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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I, species 1 in the reply filed on August 24, 2026, is acknowledged. Claim 8-10 and 16-17 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention II and species 2, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Accordingly, claims 1-7, 11-15 and 18-20 are ready for examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “length of the edge of the transition structure extending into a corresponding region of the aperture” recited in claim 5, “a second electrode of the first transistor being connected to a second electrode plate of the storage capacitor”, recited in claim 13, and “a first electrode plate of the storage capacitor [being] directly opposite to the shielding piece and connect to the shielding piece through a via hole”, as well as “planarization layer, located on a side of the source-drain metal layer away from substrate, and a least cover[ing] the power line, the data line, the sensing line, the first electrode plate of the storage capacitor, and the auxiliary electrode”, recited claim 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Moreover, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: capacitor CP described in paragraph [0126] of the specification as published. Lastly, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: PA2, Fig. 3. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 15 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
With respect to claim 15, “each the power line and the auxiliary electrode” should read “each of the power line and the auxiliary electrode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-15 and 18-20 is/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.
With respect to claim 1, as currently presented the claim requires that “a light-emitting device and a transition structure” be distributed at intervals. It is not clear how two elements can be distributed (spaced apart) at intervals. Specifically, while the light-emitting device and the transition structure can be spaced from one another, it is unclear how these two elements can be distributed at plurality of intervals. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that “a light emitting device and a transition structure are space apart from one another.
Moreover, the claim requires that the auxiliary electrode be located on a side of a group of pixel circuits corresponding to the auxiliary electrode. First, it is not clear what is covered by the term “corresponding” and how the group of pixel circuits correspond to the auxiliary electrode and where the auxiliary electrode is located relative to the group of pixel circuits. Second, it is unclear if the recited group of pixel circuits is referring back to the at least one group of pixel circuit that is in one-to-one correspondence with the auxiliary electrode or a different group of pixel circuits. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that auxiliary electrode and group of pixel circuits are present in the display panel and that the recited group of pixel circuits are referring back to at least one group of pixel circuits.
Furthermore, the scope of the phrase “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” is unclear. In particular, it is not clear which part of the transition structure is considered to be a partial edge. Specifically, it is not clear what is considered an edge or partial edge (e.g. a part where top and side of the transition structure meet, the top and side of the transition structure partially meeting or a side of the transition structure), and at what part of the edge, the fracture is formed on. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the edge is referring to a side surface of the transition structure and that the fracture is formed on a part of the side surface of the transition structure (i.e. the light-emitting functional layer is not continuous along the inner side surface of the transition structure).
Lastly, the claim recites “the pixel circuit” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purpose of compact prosecution, “the pixel circuit” will be treated as if it were a pixel circuit. Claims 2-7, 11-15 and 18-20, which either directly or indirectly depend from claim 1 and which inherit issues of claim 1 are rejected for similar reasons.
With respect to claim 2, as currently presented the claim recites “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” three times (line 16, claim 1 and lines 3 and 7). It is unclear whether the second and third recited “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” were intended to relate back to “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” (line 16 of claim 1) or to set forth an additional at least a partial edge of the transition structure. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the second and third recited “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” are referring back to the “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” recited in claim 1.
Moreover, the claim recites “a fracture” twice (in line 15, claim 1 and line 7). It is unclear whether the second recited “fracture” was intended to relate back to “fracture” (line 16, claim 1) or to set forth an additional fracture. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the second recited fracture is referring back to the fracture recited in claim 1.
Furthermore, the scope of the phrase “at least a partial edge of an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate ” is unclear. Specifically, it is not clear what is considered to be a partial edge of an orthographic projection. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate.
Lastly, as currently presented the claim requires that “the second electrode covers a side of the transition structure, and a part of the exposed portion not covered by the partition portion”. It is unclear which element is not covered by the partition portion. Specifically, it is not clear, a part of which element is exposed. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a part of the exposed portion not covered by the partition portion is referring to a part of the auxiliary electrode exposed at the aperture. Claims 3-7, which either directly or indirectly depend from claim 2 and which inherit issues of claim 2, are rejected for similar reasons.
With respect to claim 3, as currently presented the claim requires that the transition structure includes an opening and “at least a partial opening edge of the transition structure”. It is unclear from the claim language, if “a partial opening edge of the transition structure” intended to cover a part of the opening included in the transition structure or introduce a new element (i.e. a partial opening edge) of and/or in the transition structure. In the event, the partial opening edge refers to a structural element of the transition structure, it is unclear to what element the partial opening edge is referring to. For example, it is not clear if the partial opening edge is referring to a part of an inner edge (boundary) of the opening or an opening that is only partially opened. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a partial opening edge is referring to a part of the inner side of the opening. Claim 4 which directly depends from claim 3, and which inherits issues of claim 3, is rejected for similar reasons.
With respect to claim 5, as currently presented the claim requires that “a length of an edge of the transition structure extend[s] into a corresponding region of the aperture”. It is not clear, however, what is considered a length of an edge of the transition structure and how a region of aperture correspond to such length. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a part of the inner sidewall of the transition structure extends into an aperture formed in a driving layer.
With respect to claim 6, as currently presented the claim requires that “at least a partial edge of at least one structure layer in the first conductive layer, the metal layer, and the second conductive layer”. It is unclear what is considered “a partial edge of at least one structural layer” and if the at least one structural layer is inside (in) one of the first conductive layer, the metal layer, and the second conductive layer or if the first conductive layer, the metal layer, and the second conductive layer are the structural layers. Review of the specifications, and in particular Fig. 1, suggests that transition structure includes layers (i.e. structural layers), such as the first conductive layer (PASa), the metal layer (PASb), and the second conductive layer (PASc), rather than the first conductive layer, the metal layer, and the second conductive layer including a structural layer in them. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the transition structure includes structural layers, such as a first conductive layer, a metal layer, and a second conductive layer, and that an orthographic projection of a part of the at least one of the first conductive layer, the metal layer, and the second conductive layer on the substrate is located within the orthographic projection of the aperture on the substrate. Claim 7 which directly depends from claim 6 and which inherits issues of claim 6, is rejected for similar reasons.
With respect to claim 7, as currently presented the claim requires “at least a partial opening edge”. It is unclear if the partial opening edge refers to a part of an edge (boundary or inner side) of an opening or an edge of an opening that is only partially opened. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a partial opening edge refers to a part of the inner side of an opening.
With respect to claim 11, as currently presented the claim recites “the power line” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purpose of compact prosecution “the power line” will be treated as if it were “a power line”. Moreover, as currently presented the claim recites that “the power line is connected to a group of pixel circuits corresponding to the power line, and the power line located on a side of the group of pixel circuits corresponding to the power line away from the auxiliary electrode”. The location of the power lines with respect to the group of pixel circuits and the auxiliary electrode, however, is unclear. Specifically, it is not clear what side of the group of pixel circuits correspond to the power line, and how the group of pixel circuits corresponding to the power line are away from the auxiliary electrode. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a power line is connected to a group of pixel circuits.
Regarding claim 13, as currently presented the claim recites “the first electrode of the first transistor” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purpose of compact prosecution, “the first electrode of the first transistor” will be treated as if it were “a first electrode of the first transistor”. Moreover, as currently presented to claim requires that “the first electrode of the first transistor is configured to load a power signal”, “a control electrode of the second transistor is configured to load a first scanning signal”, “a second electrode of the second transistor is configured to load a data signal”, “a control electrode of the third transistor is configured to load a second scanning signal”, and “a second electrode of the third transistor is configured to load a sensing signal”. It is unclear, however, what is considered loading of the signals and where the signals are loaded. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that electrodes configured to load, are connected to the claimed signals. Additionally, it is unclear what is connected to the first electrode, as recited in line 8 of the claim.
With respect to claim 14, as currently presented the claim recites “a first electrode plate of the storage capacitor” twice (in lines 4-5 of claim 13, and line 14) and “a second electrode plate of the storage capacitor” twice (in line 7, claim 13 and line 9). It is unclear whether the second recited “a first electrode plate of the storage capacitor” and “a second electrode plate of the storage capacitor” were intended to relate back to “a first electrode plate of the storage capacitor” (lines 4-5, claim 13) or “a second electrode plate of the storage capacitor” (line 8, claim 13) or to set forth an additional first and second electrode plates. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed the second recited first and second electrode plates were intended to refer to the first and second electrode plates recited in claim 13. Moreover, it is unclear what is considered loading of a signal, recited in lenses 15-18 and/or how signals are loaded and to where. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that electrodes configured to load, are connected to the claimed signals.
With respect to claim 15, as currently presented the claim recites “the unit circuit” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purpose of compact prosecution “the unit circuit” will be treated as if it were “a unit circuit”. Furthermore, it is unclear if each of the circuit units recited in lines 1-4 includes the recited elements, and how the recited elements are related to the elements recited in claims 1, 13 and 14. Additionally, the difference between “the at least one group of pixel circuits” (line 6, claim 1), “a group of pixel circuits” (line 7, claim 1) and “one group of pixel circuits” (lines 1-2) is unclear. Specifically, it is not clear if the different phrases refer to the same or different groups of pixel circuits. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed the above noted groups or pixel circuits are referring to the same group of pixel circuits. Moreover, the claim recites “the first electrodes of the first transistors of the four-pixel circuits” in lines 6-7, “the first and second electrode plates of each storage capacitor” in line 9, “the control electrodes of the second transistors” in line 14, “the control electrodes of the third transistors” in lines 15-16, “the two shielding pieces” in lines 17 and 20-21. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations. Moreover, it is unclear if “the shielding piece” recited in line 10 of the claim is intended to refer to “a shielding piece” (line 3, claim 13) or one of the shielding pieces from among four shielding pieces recited in line 8 of the claim. Lastly, it is unclear how the power line loads power signal at the first electrodes and/or what is considered loading of a signal. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that electrodes configured to load, are connected to the claimed signals.
With respect to claim 19, as currently presented the claim recites “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” three times (line 16, claim 1 and lines 3 and 7). It is unclear whether the second and third recited “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” were intended to relate back to “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” (line 16 of claim 1) or to set forth an additional at least a partial edge of the transition structure. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the second and third recited “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” are referring back to the “at least a partial edge of the transition structure” recited in claim 1.
Moreover, the claim recites “a fracture” twice (in line 15, claim 1 and line 7). It is unclear whether the second recited “fracture” was intended to relate back to “fracture” (line 16, claim 1) or to set forth an additional fracture. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that the second recited fracture is referring back to the fracture recited in claim 1.
Furthermore, the scope of the phrase “at least a partial edge of an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate ” is unclear. Specifically, it is not clear what is considered to be a partial edge of an orthographic projection. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate.
Lastly, as currently presented the claim requires that “the second electrode covers a side of the transition structure, and a part of the exposed portion not covered by the partition portion”. It is unclear which element is not covered by the partition portion. Specifically, it is not clear, a part of which element is exposed. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a part of the exposed portion not covered by the partition portion is referring to a part of the auxiliary electrode exposed at the aperture. Claim 20 which either directly depend from claim 19 and which inherit issues of claim 19, is rejected for similar reasons.
With respect to claim 20, as currently presented the claim requires that the transition structure includes an opening and “at least a partial opening edge of the transition structure”. It is unclear from the claim language, if “a partial opening edge of the transition structure” intended to cover a part of the opening included in the transition structure or introduce a new element (i.e. a partial opening edge) of and/or in the transition structure. In the event, the partial opening edge refers to a structural element of the transition structure, it is unclear to what element the partial opening edge is referring to. For example, it is not clear if the partial opening edge is referring to a part of an inner edge (boundary) of the opening or an opening that is only partially opened. For purpose of compact prosecution, it will be assumed that a partial opening edge is referring to a part of the inner edge of the opening.
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)(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 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cho et al. (US 2023/0076780, hereinafter “Cho”).
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches in Figs. 1-2 and 18 (Fig. 18 shown below) a display panel, comprising:
a substrate (101, Fig. 18 and ¶[0064]);
a driving layer (e.g. layers BF to IL3, Fig. 18), located on a side of the substrate (101, Fig. 18) and comprising a plurality of groups of pixel circuits (Figs. 2, 18 and ¶[0057]) distributed (i.e. spaced apart) along a row direction (Fig. 2), wherein the driving layer comprises a source-drain metal layer (120, 130, Fig. 18 and ¶[0064]), the source-drain metal layer comprises an auxiliary electrode (123, 135, Fig. 18 and ¶¶[0073]-[0077]) in one-to-one correspondence with at least one group of pixel circuits (e.g. a group of three transistors, Fig. 18), and the auxiliary electrode is located on a side (e.g. to the left of the group of circuits (transistors), Fig. 18) of a group of pixel circuits corresponding to the auxiliary electrode; and
a light-emitting layer (e.g. 130-171, Fig. 18 and ¶¶[0077]-[0092]), located on a side of the driving layer (e.g. layers BF to IL3, Fig. 18) away from the substrate (101, Fig. 18), wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a light-emitting device (e.g. PX, Fig. 18 and ¶[0061]) and a transition structure (e.g. CP, Fig. 18 and ¶[0061]) distributed at intervals (i.e. spaced apart from one another), an orthographic projection of the transition structure (163, Fig. 18 and ¶[0064]) on the substrate and an orthographic projection of the auxiliary electrode (123, 135, Fig. 18) on the substrate have an overlapping region (Fig. 18), the light-emitting device (ED1-ED3, Fig. 18 and ¶[0116]) comprises a first electrode (130, 131, 132, Fig. 18 and ¶[0116]), a light-emitting functional layer (141, Fig. 18 and ¶[0084]), and a second electrode (150, Fig. 18 and ¶[0084]) sequentially distributed (i.e. formed) along a direction away from the substrate (Fig. 18), the first electrode of the light-emitting device is connected to the pixel circuit (e.g. transistor, Fig. 18), the light-emitting functional layer (141, Fig. 18 and ¶[0084]) covers the first electrode (130, 131, 132, Fig. 18) and the transition structure (163, Fig. 18), and forms a fracture (i.e. the light-emitting functional layer is not continuous at the inner surface of the transition structure) on at least a partial edge (i.e. part of the side surface of the transition structure) of the transition structure, the second electrode (150, Fig. 18) covers the light-emitting functional layer (141, Fig. 18) and an exposed part of the transition structure at the fracture of the light-emitting functional layer (141, Fig. 18), and the second electrode (150, Fig. 18) is connected to the auxiliary electrode (123, 135, Fig. 18).
PNG
media_image1.png
687
901
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18 (1), Cho teaches a display apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising the display panel according to claim 1 (Fig. 18).
Claim(s) 1-4, 13 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Choi et al. (US 2019/0172898, hereinafter “Choi”).
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches in Figs. 1-4,16 and 17A-17B (Figs. 1, 3B, 16 and 17A-17B shown below) a display panel, comprising:
a substrate (110a, Fig. 16 and ¶[0046]);
a driving layer (i.e. TFT layer and 118, Fig. 16), located on a side of the substrate (101, Fig. 16) and comprising a plurality of groups of pixel circuits (Figs. 1-4, 16 and ¶[0057]) distributed (i.e. spaced apart) along a row direction (Figs. 1-4 and 17A-17B), wherein the driving layer comprises a source-drain metal layer (116a-116c, Fig. 16 and ¶[0053]), the source-drain metal layer comprises an auxiliary electrode (116c, Fig. 16 and ¶[0053]) in one-to-one correspondence with at least one group of pixel circuits (Figs. 1-4, 16 and 17A-17B), and the auxiliary electrode is located on a side (Figs. 17A-17B) of a group of pixel circuits corresponding to the auxiliary electrode (Figs. 17A-17B); and
a light-emitting layer (i.e. OLED layer, Fig. 16 and ¶[0039]), located on a side of the driving layer (i.e. TFT layer, Fig. 16) away from the substrate (110a, Fig. 16), wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a light-emitting device (SPA, Fig. 16 and ¶[0051]) and a transition structure (e.g. 121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16, ¶¶[0064] and [0085]) distributed at intervals (i.e. spaced apart from one another, Figs. 17A-17B), an orthographic projection of the transition structure (121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16) on the substrate and an orthographic projection of the auxiliary electrode (116c, Fig. 16) on the substrate have an overlapping region (Fig. 16), the light-emitting device (SPA, Fig. 16 and ¶[0051]) comprises a first electrode (120a, Fig. 16 and ¶[0053]), a light-emitting functional layer (122, Fig. 16 and ¶[0054]), and a second electrode (123, Fig. 16 and ¶[0054]) sequentially distributed (i.e. formed) along a direction away from the substrate (Fig. 16), the first electrode of the light-emitting device is connected to the pixel circuit (e.g. TFT, Fig. 16), the light-emitting functional layer (122, Fig. 16 and ¶[0054]) covers the first electrode (120a, Fig. 16) and the transition structure (121, 120c, Fig. 16), and forms a fracture (i.e. the light-emitting functional layer is not continuous at the inner surface of the transition structure, Fig. 16) on at least a partial edge (i.e. part of the inner side surface of the transition structure) of the transition structure, the second electrode (123, Fig. 16) covers the light-emitting functional layer (122, Fig. 16) and an exposed part of the transition structure at the fracture of the light-emitting functional layer (Fig. 16), and the second electrode (123, Fig. 18) is connected to the auxiliary electrode (116c (through 117c and 120b), Fig. 16).
PNG
media_image2.png
396
581
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
302
494
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
408
500
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
407
563
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2 (1), Choi teaches wherein the driving layer is defined with an aperture (CNH, 118, Fig. 16 and ¶[0090]) facing towards the light-emitting layer (OLED, Fig. 16), and an orthographic projection of at least a partial edge of the transition structure (121,120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16) on the substrate (110a, Fig. 16) is located within an orthographic projection of the aperture on the substrate;
the auxiliary electrode (AUX, Fig. 16) comprises an exposed portion at the aperture, the light-emitting functional layer (122, Fig. 16) comprises a covering portion (122a, Fig. 16 and ¶[0068]) and a partition portion (122b, Fig. 16 and ¶[0068]), wherein the covering portion and the partition portion form a fracture (i.e. are not continuous/ are not present, Fig. 16) on at least a partial edge of the transition structure (121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16), the covering portion (122a, Fig. 16) covers the first electrode (120a, Fig. 16) and the transition structure (121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16), the partition portion (122b, Fig. 16) is located within the aperture (CNH, Fig. 16), and at least a partial edge of an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate (Fig. 16);
the second electrode (123, Fig. 16 and ¶[0052]) covers a side of the transition structure (121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16), and a part of the exposed portion (i.e. portion of 120b not covered by 122b, Fig. 16) not covered by the partition portion (122b, Fig. 16), and a part of the second electrode covering the light-emitting functional layer and a part of the second electrode covering the exposed portion are continuous (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 3 (2), Choi teaches wherein the transition structure (121, 120c in the CNA area, Fig. 16) is defined with an opening (Fig. 16), and an orthographic projection of at least a partial opening edge of the transition structure on the substrate is located within the orthographic projection of the aperture (CNH, Fig. 16) on the substrate (110a, Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 4 (3), Choi teaches wherein the opening of the transition structure (i.e. opening between 121, 120c in CAN area, Fig. 16) coincides with a centerline of the aperture of the driving layer (CNH, Fig. 16), and an opening size of the opening is less than an aperture size of the aperture (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 13 (1), Choi teaches wherein the pixel circuit comprises a first transistor (DR, Fig. 3B and ¶[0043]), a second transistor (SW2, Fig. 3B and ¶[0043]), a third transistor (SW1, Fig. 36 and ¶[0043]), and a storage capacitor (Cst, Fig. 3B and ¶[0043]),
a control electrode of the first transistor (DR, Fig. 3B) is connected to a first electrode plate of the storage capacitor (Cst, Fig. 3B) and a first electrode of the second transistor (SW2, Fig. 3B), the first electrode of the first transistor is configured to load a power signal (EVDD, Fig. 3B), and a second electrode of the first transistor is connected to a second electrode plate of the storage capacitor (Cst at node N2, Fig. 3B) and a first electrode of the third transistor (SW1, Fig. 3B), and is connected to the first electrode;
a control electrode of the second transistor (SW2, Fig. 3B) is configured to load a first scanning signal (GL1b, Fig. 3B and ¶[0044]), and a second electrode of the second transistor (SW2, Fig. 3B) is configured to load a data signal (INIT, Fig. 3B); and
a control electrode of the third transistor (SW1, Fig. 3B) is configured to load a second scanning signal (GL1a, Fig. 3B and ¶[0044]), and a second electrode of the third transistor (SW1, Fig. 3B) is configured to load a sensing signal (DL1, Fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 18 (1), Choi teaches a display apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising the display panel according to claim 1 (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 19 (18), Choi teaches wherein the driving layer is defined with an aperture (CNH, Fig. 16 and ¶[0090]) facing towards the light-emitting layer (OLED, Fig. 16), and an orthographic projection of at least a partial edge of the transition structure (121,120c, Fig. 16) on the substrate (110a, Fig. 16) is located within an orthographic projection of the aperture on the substrate (Fig. 16);
the auxiliary electrode (AUX, Fig. 16) comprises an exposed portion at the aperture (Fig. 16), the light-emitting functional layer (122, Fig. 16) comprises a covering portion (122a, Fig. 16 and ¶[0068]) and a partition portion (122b, Fig. 16 and ¶[0068]), wherein the covering portion and the partition portion form a fracture (i.e. are not continuous, Fig. 16) on at least a partial edge of the transition structure (121, 120c, Fig. 16), the covering portion (122a, Fig. 16) covers the first electrode (120a, Fig. 16) and the transition structure (i.e. top of 121, 120c, Fig. 16), the partition portion (122b, Fig. 16) is located within the aperture (CNH, Fig. 16), and at least a partial edge of an orthographic projection of the exposed portion of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate extends beyond an orthographic projection of the partition portion on the substrate (Fig. 16);
the second electrode (123, Fig. 16 and ¶[0052]) covers a side of the transition structure (121, 120c, Fig. 16), and a part of the exposed portion (i.e. portion of 120b not covered by 122b, Fig. 16) not covered by the partition portion (122b, Fig. 16), and a part of the second electrode covering the light-emitting functional layer and a part of the second electrode covering the exposed portion are continuous (Fig. 16).
Regarding claim 20 (19), Choi teaches wherein the transition structure (121, 120c, Fig. 16) is defined with an opening (Fig. 16), and an orthographic projection of at least a partial opening edge of the transition structure on the substrate is located within the orthographic projection of the aperture (CNH, Fig. 16) on the substrate (110a, Fig. 16).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi as applied to claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 5 (2), teaching of Choi was discussed above in the rejection of claim 2, wherein a length of an edge of the transition structure (i.e. length of 121 and 120c extending over sidewalls of 118 and 119 (UC2), Figs. 11 and 16) extends into a corresponding region of the aperture (CNH, Fig. 16). While Choi does not explicitly teach that the length is greater than or equal to 0.8 microns and less than or equal to 1.2 microns, absent of any criticality, recessing layers 118 and 119 so that the length of the edge of the transition structure is within the claimed range would be within capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art as doing so would amount to nothing more than changing the size of the undercut. Accordingly, it would have been an obvious matter of choice to change the size of the undercut disclosed by Cho so that the length of an edge of the transition structure extending into a corresponding region of the aperture is within the claimed range, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the component, where a change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2024/0122032, hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 11 (1), teaching of Choi was discussed above and includes a plurality of power line (EVDD and EVSS, Figs. 1-3) with one-to-one correspondence with the plurality of groups of pixel circuits (Figs. 1-2 and 3A-3B), the power line is connected to a group of pixel circuits (Figs. 1-3) corresponding to the power line (Figs. 2 and 3A-3B), and the power line located on a side of the group of pixel circuits corresponding to the power line away from the auxiliary electrode (Figs. 17A-17B).
Choi, however, does not explicitly teach that the source-drain metal layer comprises the plurality of power lines. Wang, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches in Figs. 1-10 and related text, that source-drain metal layer (i.e. third conductive layer pattern, Figs. 10a-10b and ¶[¶0076] and [0129]), may include a plurality of power lines (44, Figs. 10a-10b and ¶[0076]) in addition to source-drain electrodes (48, 45, Fig. 10b and ¶[0129]) in order to meet specific design requirements for conductive layer patterns.
Thus, since the prior art teaches all of the claim elements, using such elements would lead to predictable results, and as such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the plurality of power lines disclosed by Choi in the source-drain metal layer (i.e. third conductive layer pattern) disclosed by Wang in order to meet specific design requirements for conductive layer patterns.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANETA B CIESLEWICZ whose telephone number is 303-297-4232. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM - 2:30 PM.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571-272-1236. 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.
/A.B.C/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights