DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Oath/Declaration
2. The oath/declaration filed on 05/10/2024 is acceptable.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The office acknowledges receipt of the following items from the applicant:
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 05/10/2024.
Specification
5. The specification is objected to for the following reason: The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed (see MPEP 606.01).
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 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.
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 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.
6. Claims 1, 9-10, 15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI et al., hereafter “CHOI” (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0157119 A1) in view of Nagayama et al., hereafter “Nagayama” (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0149513 A1).
Regarding claim 1, CHOI discloses a display device comprising:
a display layer (DP-ED) that provides source light (para [0014]); and
a light control layer (CCL) disposed on the display layer (DP-ED) and including a plurality of light control parts (CCP1/CCP2/CCP3) distinguished from each other,
wherein at least one of the plurality of light control parts (CCP1/CCP2/CCP3) includes quantum dots (Q1/Q2) that convert a wavelength of the source light (para [0094]), and scatterers (SP1/SP2) (Fig. 3).
made of layered double hydroxide.
CHOI discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers.
Nagayama, however, discloses the plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d includes inorganic plate-shaped particles obtained from a clay mineral (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
CHOI and Nagayama disclose the scatterers (from the inorganic plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d) made of layered double hydroxide (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
Regarding claim 9, CHOI and Nagayama (citations to CHOI unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the source light includes blue light and green light (Fig. 3 and para [0014]).
Regarding claim 10, CHOI and Nagayama (citations to CHOI unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the display layer (DP-ED) includes: a first electrode (EL1); a second electrode (EL2) facing the first electrode (EL1); and a light-emitting portion (EML) disposed between the first electrode (EL1) and the second electrode (El2), and including a light-emitting element that emits the source light (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, CHOI discloses a display device divided into a first pixel area (PXA-R) that emits red light, a second pixel area (PXA-G) that emits green light, and a third pixel area (PXA-B) that emits blue light on a plane, the display device comprising:
a display panel (DP-ED) including a light-emitting element (OLED); and
a light control panel (CCL) including a first light control part (CCP1) corresponding to the first pixel area (PXA-R), a second light control part (CCP2) corresponding to the second pixel area (PXA-G), and a third light control part (CCP3) corresponding to the third pixel area (PXA-R), wherein the light control panel (CCL) is disposed on the display panel (DP-ED), the first light control part (CCP1) includes first quantum dots (OD1) and scatterers (SP1/SP2), the second light control part (CCP2) includes second quantum dots (OD2) and the scatterers (SP1/SP2) (Fig. 3).
CHOI discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers.
Nagayama, however, discloses the plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d includes inorganic plate-shaped particles obtained from a clay mineral (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
CHOI and Nagayama disclose the scatterers (from the inorganic plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d) made of layered double hydroxide (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
Regarding claim 19, CHOI and Nagayama (citations to CHOI unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the light-emitting element emits source light including the blue light and the green light (para [0014]).
Regarding claim 20, CHOI and Nagayama (citations to CHOI unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the light control panel (CCL) further includes a color filter layer (CF1/CF2/CF3) spaced apart from the display panel (DP-ED) and disposed on the light control layer (CCL), and the color filter layer includes a first color filter (CF1) disposed corresponding to the first pixel area (PXA-R) and transmits the red light, a second color filter (CF2) disposed corresponding to the second pixel area (PXA-G) and transmits the green light, and a third color filter (CF3) disposed corresponding to the third pixel area (PXA-B) and transmits the blue light (Fig. 3).
7. Claims 2-3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI and Nagayama in view of MASHIMA H (CN-111465878-A).
Regarding claims 2-3 and 16, CHOI and Nagayama disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose wherein the plate-shaped scatterers have a ratio of a maximum width of a surface and a thickness in a range of about 2:1 to about 10:1, the maximum width is in a range of about 5 nm to about 300 nm, and the thickness is in a range of about 1 nm to about 50 nm.
MASHIMA H, however, discloses the scatterers (particles) has a thickness of 50 µm and a width of 500 mm (English Text).
However, the selection of the claimed device parameters would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to provide the plate-shaped scatterers have a ratio of a maximum width of a surface and a thickness is within the claimed range, since it is well settles that when the general conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
8. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI and Nagayama in view of KANG et al., hereafter “KANG” (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0189611 A1).
Regarding claim 5, CHOI and Nagayama disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose wherein the plate-shaped scatterers constitute in a range of about 0.1 wt% to about 20 wt% of a total weight 100 wt% of the plurality of light control parts including the plate-shaped scatterers.
KANG, however, discloses a light-absorbing particles are about 0.01 wt% to about 5.00 wt in amount in the light control layer based on a total weight of the light control layer (Fig. 5 and para [0020]).
However, the selection of the claimed device parameters would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to provide wherein the range of the plate-shaped scatterers related to a total weight 100 wt% of the plurality of light control parts including the plate-shaped scatterers is within the claimed range, since it is well settles that when the general conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
9. Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI and Nagayama in view of PAEK et al., hereafter “PAEK” (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0258973 A1).
Regarding claim 6, CHOI and Nagayama disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above including wherein the plurality of light control parts (CCP1/CCP2/CCP3) include: a red light control part (CCP1) that emits red light (R) and includes first quantum dots (OD1) and the plate-shaped scatterers (SP1/SP2); a green light control part (CCP2) that emits green light (G) and includes second quantum dots (OD2) and the plate-shaped scatterers (SP1/SP2) (Fig. 3), but does not disclose a blue light control part (CCP3) that transmits the source light.
PAEK, however, discloses a blue light control part (CCP3) that transmits the source light (Fig. 6 and para [0098]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of CHOI and Nagayama to provide a blue light control part (CCP3) that transmits the source light as taught by PAEK for a purpose of improving the light efficiency of the display device.
Regarding claim 8, CHOI and Nagayama (citations to CHOI unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the blue light control part (CCP3) includes the plate-shaped scatterers (SP1/SP2) (Fig. 3).
10. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI, Nagayama and PAEK in view of KOBAYASHI Y (WO-2018088048-A).
Regarding claim 7, CHOI, Nagayama and PAEK discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above including wherein the blue light control part includes scatterers, but does not disclose wherein the scatterers are the spherical scatterers.
KOBAYASHI Y, however, discloses wherein the scatterers (13) are the spherical scatterers (Fig. 1 and English Text).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scatterers are sphere scatterers in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
11. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI, Nagayama and PAEK in view of KOBAYASHI Y (WO-2018088048-A).
Regarding claim 18, CHOI, Nagayama and PAEK discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above including wherein the blue light control part includes scatterers, but does not disclose wherein the scatterers are the spherical scatterers and does not include the plate-shaped scatterers.
KOBAYASHI Y, however, discloses wherein the scatterers (13) are the spherical scatterers and does not include the plate-shaped scatterers (Fig. 1 and English Text).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scatterers are sphere scatterers in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
12. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI et al., hereafter “CHOI” (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0157119 A1) in view of KOBAYASHI Y (WO-2018/088048) and further in view of Nagayama et al., hereafter “Nagayama” (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0149513 A1).
Regarding claim 11, CHOI discloses a display device comprising:
a display panel (DP-ED) that provides source light; and
a light control panel (CCL) disposed on the display panel (DP-ED) and including a scattering layer (including OD1/SP1/SP2/BR1 and OD2/SP1/SP2/BR2) including plate-shaped scatterers (SP1/SP2) (Fig. 3). made of layered double hydroxide.
CHOI discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose the scattering layer is the optical scattering layer.
KOBAYASHI Y, however, discloses the scattering layer (12) is the optical scattering layer (Fig. 2 and English Text).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scattering layer is the optical scattering layer in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
CHOI and KOBAYASHI Y discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers.
Nagayama, however, discloses the plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d includes inorganic plate-shaped particles obtained from a clay mineral (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to replace the scatterers are plated-shaped scatterers in order to improve the image display quality, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any type of the scatterers on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
CHOI, KOBAYASHI N and Nagayama disclose the scatterers (from the inorganic plate-shaped particle layer 131a, 131b, 131c or 131d) made of layered double hydroxide (Fig. 1 and para [0073]).
13. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI, KOBAYASHI N and Nagayama in view of MASHIMA H (CN-111465878-A).
Regarding claim 12, CHOI, KOBAYASHI N and Nagayama disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose wherein the plate-shaped scatterers have a ratio of a maximum width of a surface and a thickness in a range of about 2:1 to about 10:1, the maximum width is in a range of about 5 nm to about 300 nm, and the thickness is in a range of about 1 nm to about 50 nm.
MASHIMA H, however, discloses the scatterers (particles) has a thickness of 50 µm and a width of 500 mm (English Text).
However, the selection of the claimed device parameters would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to provide the plate-shaped scatterers have a ratio of a maximum width of a surface and a thickness is within the claimed range, since it is well settles that when the general conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
14. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHOI, KOBAYASHI N and Nagayama in view of SON et al., hereafter “SON” (U.S. Publication No. 2022/0165816 A1).
Regarding claim 14, CHOI, KOBAYASHI N and Nagayama disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above including wherein the light control pane (CCL) further includes a color filter layer disposed on the optical scattering layer (including OD1/SP1/SP2/BR1 and OD2/SP1/SP2/BR2) and including a red filter (CF1), a green filter (CF2), and a blue filter (CF3) (Fig. 3), but does not disclose the source light is white light.
SON, however, discloses the source light (LD) is white light (Fig. 1 and para [0111])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of CHOI, BAYASHI Y and Nagayama to provide the source light is white light as taught by SON for a purpose of improving the uniformity of white light brightness of the display device.
Allowable Subject Matter
15. The following is a statement of reason for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 4, 13 and 17 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.
Cited Prior Arts
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
KIM S (KR-20230047288-A) discloses a display device comprising: a light emitting device 120 was formed on a first substrate 110 and covered with a thin film encapsulation layer 130 and a filler 300 is applied between the first and second substrates 110 and 210 and the two substrates 110 and 210 are bonded to form the light emitting element 120 and the quantum dot layers 230R and 230G and the color filter layers 220R, 220G, and 220B were completed (Fig. 3 and English Text).
Conclusion
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Phuc T. Dang whose telephone number is 571-272-1776. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jacob Choi can be reached on 469-295-9060. 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.
/PHUC T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights