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 § 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 –
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 14, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al. (CN 113964280).
With regard to claim 1,
Hu et al. disclose a display panel, comprising a light emitting device layer (30), an encapsulation layer (40), and an optical adjustment layer (60/80) that are sequentially stacked; wherein the optical adjustment layer comprises a first lens structure (61) located on a side of the encapsulation layer away from the light emitting device layer, and a planarization layer (80) located on a side of the first lens structure away from the light emitting device layer and on a side of an exposed encapsulation layer away from the light emitting device layer; wherein at least a portion of a surface of the first lens structure away from the light emitting device layer has an undulating morphology (70).
With regard to claim 2,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 1, wherein the light emitting device layer comprises a pixel definition structure (50), and a pixel unit (301) enclosed by the pixel definition structure; a projection of the first lens structure on a plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within a projection of the pixel definition structure on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (see fig. 1); a refractive index of the first lens structure is smaller than a refractive index of the planarization layer (paragraph 43).
With regard to claim 4,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 2, wherein the first lens structure comprises: a first surface away (C1) from the light emitting device layer, a second surface (C2) close to the light emitting device layer, and a third surface (S1) connecting the first surface and the second surface; a projection of the first surface on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within a projection of the second surface on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located; the undulating morphology is formed on the first surface (see fig. 2).
With regard to claim 5,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 4, wherein the third surface is a smooth surface (See fig. 2).
With regard to claim 6,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 2, wherein the undulating morphology comprises: protrusions and depressions alternately distributed (See fig. 2); a projection of the protrusions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located and a projection of the depressions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located both surround a projection of the pixel unit on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (see, e.g., fig 13).
With regard to claim 7,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 6, wherein the undulating morphology comprises at least one of the following features: at least one of the projection of the protrusions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located and the projection of the depressions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located comprises a ring-shaped projection (see, e.g., fig 13); and at least one of the projection of the protrusions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located and the projection of the depressions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located comprises at least two segment-shaped projections with end-to-end spacing (See, e.g., fig 13).
With regard to claim 8,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 7, wherein the projection of the protrusions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located and the projection of the depressions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located are all located on different ring-shaped projection profiles which are coaxial but have different sizes, and are distributed alternately on different ring-shaped projection profiles; or the projection of the protrusions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located and the projection of the depressions on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located are all located on the same ring-shaped projection profile and alternately distributed on the ring-shaped projection profile (See, e.g., fig 17).
With regard to claim 14,
Hu et al. disclose a display apparatus, comprising the display panel of claim 1.
With regard to claim 15,
Hu et al. disclose a manufacturing method for a display panel, comprising: preparing a light emitting device layer (30) and forming an encapsulation layer (40) on a side of the light emitting device layer; preparing a first lens structure (61) on the encapsulation layer and making at least a portion of a surface of the first lens structure away from the light emitting device layer have an undulating morphology (70); and forming a planarization layer (80 on the first lens structure and on an exposed encapsulation layer.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (as above).
With regard to claim 3,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 2, wherein the pixel unit comprises a cathode layer (301C), a light emitting layer (301B), and an anode layer (301A); or the pixel unit comprises a backlight layer, an array substrate and a liquid crystal encapsulation layer. While Hu et al. do not disclose the hole and electron transport layers, such layers were well known to and widely used by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate into the panel of Hu et al. in order to increase light emission efficiency.
With regard to claims 16-20,
Hu et al. disclose the manufacturing method according to claim 15. While Hu et al. do not explicitly state the method of preparing the first lens structure, exposure masks, photoresists, plasma bombardment, and sacrificial layers were well known to and widely used by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for forming concavo-convex/projection-depression/undulating structures and would have been obvious to the same to incorporate as the method of Hu et al. in order to utilize readily available systems and processes to form the structures detailed by Hu et al.
Claims 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (as above), in view of Moon et al. (USPN 2019/0115404).
With regard to claim 9,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 2. While Hu et al. do not disclose the second lens structure, Moon et al. do disclose an analogous panel wherein the optical adjustment layer further comprises a second lens structure (311); the second lens structure is located between the encapsulation layer (180) and a portion of the planarization layer (322/211); a projection of the second lens structure on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within the projection of the pixel unit on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (see, e.g., fig. 3); a refractive index of the second lens structure is greater than the refractive index of the planarization layer (see paragraph 87). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate this concept of Moon et al. into the panel of Hu et al. in order to troy to improve light extraction efficiency.
With regard to claim 10,
Moon et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 9, wherein the second lens structure comprises: a fourth surface (upper) away from the light emitting device layer, a fifth surface lower) close to the light emitting device layer, and a sixth surface (322a) connecting the fourth surface and the fifth surface; a projection of the fifth surface on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within a projection of the fourth surface on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (see, e.g., fig. 3). The obviousness of the incorporation of the concept of Moon et al. into the panel of Hu et al. was addressed in the rejection of claim 9.
With regard to claim 11,
Moon et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 10, wherein the sixth surface is a smooth surface; and/or the fourth surface and the fifth surface are smooth surfaces (see e.g., fig. 3). The obviousness of the incorporation of the concept of Moon et al. into the panel of Hu et al. was addressed in the rejection of claim 9.
With regard to claim 12,
Moon et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 9, wherein the second lens structure and the first lens structure are separated by a portion of the planarization layer (322, see, e.g., fig 3). The obviousness of the incorporation of the concept of Moon et al. into the panel of Hu et al. was addressed in the rejection of claim 9.
With regard to claim 13,
Hu et al. disclose the display panel according to claim 1, wherein the light emitting device layer comprises a pixel definition structure (50), and a pixel unit (301) enclosed by the pixel definition structure; a projection of the first lens structure on a plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within a projection of the pixel definition structure on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (See, e.g., fig. 2). While Hu et al. do not disclose the second lens structure, Moon et al. do disclose an analogous panel wherein the optical adjustment layer further comprises a second lens structure (311); the second lens structure is located between the encapsulation layer (180) and a portion of the planarization layer (322/211); a projection of the second lens structure on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located is within the projection of the pixel unit on the plane where the encapsulation layer is located (see, e.g., fig. 3); a refractive index of the first lens structure (321) and second lens structure are both larger than the refractive index of the planarization layer (see paragraphs 87,103). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate this concept of Moon et al. into the panel of Hu et al. in order to troy to improve light extraction efficiency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPN 2024/0032398, 2022/0229209, 2020/0105826.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher Raabe whose telephone number is (571)272-8434. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0530-1430.
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, James R Greece can be reached at (571)272-3711. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M RAABE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875