DETAILED ACTION
General Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with line numbers and page numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist the examiner in locating appropriate paragraphs.
Per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification.
For Examiner’s Interview fill out the online Automated Interview Request (AIR) form (http://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html).
Status of claim(s) to be treated in this office action:
Independent: 1 and 11.
Pending: 1-20.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s IDS(s) submitted on 5/15/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has/have considered by the examiner and made of record.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
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.
The following title is suggested: DISPLAY DEVICE WITH INTEGRATED EMISSION AND SENSING AREAS.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bok et al., US PG pub. 20210191552 A1.
Re: Independent Claim 1, Bok discloses an active area (CA, fig. 4) comprising an emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and a sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B); an optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B) comprising a light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) located in the emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and a photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B) located in the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B); a light blocking member (183, fig. 102B) disposed on the optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B), and comprising a first opening (opening Pa, fig. 102B) disposed in an area corresponding to the emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and a second opening (opening IPx, fig. 102B) disposed in an area corresponding to the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B);
a color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) located in the first opening (opening Pa, fig. 102B) and overlapping the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B); and
an optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) located in the second opening (opening IPx, fig. 102B) and overlapping the photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B), wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) is entirely disposed in the second opening (opening IPx, fig. 102B).
Bok is silent regarding: the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) has a thickness smaller than that of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B).
However, thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 223, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid 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 USPQ2sd 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the display device of Bok et al., as modified above to include thickness such as optical filter has a smaller thickness than color filter since modification would have only involved a mere change in working range which involves only routine skill in the art one would have been motivated to make such modification to make those layer to have a thinner thickness to achieve the predictable result of miniaturization the sensor device of the display device thereby improve the high-density integration.
Re: Claim 2, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: in fig. 102B, wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) comprises a metal thin film transmitting light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the emission area (LEA, fig. 102B).
Bok discloses in figure 51A that the TSL can have metal thin film material as aluminum TCL1 and TCL2 conductive layer which can transmit light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the emission area (OLED, fig. 51A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include metal aluminum thin film since the internal light reflecting can improve the light emissive from the emitting region.
Re: Claim 3, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: wherein the metal thin film has a thickness of 10 nm or less. However, thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 223, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid 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 USPQ2sd 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the display device of Bok et al., as modified above to include thickness such as optical filter metal thin film has a thickness of 10 nm or less since modification would have only involved a mere change in working range which involves only routine skill in the art one would have been motivated to make such modification to make those layer to have a thinner thickness to achieve the predictable result of miniaturization the sensor device of the display device thereby improve the high-density integration.
Re: Claim 4, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: in fig. 102B, wherein the metal thin film contains at least one metal selected from the group consisting of copper (Cu), gold (Au), silver (Ag), nickel (Ni), titanium (Ti), vanadium (V), and aluminum (Al).
Bok discloses in figure 51A that the TSL can have metal thin film material as aluminum TCL1 and TCL2 conductive layer which can transmit light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the emission area (OLED, fig. 51A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include metal aluminum thin film since the internal light reflecting can improve the light emissive from the emitting region.
Re: Claim 5, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: a pixel comprising the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) and emitting light of a first color (Pg, fig. 102A) in the emission area (LEA, fig. 102B), wherein the color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) is a color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) which selectively transmits light of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A), and wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) comprises a color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) which selectively transmits light of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A).
Re: Claim 6, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 5 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the pixel emits green light (Pg, fig. 102A), and wherein the color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) and the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) are green color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B)s.
Re: Claim 7, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 5 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the active area (CA, fig. 4) comprises a pixel column in which the pixel and another pixel (as shown in figure 102a) which emit light of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) are arranged, and wherein the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B) is disposed between the emission area (LEA, fig. 102B)s of the pixel and the another pixel.
Re: Claim 8, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) and the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) are disposed on a same layer above the optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B).
Re: Claim 9, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: a panel circuit layer (100, fig. 102B) disposed below the optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B), and comprising a pixel transistor (TFT, fig. 102B) connected to the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) and a sensor transistor (TFT, fig. 102B) connected to the photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B); and a substrate (100, fig. 102B) disposed below the panel circuit layer.
Re: Claim 10, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) and the photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B) are disposed on a same layer above the substrate (100, fig. 102B).
Re: Independent Claim 11, Bok discloses a first pixel comprising a light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) located in a first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B); an optical sensor comprising a photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B) located in a sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B) disposed adjacent to the first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B); a first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) located in the first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and disposed on the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B); and an optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) located in the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B) and disposed on the photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B), wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) entirely covers a light receiving part of the optical sensor disposed corresponding to the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B).
Bok is silent regarding: the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) has a thickness smaller than that of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B).
However, thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 223, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid 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 USPQ2sd 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the display device of Bok et al., as modified above to include thickness such as optical filter has a smaller thickness than color filter since modification would have only involved a mere change in working range which involves only routine skill in the art one would have been motivated to make such modification to make those layer to have a thinner thickness to achieve the predictable result of miniaturization the sensor device of the display device thereby improve the high-density integration.
Re: Claim 12, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 11 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: in fig. 102B, wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) comprises a metal thin film transmitting light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B).
Bok discloses in figure 51A that the TSL can have metal thin film material as aluminum TCL1 and TCL2 conductive layer which can transmit light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the emission area (OLED, fig. 51A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include metal aluminum thin film since the internal light reflecting can improve the light emissive from the emitting region.
Re: Claim 13, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: wherein the metal thin film has a thickness of 10 nm or less. However, thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 223, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid 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 USPQ2sd 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the display device of Bok et al., as modified above to include thickness such as optical filter metal thin film has a thickness of 10 nm or less since modification would have only involved a mere change in working range which involves only routine skill in the art one would have been motivated to make such modification to make those layer to have a thinner thickness to achieve the predictable result of miniaturization the sensor device of the display device thereby improve the high-density integration.
Re: Claim 14, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 12 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: in fig. 102B, wherein the metal thin film contains at least one metal selected from the group consisting of copper (Cu), gold (Au), silver (Ag), nickel (Ni), titanium (Ti), vanadium (V), and aluminum (Al).
Bok discloses in figure 51A that the TSL can have metal thin film material as aluminum TCL1 and TCL2 conductive layer which can transmit light corresponding to a wavelength band of light emitted from the emission area (OLED, fig. 51A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include metal aluminum thin film since the internal light reflecting can improve the light emissive from the emitting region.
Re: Claim 15, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 11 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: a second pixel comprising a light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) located in a second emission area (LEA, fig. 102B); a third pixel comprising a light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) located in a third emission area (LEA, fig. 102B); a second color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) located in the second emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and disposed on the second pixel; and a third color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) located in the third emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and disposed on the third pixel, wherein the first pixel, the second pixel, and the third pixel emit light of a first color (Pg, fig. 102A), light of a second color (Pr, fig. 102A), and light of a third color (Pb, fig. 102A), respectively, and wherein the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B), the second color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B), and the third color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) are color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B)s which selectively transmit light of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A), light of the second color, and light of the third color, respectively.
Re: Claim 16, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 15 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) comprises a fourth color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) which selectively transmits one of light of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A), light of the second color (Pr, fig. 102A), and light of the third color (Pb, fig. 102A) and has a thickness smaller than those of the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B), the second color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B), and the third color filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B).
Re: Claim 17, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 11 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: an optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B) comprising the light emitting element (OLED, fig. 102B) and the photoelectric conversion element (PD, fig. 102B); an optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) layer disposed on the optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B), and comprising the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) and the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B); and a substrate (100, fig. 102B) disposed below the optical element layer (122e and 119, fig. 102B), wherein the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) and the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) are disposed on a same layer on a surface of the substrate (100, fig. 102B).
Re: Claim 18, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 17 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: a light blocking member (183, fig. 102B) provided in the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) layer, and surrounding the first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B) in a plan view.
Re: Claim 19, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 18 on which this claim depends. Bok further discloses: wherein the light blocking member (183, fig. 102B) comprises a first opening (opening Pa, fig. 102B) disposed in an area corresponding to the first emission area (LEA, fig. 102B) and a second opening (opening IPx, fig. 102B) disposed in an area corresponding to the sensing area (IMA, fig. 102B), wherein the first color (Pg, fig. 102A) filter (50 and 182 in LEA area, fig. 102B) is entirely disposed in the first opening (opening Pa, fig. 102B), and wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) is entirely disposed in the second opening (opening IPx, fig. 102B).
Re: Claim 20, Bok discloses all the limitations of claim 11 on which this claim depends. Bok is silent regarding: wherein the optical filter (190 and 182 in IMA area, fig. 102B) has a thickness smaller than that of the light blocking member (183, fig. 102B). However, thickness range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 223, 235 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions of any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is aid 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 USPQ2sd 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the display device of Bok et al., as modified above to include thickness such as optical filter has a smaller thickness than color filter since modification would have only involved a mere change in working range which involves only routine skill in the art one would have been motivated to make such modification to make those layer to have a thinner thickness to achieve the predictable result of miniaturization the sensor device of the display device thereby improve the high-density integration.
Prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to current application disclosure.
* (“Hatsumi et al., US patent 12048227 B2”) Discloses a display device having a function of sensing light is provided. The display device includes a first substrate, a second substrate, a light-receiving element, a light-emitting element, a resin layer, and a light shielding layer. The light-receiving element, the light-emitting element, the resin layer, and the light shielding layer are each positioned between the first substrate and the second substrate. The light-receiving element includes a first pixel electrode over the first substrate, an active layer over the first pixel electrode, and a common electrode over the active layer. The light-emitting element includes a second pixel electrode over the first substrate, a first light-emitting layer over the second pixel electrode, and the common electrode over the first light-emitting layer. The resin layer and the light shielding layer are each positioned between the common electrode and the second substrate. The resin layer includes a portion overlapping with the light-emitting element. The light shielding layer includes a portion positioned between the common electrode and the resin layer. The resin layer includes a portion overlapping with the light-receiving element or is provided in an island shape. At least part of light passing through the second substrate enters the light-receiving element without through the resin layer.
* (“Kubota et al., US PG pub. 20210066669 A1”) discloses a display unit having a function of sensing light is provided. The display unit includes a first and second light-emitting devices, a light-receiving device, and a light-blocking layer. The first and second light-emitting devices emit a first color. The light enters the light-receiving device through a first opening of the light-blocking layer. In a top view, |a−b| of a difference between the shortest distance a from the first light-emitting device to the light-receiving device and the shortest distance b from the second light-emitting device to the light-receiving device is smaller than |c−d| of a difference between the shortest distance c from the first light-emitting device to the first opening and the shortest distance d from the second light-emitting device to the first opening. In the top view, c is shorter than d.
* (“Lim et al., US PG pub. 20210167144 A1”) Discloses a display device includes: a substrate; a first display pixel disposed on the substrate and including a light emitting element; a first sensor pixel disposed on the substrate and including an optical sensor; a first bank disposed on the substrate, wherein the first display pixel is disposed in the first bank; a first light blocking layer overlapping the first bank; a first color filter disposed on the first light blocking layer and overlapping the light emitting element; and an optical pattern layer disposed on the optical sensor, wherein the optical pattern layer includes a light blocking portion and a plurality of light transmitting portions passing through the light blocking portion.
* (“Lee et al., US PG pub. 20220190045 A1”) discloses a display device includes a substrate, pixel electrodes on the substrate, a bank in which opening areas partially exposing the pixel electrodes are defined, organic light emitting layers disposed on the pixel electrodes, a common electrode disposed on the organic light emitting layers and the bank, an encapsulation layer disposed on the common electrode, a touch electrode which is disposed on the encapsulation layer and does not overlap the opening areas in a thickness direction, a first adhesive member disposed on the touch electrode, a first light blocking layer which is disposed on the first adhesive member and does not overlap the opening areas in the thickness direction, color filters which are disposed on the first adhesive member and overlap the opening areas in the thickness direction, and a support layer which is disposed on the first light blocking layer and the color filters and includes a first organic material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSZ CHIU whose telephone number is 571-272-8656. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9:00AM to 5:00PM (EST).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Leonard Chang can be reached on 571-270-3691. 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.
/TSZ K CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 Tsz.Chiu@uspto.gov
/Leonard Chang/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights