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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II drawn to Figures 7, 9 and 10, including Claim 1-8, 11-13 and 16-20 in the reply filed on 07/01/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 13, 16-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by Lee (Patent No.: US 1-879316).
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 1, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches a display device comprising:
a pixel defining layer [EML] including a light emitting opening [LO] defined therein;
a barrier wall layer [BWL] on the pixel defining layer, the barrier wall layer comprising barrier walls spaced apart from each other and defining a barrier wall opening of the barrier wall layer which is between the barrier walls, the barrier wall opening overlapping the light emitting opening of the pixel defining layer;
a light emitting element [LEE] overlapping the light emitting opening of the pixel defining layer; and
a spacer [S} which is on a barrier wall among the barrier walls and spaced apart from the light emitting opening and the barrier wall opening,
wherein the barrier wall which has the spacer thereon defines a blocking opening [BO] of the barrier wall which surrounds the spacer.
Re claim 2, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the barrier wall layer further comprises among the barrier walls:
a first barrier wall layer [FB] and a second barrier wall layer [SB] which is on the first barrier wall layer, and
at the blocking opening [BO], the second barrier wall layer protruding further than the first barrier wall layer and defining a first blocking tip portion at the second barrier wall layer.
Re claim 3, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the first blocking opening includes:
a first opening portion defined in the first barrier wall layer [FB],
a second opening portion defined in the second barrier wall layer [SB], and
wherein a width (horizontal width) of the first opening portion is greater than a width of the second opening portion.
Re claim 6, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein an inner surface of the barrier wall layer [BWL] defines the barrier wall opening, the light emitting element includes a first electrode (171), an emission pattern (172/173) on the first electrode, and a second electrode (174/191) on the emission pattern, and the second electrode (174/191) contacts the inner surface of the barrier wall layer [BWL] at the barrier wall opening.
Re claim 7, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 1, further comprising: an encapsulation layer on the light emitting element and covering the light emitting element, wherein the encapsulation layer includes: a lower inorganic encapsulation layer (191) on the light emitting element and covering the light emitting element and the barrier walls [BWL]; an organic encapsulation film (192) on the lower inorganic encapsulation layer; and an upper inorganic encapsulation layer (193) on the organic encapsulation film.
Re claim 8, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 7, wherein an inner surface of the barrier wall layer defines the blocking opening [BO], the lower inorganic encapsulation layer (191) extends along the inner surface of the barrier wall layer [BWL] which defines the blocking opening [BO], and the organic encapsulation film extends along the lower inorganic encapsulation layer and into the blocking opening.
Re claim 13, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 8, further comprising: an input sensor (TSL, col. 7, lines 35-45) directly on the encapsulation layer (TFEL]), wherein the input sensor includes: a sensor base layer directly on the encapsulation layer; a first sensor conductive layer (ML1) on the sensor base layer (INS1); a sensor insulating layer (INS2) on the first sensor conductive layer and covering the first sensor conductive layer; and a second sensor conductive layer (ML2) on the sensor insulating layer (INS2).
Re claim 16, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches a display device comprising:
a base layer including:
a display region including a light emissive region [ER] and a non-emissive region [NER];
a non-display region adjacent to the display region;
a barrier wall layer [BWL] on the base layer (SUB), the barrier wall layer comprising barrier walls spaced apart from each other and defining a barrier wall opening [LO] corresponding to the light emissive region;
a light emitting element [LEE] overlapping the light emissive region; and
a spacer [S] which is on a barrier wall among the barrier walls and overlaps the non-emissive region [NER] of the display region,
wherein the barrier wall which has the spacer thereon defines a blocking opening of the barrier wall which is between the spacer and the light emitting element.
Re claim 17, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 16, wherein the barrier wall layer further comprises:
a first barrier wall layer [FB] and a second barrier wall layer [SB] which is on the first barrier wall layer, and
at the blocking opening [BO], the second barrier wall layer protruding further than the first barrier wall layer and defining a blocking tip portion at the second barrier wall layer.
Re claim 18, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 17, wherein the first blocking opening includes:
a first opening portion [FO] defined in the first barrier wall layer [FB],
a second opening portion [SO] defined in the second barrier wall layer [SB], and wherein a width of the first opening portion is greater than a width of the second opening portion.
Re claim 20, Lee, FIG. 7 [as shown above] teaches the display device of claim 18, wherein an inner surface of the barrier wall layer [BWL] defines the barrier wall opening, the light emitting element includes a first electrode (171), an emission pattern (172/173) on the first electrode, and a second electrode (174/191) on the emission pattern, and the second electrode (174/191) contacts the inner surface of the barrier wall layer [BWL] at the barrier wall opening.
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, 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) 4-5, 11-12 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
In re claims 4-5, 11-12 and 19 differs from the claim invention by not disclosing
wherein the width of the second opening portion is equal to or greater than about 0.1 micrometer (claim 4).
wherein the width of the second opening portion is equal to or less than about 1 micrometer (claim 5/19).
wherein the organic encapsulation film of the encapsulation layer has a thickness of equal to or greater than about 0.1 micrometer and equal to or less than about 20 micrometers (claim 11).
wherein the organic encapsulation film of the encapsulation layer has a permittivity of equal to or greater than about 2.0 and equal to or less than about 3.2 (claim 12).
However, Applicant has not disclosed that the ranges are for particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include the above said teaching, 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, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) (Claimed process which was performed at a temperature between 40°C and 80°C and an acid concentration between 25% and 70% was held to be prima facie obvious over a reference process which differed from the claims only in that the reference process was performed at a temperature of 100°C and an acid concentration of 10%.); see also Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382 ("The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages."); In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969) (Claimed elastomeric polyurethanes which fell within the broad scope of the references were held to be unpatentable thereover because, among other reasons, there was no evidence of the criticality of the claimed ranges of molecular weight or molar proportions.). For more recent cases applying this principle, see Merck & Co. Inc. v. Biocraft Laboratories Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989); In re Kulling, 897 F.2d 1147, 14 USPQ2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Hong (Pub. No.: US 2022/0093697)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-5PM, 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 http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Britt Hanley can be reached at 571-270-3042. 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.
/TONY TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights