DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 6-7, 10 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (CN-114664901-A) (Liu) in view of Nishimura et al. (JP-2022185322) (Nishimura).
Claim 1 is rejected.
Claim 1 claims a display panel, Liu discloses a display panel, and specifically discloses (see specification paragraphs 0048-0104, Figs. 1-8) that the display panel comprises a substrate 11, a flat layer 12, a pixel definition layer 13, support pillars 14 (i.e. Isolation structures), an organic light emitting unit 15, and an isolation wall 16. The organic light emitting unit 15 includes an anode layer 151, an organic light emitting layer 152, and a cathode layer 153. As can be seen from Figure 1, a plurality of anodes 151 (i.e., second electrodes) disposed at intervals on the substrate, the support columns 14 are disposed on the same side of the substrate as the anodes 151, the isolation structure encloses an isolation opening and a first opening, the anodes 151 emerge from the isolation opening, and an orthographic projection of the anodes 151 onto the substrate is staggered from an orthographic projection of the first opening onto the substrate; a light emitting unit including a first light emitting unit positioned within the isolation opening on a side of the second electrode facing away from the substrate, and a second light emitting unit positioned within the first opening; a cathode layer 153 (i.e. A first electrode) comprising a first sub-electrode and a second sub-electrode, the first sub-electrode being located within the isolation opening, the first sub-electrode being located on a side of the first light emitting unit facing away from the substrate; a second sub-electrode is positioned within the first opening, and the second sub-electrode is positioned on a side of the second light emitting unit facing away from the substrate.
The solution claimed in Claim 1 differs from Liu in that at least part of the first sub- electrode overlaps with an inner wall face of the isolation structure facing the isolation opening and at least part of the second sub-electrode overlaps with an inner wall face of the isolation structure facing the first opening. Based on the distinguishing features described above, it can be determined that the technical problem actually addressed by this claim is pixel isolation.
Nishimura discloses a display panel, and specifically discloses (see specification paragraphs 0008 to 0064, FIGS. 1 to 8) that has a display element 20 and a partition 30, the display element 20 including a lower electrode E1, an organic layer OR, and an upper electrode E2, and the partition 30 and the upper electrode E2 are in contact with each other as seen in FIG. 4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the above feature plays the same role in Nishimura as it plays in the present invention to solve its technical problem, that is, Nishimura gives the implication of using this technical feature in the technical solution of Liu to solve its technical problem. On this basis, providing that the cathode layer in Liu overlaps the inner wall face of the support pillar. This is done to increase reliability.
Concerning claims 6-7, Nishimura (in particular, see paragraphs [0035] - [0038]) describes that the partition wall 30 has a first layer 31 (corresponding to the "isolation wall"), which is a conductive layer, and a second layer 32 (corresponding to the "blocking portion") arranged on the first layer 31.
Regarding claim 10, in the invention described in Liu, the organic light emitting layer 152 and the cathode layer 153 located on the support column 14 and the isolation wall 16 correspond to the "third light emitting unit" and the "third sub-electrode", respectively.
Regarding claim 14, Liu (see, in particular, paragraphs [0049] - [ 0055], [0061], [0077 ] - [0080] and Fig. 8) describes a display panel including a substrate 11 (corresponding to the "substrate"), a support column 14 provided on the side of the pixel definition layer 13 away from the substrate 11, an organic light emitting unit 15 including an anodic layer 151, an organic light emitting layer 152, and a cathode layer 153, and a separation wall 16, Here, in Fig. 8 of Liu, among the regions surrounded by the support column 14 and the isolation wall 16, the region corresponding to the pixel vapor deposition region 131 corresponds to the "isolation opening", and the region between the adjacent pixel vapor deposition regions 131 corresponds to the "first opening". In addition, the organic light emitting unit 15 provided in the pixel vapor deposition region 131 corresponds to the "light emitting sub-pixel", and the organic light emitting layer 152 and the cathode layer 153 located in the region between the pixel vapor deposition regions 131 and together correspond to the "virtual sub-pixel".
Regarding Claim 15, In the invention described in Liu, the anode layer 151, the organic light emitting layer 152, and the cathode layer 153 of the organic light emitting unit 15 provided in the pixel vapor deposition region 131 correspond to the "second electrode", the "first light emitting unit", and the "first sub-electrode", respectively. In addition, the organic light emitting layer 152 and the cathode layer 153 located in the region between the adjacent pixel vapor deposition regions 131 and correspond to the "second light emitting subunit" and the "second sub-electrode", respectively.
Regarding Claim 16, It is a general configuration to provide an optical sensor in a display panel, and a person skilled in the art could have appropriately determined the arrangement according to the arrangement of pixels and openings. Therefore, the invention according to Claim 16 could have been easily invented by a person skilled in the art based on the invention described in Liu.
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds of claim 2.
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds of claim 1.
Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds of claim 2.
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds of claim 16.
Claims 2-5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (CN-114664901-A) (Liu) in view of Nishimura et al. (JP-2022185322) (Nishimura) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yuan et al. (CN-113471384-A) Yuan.
Claim 2 further defines Claim 1, defining additional features not disclosed in Liu in view of Nishimura, constituting yet another distinguishing feature from Liu in view of Nishimura, and further solving the technical problem of providing a touch structure.
Concerning Claims 2-3, Yuan It is obvious that the invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura has a signal line for driving a display panel. Here, it is well known that a touch layer is provided above the light emitting unit (see, for example, paragraph [0104], Fig. 21, etc. of Yuan), and a person skilled in the art could have appropriately applied the well-known art to the invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the specific arrangement of the signal lines is a design matter that could have been appropriately determined by a person skilled in the art in consideration of the light transmission region, to create an ideal coating state, which is beneficial to further improving the display effect.
Concerning Claims 4-5, Yuan (in particular, see paragraph [0104]) describes that the first electrode 111 is provided corresponding to each mesh of the grid of the metal mesh forming the touch layer 180. Here, the shape of the signal line forming the touch layer and the specific positional relation between the shape and the opening in which the light emitting unit is provided are design matters that could have been appropriately determined by a person skilled in the art when embodying the invention.
Claim 13 further defines Claim 1, defining additional features not disclosed in Liu in view of Nishimura, constituting yet another distinguishing feature from Liu in view of Nishimura, and further solving the technical problem of providing a touch structure.
Yuan (see, in particular, paragraph [0080] and Figs. 6-7) describes that the display panel 100 includes a sealing layer 140, and the sealing layer 140 includes a first inorganic layer CVD1, a second inorganic layer CVD2, and an organic layer IJP installed therebetween. Here, the invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura and the invention described in Yuan belong to the same technical field in that they have a configuration in which a member that separates the two is arranged between adjacent pixels. In addition, since it is a well-known problem for a person skilled in the art to prevent the intrusion of moisture or the like, a person skilled in the art could have easily conceived of applying the above-mentioned technical matter described in Wang to the invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the material of the inorganic layer and the arrangement pattern of the inorganic layer are design matters, , to create an ideal coating state, which is beneficial to further improving the display effect.
Claims 8-9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Nishimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ji (CN 105609534-A) Ji.
Claims 8-9 further defines Claim 1, defining additional features not disclosed in Liu in view of Nishimura, constituting yet another distinguishing feature from Liu in view of Nishimura, and further solving the technical problem of providing a touch structure.
Ji (in particular, see paragraph [0041]) describes that the thickness of the light emitting layer differs depending on the light emitting color. The invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura and the invention described in Cited Document 4 belong to the same technical field in that they are inventions relating to a display device including a light emitting element having a light emitting layer.
Therefore, in the invention described in Liu in view of Nishimura, in order to make the light emitting layer have an appropriate thickness according to the wavelength of light, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily applied the above-mentioned technical matter described in Ji, in order to decrease brightness differences at different positions from the edge of the display panel.
Regarding Claim 11, Liu (see, in particular, paragraph [0050] and Fig. 8) describes that a pixel definition layer 13 (corresponding to the "insulating layer" and the "pixel definition layer") is provided, and a pixel vapor deposition region 131 is provided on the pixel definition layer 13 (the portion of the pixel definition layer 13 where the pixel vapor deposition region 131 is provided corresponds to the "pixel opening").
Regarding Claim 12, in the invention described in Liu, since pixels are generally distributed in rows and columns along two orthogonal directions, it can be said that the pixel vapor deposition regions 131 are also distributed in the same manner, and it is deemed that a plurality of regions between the adjacent pixel vapor deposition regions 131 surrounded by the support column 14 and the isolation wall 16 are distributed at intervals. In that case, how to arrange the region between the adjacent pixel vapor deposition regions 131 surrounded by the support column 14 and the isolation wall 16 is a design matter that could have been appropriately determined by a person skilled in the art when embodying the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. This is art that was filed after the current application however are very close in subject matter.
Zeng et al. US Pub No. 2025/0143090 “Display Panel and Display Apparatus”
Sun et al. US Pub No. 2025/0169340 “Display Panel and Display Apparatus”
Zhou et al. US Pub No. 2025/0185465 “Display Panel and Display Apparatus, and Method for Manufacturing Display Panel”
Zhou et al. US Pub No. 2025/00221191 “Display Panel and Display Apparatus, and Method for Manufacturing Display Panel”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER LEE LINDSAY JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9-7.
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, Allana Lewin Bidder can be reached at 571-272-5560. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights