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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s IDS submitted on 6/24/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has/have been considered by the examiner and made of record.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 13, lines 3 and 4 of the final paragraph “plurality” is missing an “i” (pluralty).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You, US 20210276781 A1, hereafter You in view of Cha et al., US 20250194348 A1, hereafter Cha.
Regarding claim 1, You discloses the following limitations:
An organic light-emitting diode (OLED) structure with a U-shaped anode, comprising:
a substrate (You, Figure 2, base substrate BS), wherein the substrate comprises a pixel area and an external circuit area (You, Figure 1, display device DD, contains a display area DA and a non display area NDA, where the NDA can include pad electrodes lines [0045]);
a plurality of OLEDs disposed in the pixel area on the substrate (You, Figure 1, in display area DD, first pixel area PX1, a second pixel area PX2, and a third pixel area PX3, and [0090] which discloses the display as OLED) wherein each of the plurality of OLEDs comprises a first anode (You, Figure 2, first, pixel protection layers PL_R, PL_G, and PL_B, and [0058] which discloses metals for the pixel protection layers), a second anode (You, Figure 2, first conductive layer CL1_R, CL1_G, or CL1_B), a light-emitting layer (You, Figure 2, first light emitting layer EML1, second light emitting layer EML2, third light emitting layer EML3) and a cathode (You, Figure 2, common electrode CTE) stacked in sequence from bottom to top (Shown, You, Figure 2), material of the first anode is different from material of the second anode (You, [0058] discloses titanium nitride for PL_R, PL_G, and PL_B (first anode), and [0068] discloses ITO for CL1_R, CL1_G, or CL1_B (second anode), and the second anode has a U-shape profile (You, Figure 2, CL1_G has a u-shape), and an opening of the U-shape profile faces the light-emitting layer (You, Figure 2, CL1-G faces EML2); and
a first metal layer disposed in the external circuit area on the substrate (You, Figure 3, first pad protection layer PL1_P (first metal layer), disclosed as in the PDA area [0059], which also made from the same material as PL_R, PL_G, and PL_B (first anode)), wherein a top surface of the first metal layer is aligned with a top surface of the first anode (You Figure 2 and 3 and [0059] which discloses that these layer are made by the same process and material as the first anode, PL_R, PL_G, and PL_B).
You discloses a green pixel with a U-shaped anode, but the other two pixels have L-shaped anodes, therefore, You fails to disclose the following:
a plurality of second anodes has a U-shape profile
Cha discloses the following limitation:
each of the plurality of second anodes has a U-shape profile (Cha, Figure 8, discloses first organic light-emitting diode OLED1, a second organic light-emitting diode OLED2, and a third organic light-emitting diode OLED3, where each OLED has a U-shaped anode)
You discloses an OLED device that incudes everything claimed except it only uses a U-shaped anode for one of the OLED pixels, the other two are L-shaped. Cha discloses an OLED display device where all of the OLED pixels have a U-shape anode. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that U-shaped and L-shaped anodes are known equivalent for providing an anode electrode in a pixel of an OLED device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute one known element (a U-shaped anode) for another known equivalent element (an L-shaped electrode) resulting in the predictable result of a useful anode electrode in an OLED device.
Regarding claim 2, You discloses the following limitations:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 1, further comprising a second metal layer disposed on the first metal layer, and wherein the second metal layer is U-shaped (You, Figure 2, third conductive layer CL3_R, CL3_G, or CL3_B).
Regarding claim 3, You discloses the following limitations:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 2, wherein material of the second metal layer is the same as material of the second anode (You, [0068] discloses ITO for the third conductive layer CL3_R, CL3_G, or CL3_B (second metal layer), and [0068] discloses ITO for CL1_R, CL1_G, or CL1_B (second anode)).
Regarding claim 4, You discloses the following limitations:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 2, wherein material of the second metal layer and material of the second anode respectively comprise titanium, titanium nitride, tantalum, tantalum nitride, tungsten, nickel, molybdenum, gold, palladium, aluminum, silver, calcium, indium, lithium, magnesium or indium tin oxide (ITO) (You, [0068] discloses ITO for the third conductive layer CL3_R, CL3_G, or CL3_B (second metal layer), and [0068] discloses ITO for CL1_R, CL1_G, or CL1_B (second anode)).
Regarding claim 5, You discloses the following limitations:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 1, wherein material of the first metal layer is the same as material of the first anode (You, Figure 3, first pad protection layer PL1_P (first metal layer), disclosed as in the PDA area [0059], which also made from the same material as PL_R, PL_G, and PL_B (first anode)).
Regarding claim 11, You fails to specifically discloses the following limitation:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 1, further comprising a bumping or a wire bonding to electrically connect the second metal layer.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that an electrical connection to the second metal layer (part of the anode) is necessary for the OLED device to function, and emit light, as intended. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to electrically connect the necessary electrical signals to the OLED device pads using a known technique such as bumping or wire bonding to make the device operable as an OLED display.
Regarding claim 12, You discloses the following limitations:
The OLED structure with a U-shaped anode of claim 1, wherein the light-emitting layer emits light toward the cathode (You, Figure 2, first light emitting layer EML1, second light emitting layer EML2, third light emitting layer EML3 all emit towards common electrode CTE).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 are 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.
Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 1: If amended to include all of the limitations of claim 1, claim 6 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the closest prior art does not appear to disclose, alone or in combination, the limitations of an OLED display device where there are a plurality of dummy metal blocks on the substrate between the pixel area and the external circuit area. The closest prior art of record is You, US 20240276781 A1. You discloses the limitations of claim 1, but fails to disclose a plurality of blocks between the pixel area and the external circuit area. The other prior art of record fails to remedy this deficiency.
Claims 7-10 have been included because they respectively depend, directly or indirectly, from claim 6. Therefore, claims 7-10 incorporate the limitations of claim 6, and would be allowable if claim 6 is amended to include the limitations of claim 1.
Claims 13-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Independent claim 13 is allowable because the closest prior art does not appear to disclose, alone or in combination, the limitations
Regarding independent claim 13, the prior art does not appear to disclose, alone or in combination, a method of making an OLED display device including the step of forming a plurality of dummy metal blocks on the substrate between the pixel area and the external circuit area. The closest prior art of record is You, US 20240276781 A1. You discloses fabricating a similar OLED device, but fails to disclose forming a plurality of blocks between the pixel area and the external circuit area. The other prior art of record fails to remedy this deficiency.
Dependent claims 14-20, are allowable because they respectively depend, directly or indirectly, from the allowable claim 13 of the application at hand. Therefore, the dependent claims in question incorporate the allowable limitations of the claims from which they depend.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baek, US US-20140353630-A1, discloses an OLED display device with u shaped anodes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA J FLECK whose telephone number is (703)756-1253. The examiner can normally be reached 10-2 ET.
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, William (Blake) Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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.
/LINDA J. FLECK/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/William B Partridge/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights