3DETAILED 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 Acknowledged
Applicant election without traverse of Species 1 shown in Figs. 1-10 in the RESPONSE to Restriction Requirements filed 09/29/26 has been acknowledged.
Applicant stated that Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are read on the elected species.
Status of Claims
Claims 9 and 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to nonelected inventions.
Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are examined on merits herein.
Specification
Specification is objected to since it does not specify in multiple paragraphs that various descriptions of elements described are appropriate only when they are related to “a top view”. Some of these paragraphs of the published application US 2025/0176395 are: 0009, 0012, 0013, 0014, 0026, etc. Examiner suggests reading the entire application for making all appropriate corrections.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In re Claim 1: The last limitation of Claim 1 states: “each of the first color filter, the second color filter and the third color filter includes an opening in the non-display area”. The recitation is unclear, since Claim 1 earlier states that a non-display area (as well as a display area) is an area of a substrate, while color filters are disposed on a surface of an opposite substrate, and, accordingly, openings in the color filters cannot be “in” the substrate.
Appropriate correction is required to clarify the claimed subject matter.
For this Office Action, the cited limitation was interpreted in accordance with the disclosure of the application, including drawings, as: “each of the first color filter, the second color filter and the third color filter includes an opening over the non-display area”.
In re Claim 4: Claim 4 recites: “the first opening, the second opening and the third opening has a closed loop shape surrounding the display area”.
For the same reason that is explained for Claim 1, the recitation is unclear and appropriate correction is required.
For this Office Action, the cited limitation was interpreted as: “from a top view, the first opening, the second opening and the third opening has a closed loop shape surrounding the display area”.
In re Claim 5: Claim 5 recites: “the third opening surrounds the display area, the second opening surrounds the third opening, and the first opening surrounds the second opening”.
The recitation is unclear for the same reason that is explained for Claim 4, in addition, each opening of the current application (of Figs. 1-10) is disposed in a plane not coinciding with another opening in a vertical direction.
Appropriate correction is required to clarify the claim language.
For this Office Action, the cited limitation was interpreted as: “from the top view, the third opening surrounds the display area, the second opening surrounds the third opening, and the first opening surrounds the second opening”.
In re Claim 6: Claim 6 recites: “the first opening is disposed adjacent to sides of the opposing substrate, the third opening is disposed adjacent to the display area, and the second opening is disposed between the first opening and the third opening”.
The recitation is unclear for various reasons described above, especially for citing that “the third opening is disposed adjacent to the display area”, and for this Office Action, the recitation was interpreted as: “from the top view, the first opening is disposed adjacent to sides of the opposing substrate, the third opening is disposed adjacent to the display area, and the second opening is disposed between the first opening and the third opening”.
In re Claim 14: Claim 14 recites: ‘the openings of the color filter layer are disposed between sides of the opposing substrate and the sealing member”. The recitation is unclear since sides of the opposing substrate and sides of the sealing member are disposed in different vertical layers.
Appropriate correction is required to clarify the claimed subject matter.
For this Office Action, the cited recitation, as unclear, was omitted from consideration
In re Claims 2-3, 7-8, and 10-13: Claims 2-3, 7-8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112b due to dependency on Claim 1.
In re Claim 15: Lines 9-12 of Claim 15 have issues like that of Claim 1.
Appropriate corrections are required.
In re Claim 18: Claim 18 recites: “the third area is disposed adjacent to the display area”, which is incorrect for the same reason that is explained for Claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
In re Claims 16-17: Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to dependency on Clam 15.
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.
As far as the claims are understood, Claims 1-3 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. (US 2023/0144317) in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0121348).
In re Claim 1, Lim teaches a display device comprising:
an emission element layer ML (Fig. 2A, paragraph 0076) disposed on a display area DA (see Fig. 1, paragraphs 0035-0036, 0058) of a substrate SUB1 (paragraph 0061) that has the display area DA and a non-display area NDA (paragraph 0059);
an opposing substrate SUB2 (paragraph 0061) facing the substrate SUB1;
a color filter layer – comprised color filters CF1, CF2, CF3 (Figs. 2A, 3, paragraph 0061) disposed on a surface of an opposing substrate SUB2 facing the substrate SUB1,
the color filter layer including a first color filter CF3, a second color filter CF1 and a third color filter CF2; and
a sealing member SL (shown in Fig. 3, paragraphs 0087, 0092) disposed between the substrate SUB1 and the opposing substrate SUB2 and coupling the substrate SUB1 with the opposing substrate SUB2, wherein
each of the first color filter CF3, the second color filter CF1 and the third color filter CF2 includes an opening – as a corresponding portion of SA (Fig. 3, such as OP1, OP2, OP3 in Annotated Fig. 3 turned upside down, paragraph 0090) in the non-display area NDA.
Annotated Fig. 3 (turned upside down)
PNG
media_image1.png
218
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Although Lim teaches that different colors reach different color filters (paragraph 0084), Lim does not explicitly teach that each color filter transmits a different color.
Kim teaches (paragraph 0121) that each filter transmits a different color.
Lim and Kim teach analogous arts directed to displays comprising light emitting devices and color filters, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing the application would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the Lim device in view of the Kim device, since they are from the same field of endeavor, and Kim created a successfully operated device.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing the application to have in the Lim display by each color filter transmitting a specific color (such as a color it receives from its color conversion layer, Lim, paragraph 0084) that is different from colors transmitted by two other filters, when it is desirable having a color display device.
In re Claim 2, Lim/Kim teaches the display device of Claim 1 as cited above.
Lim further teaches (Fig. 2A) that the first color filter CF3 is disposed on the
surface of the opposing substrate SUB2, the second color filter CF1 is disposed on a surface of the first color filter CF3, and the third color filter CF2 is disposed on a surface of the second color filter CF1.
In re Claim 3, Lim/Kim teaches the display device of Claim 1 as cited above.
Lim further teaches (Annotated Fig. 3, turned upside down to correspond Fig. 2A)
that the first color filter CF3 includes a first opening OP1, the second color filter CF1 includes a second opening OP2, and the third color filter CF2 includes a third opening OP3.
In re Claim 12, Lim/Kim teaches the display device of Claim 1 as cited above.
Lim teaches the display device, further comprising (Fig. 2A):
a low-refractive layer LR (made from silicon oxide, paragraph 0083, which is inherently a low-refractive material, see paragraph 0064 of Murata, US 2006/0055850, for inherency) disposed on a surface of the color filter layer;
a first capping layer PTL1 (paragraph 0061) disposed on a surface of the low-refractive layer LR;
a wavelength conversion layer QD1, QD2, QD3 (paragraph 0061) disposed on a surface of the first capping layer PTL1;
a second capping layer PTL2 (paragraph 0061) disposed on a surface of the wavelength conversion layer.
Lim does not teach a spacer layer disposed on a surface of the second capping layer.
Kim teaches (Fig. 6) a spacer layer 400 (paragraph 0070) on a second capping layer 460 (paragraph 0136).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing the application to modify the Lim/Kim display device of Claim 1 by substituting one second capping layer of Lim with a stack of a second capping layer and a spacer layer of Kim, when it is desired to have a spacer layer against external pressure (Kim, paragraph 0137),
In re Claim 13, Lim/Kim teaches the display device of Claim 12 as cited above.
Lim further teaches (Fig. 3 and Annotated Fig. 3 turned upside down) that the low-refractive layer LR covers one of the openings of the color filter layer.
In re Claim 14, Lim/Kim teaches the display device of Claim 1 as cited above, wherein the openings of the color filter layer are disposed between sides of the opposing substrate and the sealing member (e.g., as interpreted).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7, 10, 11, and 15, as interpreted, contain allowable subject matter.
Claims 5-6 depend on Claim 4, Claim 8 depends on Claim 7, and Claims 16-18 depend on Claim 15.
Reason for Identifying Allowable Subject Matter
Re Claim 4: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, do(es) not anticipate or render obvious such limitation of Claim 4 as interpreted as: “each of the first opening, the second opening and the third opening has a closed loop shape surrounding the display area”, in combination with all limitations of Claims 3 and 1, on which Claim 4 depends.
Re Claim 7: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, do(es) not anticipate or render obvious such limitation of Claim 7, as interpreted as: “the first opening, the second opening and the third opening do not overlap one another in a thickness direction of the display device”, in combination with all limitations of Claims 3 and 1, on which Claim 7 depends.
Re Claim 10: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, fail(s) to anticipate or render obvious such limitation of Claim 10, as interpreted, as: “each of the openings has a width in a range of about 10 µm to about 20 µm”, in combination with all limitations of Claim 1, on which Claim 10 depends.
Re Claim 11: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, fail(s) to anticipate or render obvious such limitation of Claim 11, as interpreted, as: “the openings are spaced apart from one another by about 10 µm to about 100 µm when viewed from top”, in combination with all limitations of Claim 1, on which Claim 11 depends.
Re Claim 15: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, fail(s) to anticipate or render obvious such limitation of Claim 15, as interpreted, as: the first opening, the second opening and the third opening each surround the display area and do not overlap one another in a thickness direction”, in combination with other limitations of Claim 15.
The prior arts of record, in addition to prior arts cited by the current Office Action above, also include Jang et al (US 2023/0209958), Kim et al. (US 2019/0155094), Ahn et al. (US 2022/0045134), Kim (US 2016/0020261), Lee et al. (US 8,698,993).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to GALINA G YUSHINA whose telephone number is 571-270-7440. The Examiner can normally be reached between 8 AM - 7 PM Pacific Time (Flexible).
Examiner interviews are available. 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, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 571-272-1670.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300; a fax phone number of Galina Yushina is 571-270-8440.
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 visit 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.
/GALINA G YUSHINA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2811, TC 2800,
United States Patent and Trademark Office
E-mail: galina.yushina@USPTO.gov
Phone: 571-270-7440
Date: 09/30/26
