electrode (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 110, [0046], line 3);
a first light emitting layer on the first pixel electrode (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 132, [0035], last 2 lines);
a first common electrode on the first light emitting layer (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 150, [0046], last 3 lines);
a first bank on the pixel defining layer (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 121, [0053], lines 1-2);
a second bank on the first bank and comprising side surfaces protruding more than side surfaces of the first bank (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 122, [0053], line 3).
Lee does not disclose a third bank on upper and lower surfaces of the second bank.
Li discloses a third bank on upper and lower surfaces of the second bank (Fig. 3, first bank 412 on pixel defining layer 20, second bank 42 on the first bank 412 and comprising side surfaces protruding more than side surfaces of the first bank 412, and third bank 60 on upper and lower surfaces of the second bank 42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to configure a third bank on upper and lower surfaces of the second bank in order to provide protection to the second bank, thus to enhance reliability.
PNG
media_image1.png
838
1293
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding to claim 2, Li discloses a thickness of the third bank (Fig. 3). Li is silent as to a range, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention filed to configure thickness of the third bank to be about 5 nanometer to about 100 nm in order to provide sufficient protection with low mismatch stress, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding to claim 3, Li discloses the thickness of the third bank on the upper surface of the second bank and the thickness of the third bank on the lower surface of the second bank are different from each other (Fig. 3).
Regarding to claim 4, Lee as modified discloses a first inorganic layer on the third bank and the first common electrode (Li, Fig. 3, element 90, [0052], last 3 lines).
Regarding to claim 5, Li discloses the third bank completely covers the second bank (Fig. 3).
Regarding to claim 6, Li discloses the third bank contacts at least a portion of the lower surface of the second bank (Fig. 3, the third bank 50 contacts portion of the lower surface of the second bank 42).
Regarding to claim 7, Li discloses third bank comprises a hydrophobic material ([0048], lines 19-22).
Regarding to claim 8, Li discloses the third bank is a self-assembled monolayer (Fig. 3).
Regarding to claim 9, Li does not disclose the third bank comprises fluorine, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise fluorine in the third bank in order to obtain a desired level of protection, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding to claim 10, Li discloses Li discloses the third bank comprises an -O- or -S- bond on a surface of the second bank (the second bank 42 contains oxide thus third bank comprise an -O- bond on a surface of the second bank).
Regarding to claim 12, Lee as modified discloses a first capping layer between the first common electrode and the first inorganic layer (Li, Fig. 3, element 80).
Regarding to claim 13, Lee teaches an end and the other end of the first common electrode contact the first bank (Fig. 1).
Regarding to claim 14, Lee as modified discloses
a second pixel electrode on the substrate and spaced from the first pixel electrode (Fig. 7, element 102);
a second light emitting layer on the second pixel electrode (Fig. 7, element 133);
a second common electrode on the second light emitting layer and spaced from the first common electrode (Fig. 7, element 150 of center pixel); and
a second inorganic layer on the second common electrode and the second bank and spaced from the first inorganic layer (Li, Fig. 3, element 90 of center pixel).
Regarding to claim 16, Lee teaches a display device comprising:
a first pixel electrode on a substrate (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 101, [0046], lines 1-2);
a pixel defining layer on the substrate and exposing the first pixel electrode (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 110, [0046], line 3);
a first light emitting layer on the first pixel electrode (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 132, [0035], last 2 lines);
a first common electrode on the first light emitting layer (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 150, [0046], last 3 lines);
a first bank on the pixel defining layer (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 121, [0053], lines 1-2);
a second bank on the first bank and comprising side surfaces protruding more than side surfaces of the first bank (Fig. 1, Fig. 7, element 122, [0053], line 3).
Lee does not disclose a third bank on the second bank and comprising fluorine.
Li discloses a third bank the second bank (Fig. 3, first bank 412 on pixel defining layer 20, second bank 42 on the first bank 412 and comprising side surfaces protruding more than side surfaces of the first bank 412, and third bank 60 on the second bank 421). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lee in view of Li to configure a third bank on the second bank in order to provide protection to the second bank, thus to enhance reliability.
PNG
media_image1.png
838
1293
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Li does not disclose the third bank comprises fluorine, however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to comprise fluorine in the third bank in order to obtain a desired level of protection, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding to claim 17, Li discloses the third bank is on upper and side surfaces of the second bank (Fig. 3, the third bank 50 is on upper and side surfaces of the second bank 42).
Regarding to claim 18, Li discloses third bank comprises a hydrophobic material ([0048], lines 19-22).
Regarding to claim 19, Li discloses the third bank comprises an -O- or -S- bond on a surface of the second bank (the second bank 42 contains oxide thus third bank comprise an -O- bond on a surface of the second bank).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 15, and 20 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 statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claims 11 and 15 were provided in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “the third bank forms an -O-P- or -O-Si- bond with a surface of the second bank” in combination with the limitation of claims 16 and 18.
Claims 1 and 16 would be allowable if the limitations of claims 18 and 20 are incorporated into claim 1 and into claim 16.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VU A VU whose telephone number is (571)270-7467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00AM - 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, CHAD M DICKE can be reached at (571) 270-7996. 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.
/VU A VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
