DETAILED ACTION
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
In response to a Restriction Requirement mailed on 07/07/2026, the Applicant elected Group I (claims 1-8 and 14-20) in a reply filed on 09/02/2026. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 9-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Currently, claims 1-8 and 14-20 are examined as below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 05/21/2024 The IDS has been considered.
Specification
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:
(Marked-Up Version) with Reduction in Manufacturing Cost
(Clean Version) Manufacturing Method of Display Device with Reduction in Manufacturing Cost
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0206307 A1 to Takenaka et al. (“Takenaka”) in view of US 2004/0022512 A1 to Sato et al. (“Sato”).
PNG
media_image1.png
574
859
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, Takenaka in Figs. 1 and 3-5 teaches a manufacturing method of a display device DSP (Figs. 1, 3 & ¶ 31, display device DSP), comprising:
preparing a processing substrate SUB (Fig. 4, ¶ 128, processing substrate SUB comprising lower electrodes LE1-LE3, rib 5 and partition 6) by forming a lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3) above a substrate 12 (¶ 82, insulating layer 12), forming an inorganic insulating layer 5 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, rib 5; ¶ 73, rib 5 is formed of inorganic insulating material) having an aperture AP1, AP2, AP3 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, aperture AP1, AP2, AP3) which overlaps the lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3, and forming a partition 6 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, partition 6) including a lower portion 61 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, lower portion 61) located on the inorganic insulating layer 5 and an upper portion 62 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, upper portion 62) which is located on the lower portion 61 and protrudes from a side surface of the lower portion 61;
forming an organic layer OR1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 85, organic layer OR1) including a light emitting layer EM1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 85, light emitting layer EM1) on the lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3 in the aperture AP1, AP2, AP3 (Figs. 4-5);
forming an upper electrode UE1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 86, upper electrode UE1) on the organic layer OR1;
forming a cap layer CP1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 87, cap layer CP1) on the upper electrode UE1;
forming a first sealing layer SE1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 89, sealing layer SE1) which covers the cap layer CP1 and the partition 6; and
forming a resin layer 13 (Fig. 3, ¶ 96-¶ 97, resin layer 13) which covers the first sealing layer SE1, wherein
the process of forming the organic layer OR1, the upper electrode UE1 and the cap layer CP1 is an evaporation process using the partition 6 as a mask in a vacuum environment (Figs. 4-5, ¶ 88, partition 6 masks regions of the layer 12 during the formation of the layers OR1, UE1 and CP1).
Takenaka does not explicitly disclose the process of forming the resin layer includes a process of applying a resinous material in an air atmosphere.
Sato recognizes a need for providing a resin layer with improved production efficiency (¶ 18, ¶ 47). Sato satisfies the need by providing a process of forming a resin layer includes a process of applying a resinous material in an air atmosphere (¶ 123).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the process in the air atmosphere taught by Sato for the resin layer formation taught by Takenaka, so as to provide a resin layer with improved production efficiency (Sato: ¶ 18, ¶ 47).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Takenaka and Sato further teaches the process of forming the resin layer 13 (Takenaka) includes a process of irradiating the resinous material with an ultraviolet ray in the air atmosphere (Sato: ¶ 123).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Takenaka and Sato does not disclose the process of applying the resinous material is performed in an air atmosphere which is adjusted such that a temperature is in a range of 20°C to 30°C, a humidity is in a range of 40% to 70%, and an oxygen concentration is greater than or equal to 20%.
However, Sato teaches a general condition in which the process of applying the resinous material is performed in an air atmosphere (¶ 123), and an air atmosphere would have a temperature, a humidity level and an oxygen concentration.
According to Section 2144.05 of the MPEP, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Here, since Sato teaches said general conditions, it would not be inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Unless the Applicant can show that the specific conditions of an air atmosphere which is adjusted such that a temperature is in a range of 20°C to 30°C, a humidity is in a range of 40% to 70%, and an oxygen concentration is greater than or equal to 20% produce unexpected results that are different in kind and not different in degree, said general conditions taught by the combination of Takenaka and Sato renders claim 7 obvious.
Regarding claim 8, Takenaka in Figs. 3 and 6-7 further teaches before forming the resin layer 13, forming a patterned resist R3 (Fig. 6, ¶ 92, resist R3) on the first sealing layer SE1, and removing the first sealing layer SE1, the cap layer CP1, the upper electrode UE1 and the organic layer OR1 exposed from the resist R3 in series by etching (Fig. 7, ¶ 93).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 2-3 and 5-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if (i) rewritten in independent form to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims or (ii) the objected claim and any intervening claims are fully incorporated into the base claim.
Claims 2 would be allowable, because the prior art of record, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or suggest, in combination with the other claimed elements in claim 2, wherein the process of forming the resin layer includes a process of drying the resinous material in an environment where a pressure is reduced compared to the air atmosphere after the process of applying the resinous material.
Claims 3 and 5-6 are allowable, because they depend from the allowable claim 2.
Claims 14-20 are allowed.
PNG
media_image2.png
364
822
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 14, Takenaka in Figs. 1, 3-5 and 13-15 teaches a manufacturing method of a display device DSP (Figs. 1, 3 & ¶ 31, display device DSP), comprising:
preparing a processing substrate SUB (Fig. 4, ¶ 128, processing substrate SUB comprising lower electrodes LE1-LE3, rib 5 and partition 6) by forming a lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3) above a substrate 12 (¶ 82, insulating layer 12), forming an inorganic insulating layer 5 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, rib 5; ¶ 73, rib 5 is formed of inorganic insulating material) having an aperture AP1, AP2, AP3 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, aperture AP1, AP2, AP3) which overlaps the lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3, and forming a partition 6 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, partition 6) which includes a lower portion 61 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, lower portion 61) located on the inorganic insulating layer 5 and an upper portion 62 (Fig. 4, ¶ 82, upper portion 62) located on the lower portion 61 and protruding from a side surface of the lower portion 61;
conveying the processing substrate SUB to a first evaporation chamber 125 (Figs. 13-15, ¶ 25, ¶ 91, ¶ 160, ¶ 194-¶ 195, conveying the processing substrate SUB to the first evaporation portion DP1 comprising an evaporation chamber 125 to form the organic layer OR1 including the light emitting layer EM1), and forming an organic layer OR1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 85, organic layer OR1) including a first light emitting layer EM1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 85, light emitting layer EM1) on the lower electrode LE1, LE2, LE3 in the aperture AP1, AP2, AP3 (Figs. 4-5);
forming an upper electrode UE1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 86, upper electrode UE1) on the organic layer OR1;
forming a cap layer CP1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 87, cap layer CP1) on the upper electrode UE1;
forming a first sealing layer SE1 (Fig. 5, ¶ 89, sealing layer SE1) which covers the cap layer CP1 and the partition 6; and
forming a resin layer 13 (Fig. 3, ¶ 96-¶ 97, resin layer 13) which covers the first sealing layer SE1.
Takenaka does not explicitly disclose the process of forming the resin layer includes a process of applying a resinous material in an air atmosphere.
Sato recognizes a need for providing a resin layer with improved production efficiency (¶ 18, ¶ 47). Sato satisfies the need by providing a process of forming a resin layer includes a process of applying a resinous material in an air atmosphere (¶ 123).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the process in the air atmosphere taught by Sato for the resin layer formation taught by Takenaka, so as to provide a resin layer with improved production efficiency (Sato: ¶ 18, ¶ 47).
However, the prior art of record, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or suggest, in combination with the other claimed elements in claim 14, conveying the processing substrate without deposition of a material for forming a second light emitting layer which is different from the first light emitting layer in a second evaporation chamber for forming the second light emitting layer; and conveying the processing substrate without deposition of a material for forming a third light emitting layer which is different from the first light emitting layer and the second light emitting layer in a third evaporation chamber for forming the third light emitting layer.
Therefore, independent claim 14 is allowed.
Claims 15-20 are allowed, because they depend from the allowed claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0363275 A1 to Ochi et al. relates to an organic EL display device including, as an organic layer stopper defining edges of an organic layer, a frame-shaped bank surrounding a display region; and an upper face of the bank includes recessed portions and protrusions including a plurality of protrusions, and upper faces of the protrusions includes planar portions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIKKA LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-2568. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5AM EST M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached on 571-272-7925. 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.
/M.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/RATISHA MEHTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
