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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0044] refers to refence numeral 41 as “first electrodes.” However, reference numeral 41 is reserved for a “light emitting portion”. It appears that it should be listed as “first electrodes 21” instead of “first electrodes 41”. 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.
Claims 1-16 and 21-24 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the second electrode layer is lapped with the auxiliary electrode” in line 14. The term “lapped” is not a standard term in semiconductor products or electronics and is not clearly defined in the Specification. It is unclear if this has a specific meaning, means that a connection is made, or that they are overlapping. It will be assumed, based on the disclosure, that the two electrodes are connected to each other because the Specification refers to the term “lap connection.”
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0008398).
Regarding claim 1¸ Lee teaches a display substrate, comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 2, substrate 10);
a first electrode layer (A1-3/CB) at a side of the substrate (top side), comprising a plurality of first electrodes (A1-3), and an auxiliary electrode (CB) located at a periphery of the first electrodes (Fig. 2);
wherein an orthographic projection of the auxiliary electrode on the substrate and an orthographic projection of the first electrodes on the substrate do not overlap with each other (Fig. 2-3);
a pixel-defining layer (60) at a side of the first electrode layer facing away from the substrate (top side of electrode layer), comprising a first opening exposing the first electrode (at P1, P2, P3), and a second opening exposing the auxiliary electrode (OP);
a light-emitting layer (75) at a side of the pixel-defining layer facing away from the first electrode layer (Fig. 2), wherein the light-emitting layer comprises a light-emitting portion located in the first opening (Fig. 2), and a hollow-out portion located in the second opening (Fig. 2); and
a second electrode layer (C) at a side of the light-emitting layer facing away from the pixel- defining layer (Fig. 2), wherein the second electrode layer is lapped with the auxiliary electrode at the second opening (Fig. 2, both overlapping and connected).
Regarding claim 2¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the auxiliary electrode is in a grid pattern having a plurality of third openings (Fig. 3), and the plurality of first electrodes are located within the plurality of third openings (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein a gap is provided between the auxiliary electrode and the first electrode (Fig. 2-3).
Regarding claim 4¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein a shape of the third opening is same as a shape of the first electrode located in the third opening (Fig. 3, both rectangular).
Regarding claim 6¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the first electrode layer further comprises a first connector (Fig. 3, CBP1) located at an end of the auxiliary electrode (Fig. 3), and a second connector (CBE) located at the other end of the auxiliary electrode;
the first connector and the second connector is configured to apply a voltage to the auxiliary electrode to burn out the light-emitting layer at the second opening after forming the light-emitting layer, to form the hollow-out portion (paragraph [0042] and [0083] and Fig. 14); and
an outer contour of the auxiliary electrode is a rectangle (Fig. 3), and the first connector and the second connector are located at two ends of a diagonal of the rectangle, respectively (see Fig. 3 and paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 21¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, wherein the display substrate further comprises a light-emitting functional portion at an inner wall of the second opening (see Fig. 2, 71-74).
Regarding claim 22¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 21, wherein
the light-emitting functional portion comprises: a first sub light-emitting functional portion (72), and a second sub light-emitting functional portion (73) located at a side of the first sub light-emitting functional portion away from the inner wall of the second opening (Fig. 2);
the first sub light-emitting functional portion comprises: a hole transport layer and/or an electron blocking layer (paragraph [0045]); and
the second sub-luminescent functional portion comprises: an electron transport layer and/or a hole blocking layer (paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 23¸ Lee teaches a display apparatus, comprising the display substrate according to claim 1 (Title).
Regarding claim 24¸ Lee teaches a method for manufacturing the display substrate according to claim 1, comprising:
providing the substrate (Fig. 9);
forming the first electrode layer at a side of the substrate (Fig. 9);
forming the pixel-defining layer at a side of the first electrode layer facing away from the substrate (Fig. 9);
forming the light-emitting layer at a side of the pixel-defining layer facing away from the first electrode layer (Fig. 9-11 and 14, light emitting layer can be conformally deposited as shown in Fig. 14);
applying a voltage to the auxiliary electrode to burn out the light-emitting layer at a position of the auxiliary electrode (Fig. 12 and paragraph [0041]); and
forming the second electrode layer at a side of the light-emitting layer facing away from the first electrode layer to allow the second electrode layer to be lapped with the auxiliary electrode at the second opening (Fig. 14).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yuan et al. (CN 113471384).
Regarding claim 5¸ Lee teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, but does not teach wherein at least part of the third openings are of different sizes.
However, Yuan teaches another display in which the auxiliary grid has openings around the sub-pixels that are of different sizes (see Yuan Fig. 17). It would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that the auxiliary electrode grid of Lee could have been formed about the sub-pixels because this allows for a shorter and more consistent distance between the auxiliary electrode and the OLED cathode for each sub-pixel, resulting in more even voltage drop over the sub-pixels, and that the size could be uneven because different color pixels produce different levels of light and therefore have different sizes in order to more evenly match the light of one another.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 7-11, the prior art, alone in combination, fails to teach or suggest part of the plurality of second sub-auxiliary electrodes are disconnected.
Regarding claims 12-16, the prior art, alone in combination, fails to teach or suggest a heat insulating layer between the planarization layer and the first electrode layer and in contact with the auxiliary electrode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evan G Clinton whose telephone number is (571)270-0525. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday at 8:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at 571-272-2429. 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.
/EVAN G CLINTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights