DETAILED ACTION
This Notice is responsive to communication filed on 06/01/2026.
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 Invention I and Species 1, reading on Claims 1-11 and Fig. 3 in the reply filed on 06/01/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 12-17 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/01/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/03/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: "1 multiplied by 106 Ωcm". Per the specification of the present application, this phrase should read “1 * 106 Ωcm”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 2, 4, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, and 9, the term “holds” does not have a clear structural meaning in the context of the claims. It is unclear if the term “holds” requires the inequality to be satisfied under specific measurements conditions not otherwise defined in the claim. It is unclear how the relationship as stated in the claim “holds” (See MPEP 2173.05(b) II). For the purpose of this Office Action, the Examiner will interpret these claims and the claims as follows:
Claim 1: “…wherein in a case that the hole transport layer has a thickness D1 in a direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode, above a center of the anode, and a thickness D2 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode, above a boundary lined between the upper surface of the anode and the side surface of the bank, D1 < D2.”
Claim 2: “…wherein the bank has a tilt angle T, and D1 < (D2*cos(T)).”
Claim 4: “…wherein in a case that the hole transport layer has a thickness D3 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode, 1µm inward away from above the boundary line between the upper surface of the anode and the side surface of the bank, (D1*2.3) < D3.”
Claim 9: “…wherein in a case that the second layer has a thickness D1 in a direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the first electrode, above a center of the first electrode, and a thickness D2 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the first electrode, above a boundary lined between the upper surface of the first electrode and the side surface of the bank, D1 < D2.”
Regarding claims 2 and 4, the formula as stated in these claims is also unclear. In claim 2, a relationship of D1 < D2 multiplied by cos T could be interpreted as:
D1 < (D2*cos(T)) or
(D1 < D2) * cos(T)
For the purpose of this Office Action, Examiner will interpret this claim as the former. Claim 4 is also similar, and will be interpreted as (D1*2.3) < D3 for the purpose of this examination.
Regarding claim 11, the term “shared layers” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “shared layers” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear whether the shared layers are physically continuous layers extending across multiple light emitting elements without interruption by the bank structure, or discrete layers per pixel formed from the same material in the same deposition step, or layers that overlap adjacent elements while being bound by the bank. The term does not provide essential structural relationships of the elements within the claim. For the purpose of this examination, the term “shared layers” will be interpreted as having a continuous hole injection layer and a continuous hole transport layer across multiple light emitting elements without interruption by the bank structure.
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.
Rejection Note: Italicized claim limitations indicate limitations that are not explicitly disclosed in the primary reference(s).
Claims 1, 4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A), and further in view of Takeuchi et al. (US 20130126842).
Regarding claim 1 (see 112 rejections regarding interpretation of claim limitations), Daisuke discloses a light-emitting element, comprising:
an anode Fig. 3: PE;
a bank Fig. 3: PI disposed at least partially adjacent to, or above, the anode Fig. 3: PE;
a hole injection layer formed at least partially on an upper surface of the anode and on a side surface of the bank;
a hole transport layer Fig. 3: HTL formed above the hole injection layer;
a light-emitting layer Fig. 3: EMT formed above the hole transport layer Fig. 3: HTL; and
a cathode Fig. 3: CE formed above the light-emitting layer Fig. 3: EMT,
wherein in a case that the hole transport layer Fig. 3: HTL has a thickness D1 in a direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: PE, above a center of the anode Fig. 3: PE, and a thickness D2 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: PE, above a boundary lined between the upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: PE and the side surface of the bank Fig. 3: PI, D1 < D2 (see annotated thicknesses below).
Paragraph 0051 teaches a hole transport layer having a central portion thickness of 50nm and a peripheral portion of 150nm, which satisfies D1 < D2.
PNG
media_image1.png
658
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Takeuchi discloses the following claim limitations not disclosed by Daisuke:
a hole injection layer Fig. 3: 103 formed at least partially on an upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: 102 and on a side surface of the bank Fig. 3: 104;
a hole transport layer Fig. 3: HTL formed above the hole injection layer Fig. 3: 103;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke with Takeuchi in order to suppress a current from locally flowing to the organic light-emitting layer via the hole-transport layer (para. 0038) and reducing drive voltage (para. 0086).
Regarding claim 4 (see 112 rejections regarding interpretation of claim limitations), Daisuke teaches the light-emitting element according to claim 1, wherein in a case that the hole transport layer Fig. 3: HTL has a thickness D3 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: PE, 1µm inward away from above the boundary line between the upper surface of the anode Fig. 3: PE and the side surface of the bank Fig. 3: PI, (D1*2.3) < D3. Daisuke teaches a hole transport layer HTL that slopes (See Fig. 3 and para. 0047) increasingly from a central portion thickness to a periphery portion thickness. A portion between the central and periphery portions can be said to meet the formula (D1*2.3) < D3 (see annotated D3 below). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that forming the hole transport layer having a sloped thickness that increases towards the periphery/boundary line between the upper surface of the anode and the side surface of the bank that meets the claimed relationship between D1 and D3, as general conditions of the claims are met. See MPEP 2144.05 II(A).
PNG
media_image2.png
657
630
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Daisuke, along with Takeuchi, teaches a display device Fig. 1 (para. 0009) comprising the light-emitting element according to claim 1.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A) and Takeuchi et al. (US 20130126842) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 20230320139).
Regarding claim 2 (see 112 rejections regarding interpretation of claim limitations), Chen teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the bank has a tilt angle T, and D1 < (D2*cos(T)).
Daisuke teaches a bank portion Fig. 3: PI that has a tilt angle as shown in Fig. 3, but does not explicitly teach a value or range of the tilt angle. Chen teaches an intersection angle of the bank Fig. 3B: ΘB of about 40° to 70° (para. 0044) which overlaps the range taught by the claimed invention. Using this range and para. 0044, a tilt angle of 45°, taught by Chen (para. 0044), a D1 of 50nm, a D2 of 150nm, taught by Daisuke (para. 0051), would satisfy the formula D1 < (D2*cos(T)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Chen in order to control the internal light reflection of the pixel structure and improve light emission/extraction (para. 0057).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches the light emitting element according to claim 2 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the tilt angle T Fig. 3B: ΘB has a relationship of 0° < T < 50° (para. 0044 teaches a range that overlaps with the range taught by the claimed invention).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Chen in order to control the internal light reflection of the pixel structure and improve light emission/extraction (para. 0057).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A) and Takeuchi et al. (US 20130126842) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US 20210273185).
Regarding claim 5, Park teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the hole injection layer contains an inorganic hole transport material (para. 0009 teaches a hole transport layer including an inorganic structure of at least one inorganic material).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Park in order to effectively dissipate the heat generated in a perovskite solar cell (para. 0004).
Regarding claim 6, Park teaches the light emitting element according to claim 5 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the inorganic hole transport material comprises a metal oxide (para. 0009 teaches the inorganic material consists of a metal oxide).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A) and Takeuchi et al. (US 20130126842) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sasagewa et al. (US 20240122052).
Regarding claim 7, Sasagawa teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the hole injection layer Fig. 4A: 104B(j) has an electrical resistivity of 1 multiplied by 106 Ωcm.
Paragraph 0182 teaches layer 104B(j) can be used for a hole-injection layer, and it has an electrical resistivity higher than or equal to 1×102 Ωcm and lower than or equal to 1×108 Ωcm, which overlaps the range taught by the claimed invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Sasagewa in order to form a hole injection layer having electron-accepting property to supply holes from the positive electrode side to the cathode side, inhibiting current flow and a crosstalk phenomenon between the first and second LEDs (para. 0026).
Regarding claim 8, Sasagawa teaches the light emitting element according to claim 1 not disclosed by Daisuke:
wherein the light-emitting layer Fig. 4A: 550B/G/R contains quantum dots (para. 0264 teaches nanoparticles, quantum dots used for a color conversion layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Sasagewa in order to effectively use a color conversion layer to convert blue light to green light, or blue light to red light (para. 0265).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A) , and further in view of Umeda et al. (US 20210126216).
Regarding claim 9 (see 112 rejections regarding interpretation of claim limitations), Daisuke discloses a light-emitting element, comprising:
a first electrode Fig. 3: PE;
a bank Fig. 3: PI disposed at least partially either adjacent to the first electrode Fig. 3: PE, or above the first electrode Fig. 3: PE;
a first layer containing an inorganic hole transport material, and formed at least partially on an upper surface of the first electrode and on a side surface of the bank;
a second layer Fig. 3: HTL containing an organic hole transport material (para. 0028 teaches an organic layer further including a hole transport layer), and formed above the first layer;
a light-emitting layer Fig. 3: EMT formed above the second layer Fig. 3: HTL; and
a second electrode Fig. 3: CE formed above the light-emitting layer Fig. 3: EMT,
wherein in a case that the second layer Fig. 3: HTL has a thickness D1 in a direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the first electrode Fig. 3: PE, above a center of the first electrode Fig. 3: PE, and a thickness D2 in the direction perpendicular to the upper surface of the first electrode Fig. 3: PE, above a boundary lined between the upper surface of the first electrode Fig. 3: PE and the side surface of the bank Fig. 3: PI, D1 < D2.
Umeda discloses the following claim limitations not disclosed by Daisuke:
a first layer Fig. 1: 14 containing an inorganic hole transport material (para. 0028, NiO is a known hole transport material), and formed at least partially on an upper surface of the first electrode Fig. 1: 16 and on a side surface of the bank Fig. 1: 2;
a second layer Fig. 1: 14 containing an organic hole transport material (para. 0028), and formed above the first layer (i.e. inorganic material of hole transport layer 14);
Umeda teaches a multilayer hole transport layer including an inorganic and an organic material (para. 0027-0028).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke with Umeda in order to have layers with materials that have excellent positive hole transport properties, promoting the supply of positive holes from the anode to the light emitting layer (para. 0027).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daisuke et al. (JP 2007188779 A) and Takeuchi et al. (US 20130126842) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20170373124).
Regarding claim 11, Daisuke and Takeuchi disclose a display device comprising:
a plurality of light-emitting elements, including the light-emitting element, according to claim 1,
wherein the hole injection layer and hole transport layer of each of the plurality of light-emitting elements are provided as shared layers in common to the plurality of light-emitting elements.
Yang discloses the following claim limitations not disclosed by Daisuke and Takeuchi:
wherein the hole injection layer Fig. 2: 151 and hole transport layer Fig. 2: 152 (para. 0072) of each of the plurality of light-emitting elements Fig. 1: 150 (para. 0050) are provided as shared layers in common to the plurality of light-emitting elements (shown in Fig. 1 and Fig.2).
Fig. 1 and 2 show the hole injection 151 and hole transport 152 layers as part of the light emitting structure 150 are continuous on the surface of the first electrode 140 and the bank 141+142, and also teach the emission structure 150 has a common layer structure so as to correspond to each color sub-pixel (para. 0068).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Daisuke and Takeuchi with Yang in order to implement a common layer structure that facilitates the injection and transport of holes and electrons corresponding to a red, blue and a green sub-pixel (para. 0068).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKECHINYERE ESIABA whose telephone number is (571)272-0720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10am-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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571) 272-5055. 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.
/Nkechinyere Esiaba/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights