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 .
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.
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(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0408476 A1~hereinafter “Choi”) in view of Park et al. (US. Pub: 2014/0159001~hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) a display device comprising: a pixel electrode (AE1-AE3) disposed on a substrate (110); a bank layer (150) covering edges of the pixel electrode and defining light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and a non-light emitting area (NLA); a light emitting layer (OL) disposed on the pixel electrode and the bank layer; a common electrode (CE) disposed on the light emitting layer; a capping layer (160) disposed on the common electrode; a counter substrate (310) facing the substrate; wherein the capping layer (160) comprises: a first capping layer (161) disposed on the common electrode (CE); and a second capping layer (163) disposed on the first capping layer and overlapping the light emitting areas (see fig. 7).
Choi does not expressly disclose an optical member disposed on the counter substrate.
However, it is well-known in the art to form a display device comprised of, in part, an optical member disposed on the counter substrate as evident by Park at least fig. 3 which discloses “an optical member (30; [0023]) disposed on the counter substrate (16; [0027])” in order to prevent reflection of external light ([0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Choi with the optical member of Park in order to prevent reflection of external light.
Regarding claim 2, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) the first capping layer (161) overlaps the light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and the non-light emitting area (NLA) and overlaps the second capping layer (162).
Regarding claim 3, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) a thickness of the first capping layer (161) is 350 to 450 Å ([0158]).
Regarding claim 4, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7; [0157]) a refractive index of each of the first capping layer and the second capping layer is 1.8 to 2.2.
Regarding claim 5, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7; [0164]) a thickness of the second capping layer (163) is 150 to 350 Å.
Regarding claim 6, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) the first capping layer (161) and the second capping layer (163) comprise different materials ([0157]; [0163]).
Regarding claim 7, Choi as modified by Park does not expressly disclose the sum of the thicknesses of the first capping layer and the second capping layer in each of the light emitting areas is 600 to 700 Å.
However, Choi discloses (in at least [0158]) “a thickness Thc1 of the first sub-capping layer 161 may be about 100 angstroms Å to about 1,000 Å, for example.” Choi further discloses ([0164]) “a thickness Thc3 of the second sub-capping layer 163 and the thickness Thc1 of the first sub-capping layer 161 may be different from each other. In some embodiments, the thickness Thc3 of the second sub-capping layer 163 may be smaller than the thickness Thc1 of the first sub-capping layer 161. In some embodiments, the thickness Thc3 of the second sub-capping layer 163 may have a value satisfying a relation of “Thc3<Thc1” in the range of about 10 Å to about 300 Å, for example.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider forming the sum of the thicknesses of the first capping layer and the second capping layer in of the light emitting areas of Choi in the range of 600 to 700 Å through routine experimentation and optimization.
Regarding claim 8, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) the first capping layer (161) is disposed under the second capping layer (163) or on the second capping layer.
Claim(s) 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0408476 A1~hereinafter “Choi”) in view of Park et al. (US. Pub: 2014/0159001~hereinafter “Park”) and further in view of Chung et al. (US. Pub: 2017/0330923 A1~hereinafter “Chung”).
Regarding claim 11, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) a display device comprising: a pixel electrode (AE1-AE3) disposed on a substrate (110); a bank layer (150) covering edges of the pixel electrode and defining light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and a non-light emitting area (NLA); a light emitting layer (OL) disposed on the pixel electrode and the bank layer; a common electrode (CE) disposed on the light emitting layer (OL); a capping layer (160) disposed on the common electrode; a counter substrate (310) facing the substrate; wherein the capping layer (160) comprises a first area overlapping the light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and a second area overlapping the non-light emitting area (NLA).
Choi does not expressly disclose an optical member disposed on the counter substrate, and a thickness of the first area is greater than a thickness of the second area.
However, it is well-known in the art to form a display device comprised of, in part, an optical member disposed on the counter substrate as evident by Park at least fig. 3 which discloses “an optical member (30; [0023]) disposed on the counter substrate (16; [0027])” in order to prevent reflection of external light ([0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Choi with the optical member of Park in order to prevent reflection of external light.
Park is silent about a thickness of the first area of the capping layer is greater than a thickness of the second area.
Chung discloses (in at least fig. 3) a capping layer (220) comprises a first area overlapping the light emitting areas (10a-10b) and a second area overlapping the non-light emitting area (20a-20b), wherein a thickness of the first area (10a-10b) is greater than a thickness of the second area (20a-20b) (see at least [0013]; [0025]) so that light transmittance and luminescent efficiency of the transparent display device may be improved ([0025]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Choi as modified by Park with the capping layer thickness structure of Chung so that light transmittance and luminescent efficiency of the transparent display device may be improved ([0025]).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Choi as modified by Park and Chung the thickness of the first area is 600 to 700 Å, and the thickness of the second area is 350 to 450 Å.
However, Chung discloses (in at least [0013]) “The capping structure may have a first thickness in the first pixel region and the second pixel region and may have a second thickness less than the first thickness in the first transmission region and the second transmission region.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider forming the thickness of the first area Choi in the range 600 to 700 Å, and the thickness of the second area is 350 to 450 Å through routine experimentation and optimization.
Regarding claim 14, Chung discloses (in at least fig. 3) the first area does not overlap the non-light emitting area (10a-10b), and the second area (20a-20b) does not overlap the light emitting areas.
Regarding claim 15, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7; [0157]; [0163]) the capping layer (160) comprises an inorganic insulating material or an organic insulating material.
Regarding claim 16, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7; [0157]) an upper surface of the capping layer (160) is flat and disposed parallel to the substrate.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0408476 A1~hereinafter “Choi”) in view of Chung et al. (US. Pub: 2017/0330923 A1~hereinafter “Chung”).
Regarding claim 17, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) a display device comprising: a pixel electrode (AE1-AE3) disposed on a substrate (110); a bank layer (150) covering edges of the pixel electrode and defining light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and a non-light emitting area (NLA); a light emitting layer (OL) disposed on the pixel electrode and the bank layer; a common electrode (CE) disposed on the light emitting layer; a capping layer (160) disposed on the common electrode; a thin-film encapsulation layer (170) disposed on the capping layer (160); and an optical member (30) disposed on the thin-film encapsulation layer (170), wherein the capping layer (160) comprises a first area overlapping the light emitting areas (LA1-LA3) and a second area overlapping the non-light emitting area (NLA).
Choi does not expressly a thickness of the first area is greater than a thickness of the second area.
Chung discloses (in at least fig. 3) a capping layer (220) comprises a first area overlapping the light emitting areas (10a-10b) and a second area overlapping the non-light emitting area (20a-20b), wherein a thickness of the first area (10a-10b) is greater than a thickness of the second area (20a-20b) (see at least [0013]; [0025]) so that light transmittance and luminescent efficiency of the transparent display device may be improved ([0025]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Choi as modified by Park with the capping layer thickness structure of Chung so that light transmittance and luminescent efficiency of the transparent display device may be improved ([0025]).
Regarding claim 18, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) the thin-film encapsulation layer (170) comprises a first encapsulating inorganic layer (171; [0058]) disposed on the capping layer ([0058]-[0059]), an encapsulating organic layer (173; [0058]-[0059]) disposed on the first encapsulating inorganic layer, and a second encapsulating inorganic layer (175; [0058]-[0059]) disposed on the encapsulating organic layer.
Regarding claim 19, Chung discloses (in at least fig. 3) the first area does not overlap the non-light emitting area (10a-10b), and the second area (20a-20b) does not overlap the light emitting areas.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0408476 A1~hereinafter “Choi”) in view of Park et al. (US. Pub: 2014/0159001~hereinafter “Park”) and further in view of Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2013/0112959 A1~ hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Choi as modified by Park does not expressly disclose the optical member comprises: a base layer; a colorant layer disposed on the base layer; and an adhesive layer disposed on the colorant layer; and the colorant layer transmits light in a wavelength band of 440 to 490 nm, a wavelength band of 510 to 580 nm, and a wavelength band of 610 to 660 nm and absorbs light in other wavelength bands.
However, Park discloses (in at least fig. 3) a display device comprised of, in part, an optical member (30; [0023]) disposed on the counter substrate (16; [0027]) in order to prevent reflection of external light ([0020]).
Kim discloses (in at least fig. 3; [0036])) a luminance-enhancing polarizing plate for an organic light-emitting element (title) comprised of, in a base layer; a colorant layer disposed on the base layer; and an adhesive layer disposed on the colorant layer; and the colorant layer transmits light in a wavelength band of 440 to 490 nm, a wavelength band of 510 to 580 nm, and a wavelength band of 610 to 660 nm and absorbs light in other wavelength bands in order to improve the brightness of the OLED device (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the optical member of Choi as modified by Park with the optical member of Kim in order to improve the brightness of the OLED device (abstract). Furthermore, it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US. Pub: 2021/0408476 A1~hereinafter “Choi”) in view of Chung et al. (US. Pub: 2017/0330923 A1~hereinafter “Chung”) and further in view of Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2013/0112959 A1~ hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 20, Choi as modified by Chung does not expressly disclose the optical member comprises: a base layer; a colorant layer disposed on the base layer; and an adhesive layer disposed on the colorant layer, wherein the colorant layer transmits light in a wavelength band of 440 to 490 nm, a wavelength band of 510 to 580 nm and a wavelength band of 610 to 660 nm and absorbs light in other wavelength bands.
However, Choi discloses (in at least fig. 7) an optical member (30) disposed on the thin-film encapsulation layer (170).
Kim discloses (in at least fig. 3; [0036])) a luminance-enhancing polarizing plate for an organic light-emitting element (title) comprised of, in a base layer; a colorant layer disposed on the base layer; and an adhesive layer disposed on the colorant layer; and the colorant layer transmits light in a wavelength band of 440 to 490 nm, a wavelength band of 510 to 580 nm, and a wavelength band of 610 to 660 nm and absorbs light in other wavelength bands in order to improve the brightness of the OLED device (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the optical member of Choi as modified by Chung with the optical member of Kim in order to improve the brightness of the OLED device (abstract). Furthermore, it has been held that simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results is obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights