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 .
Status of the Claims
Preliminary amendment filed 28 March 2024 is acknowledged. Claims 7-9 and 12-19 were amended. Claim 20 was added. Claims 1-20 were pending.
Amendment filed 21 August 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 2 and 20 have been canceled. Claims 1, 3, 4, 8-10, 13-15, and 19 have been amended. Claims 1 and 3-19 are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group I, claims 1 and 3-9, in the reply filed on 21 August 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 1 and 10 as presently amended now recite special technical features over Irobe (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0158135, hereinafter Irobe ‘135) of record. This is not found persuasive because the lack of unity restriction is issued based on the claims as presented at the time of examination. Applicant is reminded that all withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product claims will be considered for rejoinder.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 10-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 21 August 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information disclosure statements filed 11 September 2024 and 10 April 2025 have been fully considered.
Drawings
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: 13 and 14. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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.
Specification
The preliminary amendments to the abstract and the specification were received on 28 March 2024. These preliminary amendments to the abstract and the specification are acceptable.
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.
The following title is suggested: DISPLAY MODULES COMPRISING LENS STRUCTURE.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irobe ‘135 in view of Ozawa (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0176812, hereinafter Ozawa ‘812).
With respect to claim 1, Irobe ‘135 teaches (FIG. 4) a display module substantially as claimed, comprising:
a light-emitting structure layer (2, 4, and 5) comprising a pixel unit layer (2) with pixel units (P) and a color filter layer (5) on the pixel unit layer, wherein the color filter layer comprises color filters (50) respectively corresponding to the pixel units ([0062-0063, 0081]); and
a lens structure (8) on the light-emitting structure layer (2, 4, and 5), wherein the lens structure comprises lens units (81) respectively corresponding to the color filters (50) ([0083, 0100]);
wherein the lens structure (8) comprises:
a lens body (8), wherein the lens body comprises a first surface that is convex ([0063]); and
wherein the lens structure (8) is made of inorganic materials (e.g. silicon nitride), and a refractive index of the lens structure is greater than or equal to 1.88 (silicon nitride has a refractive index of 2.016) ([0100]).
Thus, Irobe ‘135 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of an additional lens layer attached to the first surface of the lens body, wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body.
However, Ozawa ‘812 teaches (FIG. 5) a lens structure (14) comprising an additional lens layer (15-17) attached to a first surface of a lens body (18), wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body ([0091]) to improve light utilization efficiency ([0104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the lens structure of Irobe ‘135 comprising an additional lens layer attached to the first surface of the lens body, wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body as taught by Ozawa ‘812 to improve light utilization efficiency.
With respect to claims 3-5, Irobe ‘135 and Ozawa ‘812 teach the device as described in claim 1 above, but primary reference Irobe ‘135 does not explicitly teach the additional limitations wherein a material of the additional lens layer is the same as a material of the lens body; wherein the additional lens layer comprises a first additional lens layer on the lens body, a second additional lens layer on the first additional lens layer, and a third additional lens layer on the second additional lens layer; and wherein refractive indexes of the lens body, the first additional lens layer, the second additional lens layer, and the third additional lens layer are the same or sequentially increased.
However, Ozawa ‘812 teaches (FIG. 5) a lens structure (14) wherein a material of an additional lens layer (15-17) is the same as a material of a lens body (18); wherein the additional lens layer comprises a first additional lens layer (17) on the lens body (18), a second additional lens layer (16) on the first additional lens layer, and a third additional lens layer (15) on the second additional lens layer; and wherein refractive indexes of the lens body (18), the first additional lens layer (17), the second additional lens layer (16), and the third additional lens layer (15) are the same (they are all formed of the same material) or sequentially increased ([0095]) to improve light utilization efficiency ([0104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the lens structure of Irobe ‘135 and Ozawa ‘812 wherein a material of the additional lens layer is the same as a material of the lens body; wherein the additional lens layer comprises a first additional lens layer on the lens body, a second additional lens layer on the first additional lens layer, and a third additional lens layer on the second additional lens layer; and wherein refractive indexes of the lens body, the first additional lens layer, the second additional lens layer, and the third additional lens layer are the same or sequentially increased as taught by Ozawa ‘812 to improve light utilization efficiency.
With respect to claim 7, Irobe ‘135 teaches further comprising: a protecting layer (51) between the light-emitting structure layer (2, 4, and 5) and the lens structure (8) ([0063]).
With respect to claim 8, Irobe ‘135 teaches wherein a material of the protecting layer comprises Al2O3, ZnO, TiO2, ITO, or IZO; and/or, thickness of the protecting layer is 400 Å to 500 Å; and/or, the inorganic materials comprise SiNx ([0100]); and/or, transmittance of the lens structure is greater than 95% for a wavelength of 460 nm.
With respect to claim 9, Irobe ‘135 teaches (FIG. 4) a display panel substantially as claimed, comprising a display module (100) ([0042]), wherein the display module comprises:
a light-emitting structure layer (2, 4, and 5) comprising a pixel unit layer (2) with pixel units (P) and a color filter layer (5) on the pixel unit layer, wherein the color filter layer comprises color filters (50) respectively corresponding to the pixel units ([0062-0063, 0081]); and
a lens structure (8) on the light-emitting structure layer (2, 4, and 5), wherein the lens structure comprises lens units (81) respectively corresponding to the color filters (50) ([0083, 0100]);
wherein the lens structure (8) comprises:
a lens body (8), wherein the lens body comprises a first surface that is convex ([0063]); and
wherein the lens structure (8) is made of inorganic materials (e.g. silicon nitride), and a refractive index of the lens structure is greater than or equal to 1.88 (silicon nitride has a refractive index of 2.016) ([0100]).
Thus, Irobe ‘135 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of an additional lens layer attached to the first surface of the lens body, wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body.
However, Ozawa ‘812 teaches (FIG. 5) a lens structure (14) comprising an additional lens layer (17) attached to a first surface of a lens body (18), wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body ([0091]) to improve light utilization efficiency ([0104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the lens structure of Irobe ‘135 comprising an additional lens layer attached to the first surface of the lens body, wherein a shape of the additional lens layer is consistent with a shape of the first surface of the lens body as taught by Ozawa ‘812 to improve light utilization efficiency.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irobe ‘135 and Ozawa ‘812 as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Shiraiwa et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0246258, hereinafter Shiraiwa ‘258).
With respect to claim 6, Irobe ‘135 and Ozawa ‘812 teaches the device as described in claim 4 above with the exception of the additional limitation wherein thicknesses of the lens body, the first additional lens layer, the second additional lens layer, and the third additional lens layer are sequentially reduced.
However, Shiraiwa ‘258 teaches (FIG. 1B) a lens structure wherein thicknesses of stacked lenses (21) are sequentially reduced ([0108]) in an arrangement that suppresses bending or breakage of the substrate ([0488]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed thicknesses of the lens body, the first additional lens layer, the second additional lens layer, and the third additional lens layer of Irobe ‘135 and Ozawa ‘812 sequentially reduced as taught by Shiraiwa ‘258 in an arrangement that suppresses bending or breakage of the substrate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher M. Roland whose telephone number is (571)270-1271. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-7:00PM Eastern.
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, Yara Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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.
/C.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights