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 .
IDS
The IDS document(s) filed on 06/11/2024, 05/06/2025, and 04/09/2026 have been considered. Copies of the PTO-1449 documents are herewith enclosed with this office action.
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 –
(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.
(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.
Claims 1, 3-4 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trisnadi et al. (US 2021/0311310 A1), hereafter “Trisnadi”.
As to claim 1, Trisnadi teaches a display panel comprising:
a substrate (1093, Fig. 9E/Fig. 3B, ⁋ [0184]);
a first subpixel array (1030A) comprising first subpixels (1044, Fig. 11C, ⁋⁋ [0204]-[0205]) arranged in a first region (see annotated Fig. 9E) on the substrate, and the first subpixel array forms a first primary color image (⁋ [0205] “where the component colors are red, green, and blue, each group may have at least one red subpixel, at least one green subpixel, in at least one blue subpixel”);
a second subpixel array (1030B) comprising second subpixels arranged in a second region (see annotated Fig. 9E) on the substrate, and the second subpixel array forms a second primary color image (⁋ [0205] “where the component colors are red, green, and blue, each group may have at least one red subpixel, at least one green subpixel, in at least one blue subpixel”); and
a third subpixel array (1030C) comprising third subpixels arranged in a third region (see annotated Fig. 9E) on the substrate, and the third subpixel array forms a third primary color image (⁋ [0205] “where the component colors are red, green, and blue, each group may have at least one red subpixel, at least one green subpixel, in at least one blue subpixel”),
wherein the first region, the second region, and the third region are configured to be spatially separated and provided side by side on a same (Fig. 9E/Fig. 32B) surface of the substrate, and
wherein the first subpixels are grouped by a first primary color and are patterned as the first subpixel array in the first region, the second subpixels are grouped by a second primary color and are patterned as the second subpixel array in the second region, and the third subpixels are grouped by a third primary color and patterned as the third subpixel array in the third region (⁋ [0205], “the light emitters 1044 may be considered subpixels and may be arranged in groups, with each group having at least one light emitter configured to emit light of each component color.”.
As to claim 3, Trisnadi teaches the display panel of claim 1, wherein a first interval between the first subpixel array and the second subpixel array and a second interval between the second subpixel array and the third subpixel array are greater than pitches of the first subpixels, the second subpixels, and the third subpixels (see Fig. 32B).
As to claim 4, Trisnadi teaches The display panel of claim 1, wherein each of the first subpixels includes a first primary color light-emitting element, wherein each of the second subpixels includes a second primary color light-emitting element, and wherein each of the third subpixels includes a third primary color light-emitting element (⁋ [0204], “the micro-displays 1030a, 1030b, 1030c may each include arrays of nanowire LED light emitters for forming images”; ⁋ [0205], “different ones of the light emitters 1044 may be configured to emit light of different colors”).
As to claim 15, Trisnadi teaches a display device comprising: the display panel of claim 1; and
a combining optical system (Fig. 32B, ⁋ [0311]) configured to combine a first light corresponding to the first primary color image output from the first subpixel array of the display panel, a second light corresponding to the second primary color image output from the second subpixel array of the display panel, and a third light corresponding to the third primary color image output from the third subpixel array of the display panel (⁋ [0311], “the micro-displays 1030a-1030c may each route light via a dedicated associated one of the projection optics 1070a-1070c to the eyepiece 1020”.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trisnadi.
As to claim 2, Trisnadi teaches the display panel of claim 1, wherein a first interval between the first subpixel array and the second subpixel array and a second interval between the second subpixel array and the third subpixel array are same as pitches of the first subpixels, the second subpixels, and the third subpixels.
On the other hand, Examiner notes the Applicant has not specified a criticality to the dimensions.
If the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device: In re Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 220 USPQ 777.
Claims 5-7, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trisnadi, and further in view of Maegawa et al. (US 2021/0183827 A1), hereafter “Maegawa”.
As to claim 5, Trisnadi teaches the display panel of claim 4, teaches wherein the first primary color light-emitting element, the second primary color light-emitting element, and the third primary color light-emitting element are red, green, and blue LEDs (⁋ [0205]) but fails to teach them as micro-LEDS.
Maegawa teaches a similar device wherein a micro-LED is utilized to emit the colors, blue, red, and green (⁋ [0031).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize a micro LED as taught by Maegawa in place of the nanowire LED of Trisnadi, because a micro-LED is a well-known alternative.
As to claim 6, Trisnadi teaches the display panel of claim 4, but fails to teach wherein the first primary color light-emitting element includes a first excitation light micro-LED element and a first primary color conversion layer provided on the first excitation light micro-LED element, wherein the first primary color conversion layer is configured to absorb a first excitation light emitted from the first excitation light micro-LED element and emit light of the first primary color, and
wherein the second primary color light-emitting element includes a second excitation light micro-LED element and a second primary color conversion layer provided on the second excitation light micro-LED element, wherein the second primary color conversion layer is configured to absorb a second excitation light emitted from the second excitation light micro-LED element and emit light of the second primary color.
Maegawa teaches a similar device wherein a light-emitting element includes a micro- LED element (202+203, Fig. 1, ⁋ [0031]) and a color conversion unit (22+23, ⁋⁋ [0041]-[0042]) on the micro-LED element, wherein the conversion unit converts the wavelength of the blue light B emitted from the micro LED element to generate red or green light, and emits the generated red light toward the outside of the image display device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the conversion unit and micro-LED as taught by Maegawa within the device of Trisnadi as it was a well-known technique to emit a primary color for the purpose of displaying an image.
As to claim 7, Trisnadi in view of Megawa teaches the display panel of claim 6, wherein the first excitation light is blue light, wherein the first primary color conversion layer includes first quantum dots (⁋ [103]) configured to absorb the blue light and emit red light (⁋ [0022]), and wherein the second primary color conversion layer includes second quantum dots configured to absorb the blue light and emit green light (⁋ [0023]).
As to claim 12, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa teach the display panel of claim 6, Maegawa further teaches wherein the first primary color light-emitting element further includes a first dichroic mirror layer (25, Fig. 3+Fig. 4, ⁋ [0045]) provided on the first primary color conversion layer and reflects the first excitation light passing through the first primary color conversion layer to the first primary color conversion layer (⁋⁋ [0045]-[0048], Fig. 3 shows 25 reflecting converted light back to micro-LED).
As to claim 14, Trisnadi teaches the display panel of claim 4, but fails to teach wherein reflective partitions are provided between the first primary color light-emitting element, the second primary color light-emitting element, and the third primary color light-emitting element.
Maegawa teaches a similar device wherein a light-emitting element includes light shielding members (24, Fig. 1, ⁋ [0043]) in between 3 light-emitting elements which reflects light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the partitions as taught by Maegawa within the device of Trisnadi to function as a reflecting material in order to improve the light extraction efficiency of the sub pixels (⁋ [0044]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trisnadi, and further in view of Ahmed et al. (US 2020/0411489 A1), hereafter “Ahmed”.
As to claim 8, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa teach the display panel of claim 7, but fail to teach wherein the first primary color conversion layer includes a plurality of first quantum dot layers with different first quantum dot densities.
Ahmed teaches a device in the same field of endeavor (⁋ [0003]) utilizing a plurality of first quantum dot layers (Fig. 7, ⁋ [0083]) with different quantum dot densities (⁋ [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the quantum dot densities as taught by Ahmed into the device of Trisnadi and Maegawa for the purpose the fabrication of a low power display (⁋ [0085]).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trisnadi, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2019/0074324 A1), hereafter “Kim”.
As to claim 10, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa teach the display panel of claim 6, but fail to teach wherein a third excitation light is ultraviolet light, and
wherein the third primary color light-emitting element includes an ultraviolet light micro-LED element and a third primary color conversion layer provided on the ultraviolet light micro-LED element, wherein the third primary color conversion layer is configured to absorb ultraviolet light emitted from the ultraviolet light micro-LED element and emit blue light.
Kim teaches a similar device wherein an excitation light may be ultraviolet (⁋ [0028]) and wherein light-emitting element includes a micro- LED element (C1-C3, Fig. 2, ⁋ [0026]) and a wavelength conversion pattern including quantum dots (170R/170G/170B, ⁋ [0035]) on the micro-LED element, wherein the wavelength conversion pattern absorbs light from the micro-LED (⁋⁋ [0035]-[0039]) and emit blue light (⁋ [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the ultraviolet light and conversion structure as taught by Kim within the device of Trisnadi and Maegawa because the light emission may have a high color purity, increased luminous efficiency and improved color reproducibility may be obtained.
As to claim 11, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa and Kim teach the display panel of claim 10, Kim further teaches wherein the third primary color conversion layer includes third quantum dots configured to absorb the ultraviolet light and emit the blue light (see claim 10).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trisnadi, and further in view of Van Gorkom et al. (US 2010/0296312 A1), hereafter “Van Gorkom”.
As to claim 13, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa teach the display panel of claim 12, but fail to teach wherein the first primary color light-emitting element further includes a second dichroic mirror layer provided between the first excitation light micro-LED element and the first primary color conversion layer, wherein the first primary color light-emitting element is configured to reflect light of the first primary color converted by the first primary color conversion layer and directed toward the first excitation light micro-LED element to the first primary color conversion layer.
Van Gorkom teaches a device in a similar field of endeavor wherein a dichroic mirror (107 ⁋ [0032]) is positioned above an LED and is capable of reflecting a primary color from the LED.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the teaching of the dichroic mirror as taught by Van Gorkom into the device of Trisnadi and Maegawa because a high efficiency system is realized because little or no generated light is absorbed and the generated light does not have to travel through a fluorescent material layer and thus has a high chance to go in the desired direction (⁋ [0017]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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:
As to claim 9, Trisnadi in view of Maegawa and Ahmed are the closest prior arts but fail to teach wherein among the plurality of first quantum dot layers, a first quantum dot density of a lower layer is less than a first quantum dot density of an upper layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARNELL HUNTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1796. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30pm.
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, 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.
/CARNELL HUNTER III/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights