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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 11-13 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seo (20170012087).
Regarding claim 1, Seo teaches a display device comprising:
a driving emission pixel including at least two driving elements and a first light emitting element, the first light emitting element being connected to one of the at least two driving elements (see OLED/TFT structures in fig. 2); and
a transparent emission pixel including a second light emitting element and a transparent area (see transparent OLEDs in the OLED/TFT structures);
wherein the second light emitting element is connected to another of the at least two driving elements via a link electrode (see 120 and 130 in fig. 2), wherein a distance between the first light emitting element and the one of the at least two driving elements is shorter than a distance between the second light emitting element and the other of the at least two driving elements (see fig. 2 wherein when comparing 120 to 130, 130 decreases in height).
Regarding claim 11, Seo teaches a display device according to claim 1, Wherein the link electrode has a zigzag shape (please see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Seo teaches a display device comprising:
a substrate (fig. 2: 10);
driving emission pixels including driving elements (fig. 2: TFT1 and TFT2) and first light emitting elements (fig. 2: OLED1); and
transparent emission pixels including second light emitting elements (fig. 2: OLED2) and transparent areas (fig. 2);
wherein the second light emitting elements are connected to the driving elements via link electrodes (fig. 2: 120 and 130), wherein, in a plane view, a length of each link electrode decreases in a direction of the driving emission pixels (please see that 130 decreases in length, when compared to 120, as we move to the right of the device).
Regarding claim 13, Seo teaches a display device according to claim 12, wherein the link electrodes are disposed on one side of the transparent emission pixels to bypass and surround the second light emitting elements (see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Seo teaches a display device according to claim 12, further comprising a dam structure (fig. 2: 19) and a common power supply line (fig.2 : 122) surrounding the driving emission pixels and the transparent emission pixels, wherein the dam structure has a closed curve structure, wherein the common power supply line has an open curve structure (please see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Seo teaches a display device according to claim 17, wherein the dam structure and the common power supply line overlap each other in an area adjacent to the driving emission pixels and opposite to the transparent emission pixels (please see fig. 2 showing this arrangement of elements).
Regarding claim 19, Seo teaches a display device according to claim 12, wherein, in a plane view, an area occupied by the link electrodes increase in a direction of the driving emission pixels (please see fig. 2 showing this arrangement of elements).
Claims 1, 11, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chae (20190131355).
Regarding claim 1, Chae teaches a display device comprising:
a driving emission pixel including at least two driving elements (see TFTs in fig.5E) and a first light emitting element (see three OLEDs in fig. 5E), the first light emitting element being connected to one of the at least two driving elements (please see OLEDs connected to TFTs); and a transparent emission pixel (see transparent TFTs in fig. 5E) including a second light emitting element and a transparent area (please see fig. 5E); wherein the second light emitting element is connected to another of the at least two driving elements via a link electrode (see elements 132 in all three OLED/TFTs), wherein a distance between the first light emitting element and the one of the at least two driving elements is shorter than a distance between the second light emitting element and the other of the at least two driving elements (see fog. 5E which shows decreases in heights of 132).
Regarding claim 11, Chae teaches a display device according to claim 1, Wherein the link electrode has a zigzag shape (see fig. 5E).
Regarding claim 12, Chae teaches a display device comprising:
a substrate (fig. 5E: 101);
driving emission pixels including driving elements (fig. 5E, see three TFTs) and first light emitting elements (fig. 5E, see three OLEDs); and
transparent emission pixels including second light emitting elements and transparent areas (fig.5E, see transparent areas);
wherein the second light emitting elements are connected to the driving elements via link electrodes (fig. 5E show three 132s), wherein, in a plane view, a length of each link electrode decreases in a direction of the driving emission pixels (as seen in fig. 5E, 132s have multiple heights).
Regarding claim 19, Chae teaches a display device according to claim 12, wherein, in a plane view, an area occupied by the link electrodes increase in a direction of the driving emission pixels (please see arrangement seen in fig. 5E).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-7 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.
Claim 8-10 is objected to based on its dependency on claim 7.
Claim 14 is 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.
Claim 15 is objected to based on its dependency on claim 14.
Claim 16 is objected to based on its dependency on claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB E HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5370. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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.
/CALEB E HENRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights