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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species C, claims 1-19, in the reply filed on 7/9/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. The IDS has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first through fourth subpixels of both the first and second pixel disposed at both sides of either the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area, as found in claim 4, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The language does not distinguish between subpixels of the first and second pixel (compare this to claim 5) and so claim 4 indicates that all subpixels must be disposed at one side or the other, as claimed. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 4-10 and 18-19 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.
(Re Claim 4) As the scenario where all subpixels are disposed at both sides of either the first non-emission area or second non-emission is not shown, it is unclear what “disposed at one side” requires.
During examination,
“wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at one side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area, and wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area”
was read as
“wherein first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel of the first pixel are disposed at one side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area, and wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel of the second pixel are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area, wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel, and the fourth subpixel emit light of respective colors different from one another”.
Claims 5-10 inherit this rejection for indefiniteness.
(Re Claims 18-19) As the spaced distances are described in specification as being between subpixels of different pixels, but only a first and second pixel are described, it is unclear if the spaced distances in claims 18-19 refer to the subpixels of the first and second pixels alone or if this refers to spaced distances between the subpixels of the first or second pixel and other unidentified pixels that may be in the display device.
During examination, a spaced distance was understood to be a distance as described in ¶66 of the instant, and between subpixels of different pixels.
Rejection 1/2
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 1-2, 11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104).
(Re Claim 1) Sato teaches transparent display device comprising:a plurality of first signal lines (The pairs of 140 running through the center of the squares; Fig. 19) extended in a first direction and disposed to be spaced apart from one another;a plurality of second signal lines (142; Fig. 19) extended in a second direction and disposed to be spaced apart from one another, the second direction transverse to the first direction;a transmissive area (148; Fig. 19) provided between two first signal lines adjacent to each other and two second signal lines adjacent to each other; anda first pixel (Fig. 19 markup below) and a second pixel (Fig. 19 markup) disposed based on an overlapping area where the first signal line and the second signal line cross each other.
However, Sato has not been explicitly shown to teach the first pixel has a triangular shape, and the second pixel has a triangular shape symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line and the second signal line, and
wherein at least one side oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees.
Hayashi teaches that sub-pixels may have a quadrilateral or a triangular shape (¶127), and demonstrates both configurations (Figs. 31 and 33).
Kim teaches forming sub-pixels in the form of right triangles, in both an upward and downward pointing arrangement (Fig. 1).
As the two sub-pixel geometries were art-recognized alternatives at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the square sub-pixels of Sato as triangular sub-pixels, as taught by Hayashi. Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the sub-pixels of the first and second pixel with the right triangle sub-pixel geometry taught by Kim, and do so in order to keep two sides of each sub-pixel aligned with the first and second signal lines, similar to the unmodified configuration, and avoiding wire rerouting through the transmissive area 148 of Sato.
After having done so, modified Sato teaches the first pixel has a triangular shape, and the second pixel has a triangular shape symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line and the second signal line (Fig. 19 markup), wherein at least one side (the rightmost side) oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (due to forming the first and second pixels as triangles according to Kim).
PNG
media_image1.png
596
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
596
517
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(Re Claim 2) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, whereineach of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first side parallel with the first signal line, and second and third sides oriented toward the transmissive area (Fig. 19 markup)
However, modified Sato does not explicitly teach each of the second and third sides forms 60° with the first side.
That said, Kim does teach a side of a sub-pixel forming an angle close to 60° (SP4; Fig. 1).
As the angle formed between the second and third sides of the first and second pixels and the first signal line of modified Sato, and the angle formed as claimed, are close enough for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to find no noticeable difference in the observed light emission of the first and second pixels, there exists a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Scherl, 156 F.2d 72, 74-75, 70 USPQ 204, 205-206 (CCPA 1946)
(Re Claim 11) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, whereinthe first signal line includes a first gate line (140 closest to the first pixel; Fig. 19 markup, ¶36) for supplying a gate signal to a plurality of subpixels included in the first pixel, and a second gate line (140 closest to the second pixel; Fig. 19 markup, ¶36) for supplying a gate signal to a plurality of subpixels included in the second pixel, and
wherein the second signal line includes at least one of a reference line, a first power line, a second power line, or a data line (¶37).
(Re Claim 14) Sato teaches transparent display device comprising:a plurality of first signal lines (the pairs of 140 running through the center of the squares; Fig. 19) extended in a first direction and disposed to be spaced apart from one another;
a plurality of second signal lines (142; Fig. 19) extended in a second direction and disposed to be spaced apart from one another, the second direction transverse to the first direction;
a transmissive area (148; Fig. 19) provided between two first signal lines adjacent to each other and two second signal lines adjacent to each other; and
a first pixel (Fig. 19 markup below) and a second pixel (Fig. 19 markup) disposed based on an overlapping area where the first signal line and the second signal line cross each other, and disposed to be symmetrical with each other by interposing one of the first signal line or the second signal line (Fig. 19).
However, Sato has not been explicitly shown to teach at least one side oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees.
Hayashi teaches that sub-pixels may have a quadrilateral or a triangular shape (¶127), and demonstrates both configurations (Figs. 31 and 33).
Kim teaches forming sub-pixels in the form of right triangles, in both an upward and downward pointing arrangement (Fig. 1).
As the two sub-pixel geometries were art-recognized alternatives at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the square sub-pixels of Sato as triangular sub-pixels, as taught by Hayashi. Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the sub-pixels of the first and second pixel with the right triangle sub-pixel geometry taught by Kim, and do so in order to keep two sides of each sub-pixel aligned with the first and second signal lines, similar to the unmodified configuration, and avoiding wire rerouting through the transmissive area 148 of Sato.
After having done so, modified Sato teaches the first pixel has a triangular shape, and the second pixel has a triangular shape symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line and the second signal line (Fig. 19 markup), wherein at least one side (the rightmost side) oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (due to forming the first and second pixels as triangles according to Kim).
PNG
media_image2.png
596
517
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
596
550
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Re Claim 15) Modified Sato teaches the display device of claim 14, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel correspond to one transmissive area (corresponding to 148; Fig. 19).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takatori (US 2010/0013853).
(Re Claim 12) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, whereineach of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first circuit area provided with at least one transistor and a second circuit area provided with at least one capacitor (Each of the subpixels 146 of the first and second pixels contains a first circuit area with a transistor, and a second circuit area with a capacitor; the first and second circuit areas are the areas of the transistor and capacitor, respectively; ¶34).
However, modified Sato does not explicitly teach each of the first circuit area and the second circuit area does not overlap each of the first signal line and the second signal line.
Takatori teaches a transistor (15c; Fig. 9) of a pixel does not overlap signal lines, and a capacitor (19; Fig. 10) of a pixel does not overlap signal lines.
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to arrange the first circuit area and second circuit area of modified Sato, as taught by Takatori, so as to avoid overlap with each of the first signal line and second signal line of modified Sato, in order to avoid parasitic capacitances and potential shorts during the manufacturing process.
(Re Claim 13) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 12 whereinthe second circuit area is disposed between the first circuit area and the transmissive area (If the first and second circuit areas are disposed within each of the subpixels of the first and second pixel, and the transmissive area 148 surrounds the first and second pixels, then the second circuit area can always be found to be between the first circuit area and the transmissive area; Fig. 19 markup).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (US 2021/0335920).
(Re Claim 18) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, but has not been explicitly shown to teach first spaced distances in the first direction are uniform in subpixels emitting light of a same color.
Hong shows spacing pixels in a such that they are an equal distance from each other in either a first direction (DR1; Fig. 12) or a second direction (DR2; Fig. 12, ¶180).
Sato also shows forming a uniform grid pattern for the arrangement of pixels (Fig. 19).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the pixels of modified Sato such that first spaced distances in the first direction are uniform in subpixels emitting light of a same color, in view of the equal spacing of Hong and the grid pattern of Sato, to cause optical effects – such as absorption, reflection, or diffraction – due to the pixel spacing, and therefore subpixel spacing, to be the same along either the first or second direction.
(Re Claim 19) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, but has not been explicitly shown to teach a difference between a first spaced distance in the first direction and a second spaced distance in the second direction is less than 10% of the first spaced distance in subpixels emitting light of a same color.
Hong shows spacing pixels in a such that they are an equal distance from each other in either a first direction (DR1; Fig. 12) or a second direction (DR2; Fig. 12, ¶180).
Sato also shows forming a uniform grid pattern for the arrangement of pixels (Fig. 19).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the pixels of modified Sato such that a difference between a first spaced distance in the first direction and a second spaced distance in the second direction is less than 10% of the first spaced distance in subpixels emitting light of a same color, in view of the equal spacing of Hong and the grid pattern of Sato, to cause optical effects – such as absorption, reflection, or diffraction – due to the pixel spacing, and therefore subpixel spacing, to be the same along either the first or second direction.
Rejection 2/2
Claims 1-3, 11, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104).
(Re Claim 1) Sato teaches a transparent display device comprising: a plurality of first signal lines (the pairs of 140 running through the center of the squares; Fig. 19) extended in a first direction (left to right) and disposed to be spaced apart from one another; a plurality of second signal lines (142; Fig. 19) extended in a second direction (top to bottom) and disposed to be spaced apart from one another, the second direction transverse to the first direction (Fig. 19); a transmissive area (148; Fig. 19) provided between two first signal lines adjacent to each other and two second signal lines adjacent to each other (Fig. 19); and a first pixel and a second pixel (Fig. 19 markup) disposed based on an overlapping area where the first signal line and the second signal line cross each other (Fig. 19).
Sato has not been explicitly shown to teach the first pixel has a triangular shape, and the second pixel has a triangular shape symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line or the second signal line, and wherein at least one side oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees.
Hayashi teaches that sub-pixels may have a quadrilateral or a triangular shape (¶127), and demonstrates both configurations (Figs. 31 and 33).
Kim teaches forming sub-pixels in the form of right triangles, in both an upward and downward pointing arrangement (Fig. 1).
As the two sub-pixel geometries were art-recognized alternatives at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the square sub-pixels of Sato as triangular sub-pixels, as taught by Hayashi. Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the sub-pixels of the first and second pixel with the right triangle sub-pixel geometry taught by Kim, and do so in order to keep two sides of each sub-pixel aligned with the first and second signal lines, similar to the unmodified configuration, and avoiding wire rerouting through the transmissive area 148 of Sato.
After having done so, modified Sato teaches the first pixel (the two portions of the pixel are shown in bold outline) has a triangular shape (the pixel portion at the first signal line), and the second pixel (the two portions of the pixel are shown in bold outline) has a triangular shape (the pixel portion at the first signal line) symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line and the second signal line (Fig. 19 markup), wherein at least one side (the rightmost side) oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (due to forming the first and second subpixels as triangles according to Kim).
Furthermore, while Sato only shows a small region of the display in Fig. 19, a PHOSITA would recognize that the region is repeated in an array and will therefore include the second pixel as shown in the mark up figure below.
PNG
media_image3.png
818
664
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Re Claim 2) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first side (respectively the bottommost and topmost side) parallel with the first signal line, and second (rightmost sides touching the first sides) and third sides (leftmost sides touching the first sides) oriented toward the transmissive area.
However, modified Sato does not explicitly teach each of the second and third sides forms 60° with the first side.
That said, Kim does teach a side of a sub-pixel forming an angle close to 60° (SP4; Fig. 1).
As the angle formed between the second and third sides of the first and second pixels and the first signal line of modified Sato, and the angle formed as claimed, are close enough for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to find no noticeable difference in the observed light emission of the first and second pixels, there exists a prima facie case of obviousness. See In re Scherl, 156 F.2d 72, 74-75, 70 USPQ 204, 205-206 (CCPA 1946)
(Re Claim 3) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first subpixel (R; Fig. 19) emitting light of a first color (red), a second subpixel (G; Fig. 19) emitting light of a second color (green), a third subpixel (B; Fig. 19) emitting light of a third color (blue), and a fourth subpixel (W; Fig. 19) emitting light of a fourth color (white).
(Re Claim 11) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, whereinthe first signal line includes a first gate line (140 closest to the first pixel; Fig. 19 markup, ¶36) for supplying a gate signal to a plurality of subpixels included in the first pixel, and a second gate line (140 closest to the second pixel; Fig. 19 markup, ¶36) for supplying a gate signal to a plurality of subpixels included in the second pixel, and
wherein the second signal line includes at least one of a reference line, a first power line, a second power line, or a data line (¶37).
(Re Claim 14) Sato teaches a transparent display device comprising: a plurality of first signal lines (the pairs of 140 running through the center of the squares; Fig. 19) extended in a first direction (left to right) and disposed to be spaced apart from one another; a plurality of second signal lines (142; Fig. 19) extended in a second direction (top to bottom) and disposed to be spaced apart from one another, the second direction transverse to the first direction (Fig. 19); a transmissive area (148; Fig. 19) provided between two first signal lines adjacent to each other and two second signal lines adjacent to each other (Fig. 19); and a first pixel and a second pixel (Fig. 19 markup) disposed based on an overlapping area where the first signal line and the second signal line cross each other (Fig. 19).
Sato has not been explicitly shown to teach at least one side oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees.
Hayashi teaches that sub-pixels may have a quadrilateral or a triangular shape (¶127), and demonstrates both configurations (Figs. 31 and 33).
Kim teaches forming sub-pixels in the form of right triangles, in both an upward and downward pointing arrangement (Fig. 1).
As the two sub-pixel geometries were art-recognized alternatives at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to form the square sub-pixels of Sato as triangular sub-pixels, as taught by Hayashi. Furthermore, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the sub-pixels of the first and second pixel with the right triangle sub-pixel geometry taught by Kim, and do so in order to keep two sides of each sub-pixel aligned with the first and second signal lines, similar to the unmodified configuration, and avoiding wire rerouting through the transmissive area 148 of Sato.
After having done so, modified Sato teaches the first pixel (the two portions of the pixel are shown in bold outline) has a triangular shape (the pixel portion at the first signal line), and the second pixel (the two portions of the pixel are shown in bold outline) has a triangular shape (the pixel portion at the first signal line) symmetrical with the first pixel by interposing one of the first signal line and the second signal line (Fig. 19 markup), wherein at least one side (the rightmost side) oriented toward the transmissive area in each of the first pixel and the second pixel has an inclination with respect to the first signal line and the second signal line, the inclination being greater than 0 degrees and less than 90 degrees (due to forming the first and second subpixels as triangles according to Kim).
Furthermore, while Sato only shows a small region of the display in Fig. 19, a PHOSITA would recognize that the region is repeated in an array and will therefore include the second pixel as shown in the mark up figure below.
PNG
media_image3.png
818
664
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Re Claim 15) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel correspond to one transmissive area (148; Fig. 19).
(Re Claim 16) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes four subpixels (Fig. 19 markup), and wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first subpixel (R; Fig. 19) emitting light of a first color (red), a second subpixel (G; Fig. 19) emitting light of a second color (green), a third subpixel (B; Fig. 19) emitting light of a third color (blue), and a fourth subpixel (W; Fig. 19) emitting light of a fourth color (white).
Claims 4-5, 8, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104) as respectively applied to claims 3 and 16 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0250240).
(Re Claim 4) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 3, but has not been explicitly shown to teach the display further comprising at least one of a first non-emission area provided along the first signal line and a second non-emission area provided along the second signal line, wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at one side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area, and wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area or the second non-emission area.
Lee teaches providing a first non-emission area (coextensive with where 140 overlaps with a first signal line 220; Fig. 14) along a first signal line (220; Fig. 14) and a second non-emission area (coextensive with where 140 overlaps with the second signal line 220+230; Fig. 14) provide along a second signal line (220+230; Fig. 14).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to dispose a light shielding layer 140 provided along both the first signal line and second signal line of modified Sato, thereby forming corresponding first and second non-emissions provided along the first and second signal lines of modified Sato, as taught by Lee, to protect transistors from ambient light (Lee: ¶51).
This results in modified Sato teaching the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, disposed at one side of the first non-emission area (the top side; Fig. 19 markup) or the second non-emission area, and the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area (the bottom side of the first non-emission area) or the second non-emission area (see also the 112(b) rejection).
(Re Claim 5) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 4, wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel of the first pixel are disposed at one side of the first non-emission area (the top side; Fig. 19 markup) or the second non-emission area, and wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel of the second pixel are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area (the bottom side of the first non-emission area) or the second non-emission area.
(Re Claim 8) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 4, wherein each of the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel include an emission area comprised of a first sub-emission area (the left part of each subpixel; Fig. 19; a first sub-emission area may be any part of the subpixel) and a second sub-emission area (the right part of each subpixel; Fig. 19; the second sub-emission area may be any part of the subpixel).
(Re Claim 17) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 16, but has not been explicitly shown to teach the display further comprising a first non-emission area provided along the first signal line, wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel in the first pixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at one side of the first non-emission area, and wherein the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel in the second pixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area.
Lee teaches providing a first non-emission area (coextensive with where 140 overlaps with a first signal line 220; Fig. 14) along a first signal line (220; Fig. 14) and a second non-emission area (coextensive with where 140 overlaps with the second signal line 220+230; Fig. 14) provide along a second signal line (220+230; Fig. 14).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to dispose a light shielding layer 140 provided along both the first signal line and second signal line of modified Sato, thereby forming corresponding first and second non-emissions provided along the first and second signal lines of modified Sato, as taught by Lee, to protect transistors from ambient light (Lee: ¶51).
This results in modified Sato teaching the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, disposed at one side of the first non-emission area (the top side; Fig. 19 markup) or the second non-emission area, and the first subpixel, the second subpixel, the third subpixel and the fourth subpixel, which emit light of respective colors different from one another, are disposed at the other side of the first non-emission area (the bottom side of the first non-emission area) or the second non-emission area (see also the 112(b) rejection).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takatori (US 2010/0013853).
(Re Claim 12) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 1, whereineach of the first pixel and the second pixel includes a first circuit area provided with at least one transistor and a second circuit area provided with at least one capacitor (Each of the subpixels 146 of the first and second pixels contains a first circuit area with a transistor, and a second circuit area with a capacitor; the first and second circuit areas are the areas of the transistor and capacitor, respectively; ¶34).
However, modified Sato does not explicitly teach each of the first circuit area and the second circuit area does not overlap each of the first signal line and the second signal line.
Takatori teaches a transistor (15c; Fig. 9) of a pixel does not overlap signal lines, and a capacitor (19; Fig. 10) of a pixel does not overlap signal lines.
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to arrange the first circuit area and second circuit area of modified Sato, as taught by Takatori, so as to avoid overlap with each of the first signal line and second signal line of modified Sato, in order to avoid parasitic capacitances and potential shorts during the manufacturing process.
(Re Claim 13) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 12 whereinthe second circuit area is disposed between the first circuit area and the transmissive area (If the first and second circuit areas are disposed within each of the subpixels of the first and second pixel, and the transmissive area 148 surrounds the first and second pixels, then the second circuit area can always be found to be between the first circuit area and the transmissive area; Fig. 19 markup).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2016/0315133), Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0053624), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0009104) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (US 2021/0335920).
(Re Claim 18) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, but has not been explicitly shown to teach first spaced distances in the first direction are uniform in subpixels emitting light of a same color.
Hong shows spacing pixels in a such that they are an equal distance from each other in either a first direction (DR1; Fig. 12) or a second direction (DR2; Fig. 12, ¶180).
Sato also shows forming a uniform grid pattern for the arrangement of pixels (Fig. 19).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the pixels of modified Sato such that first spaced distances in the first direction are uniform in subpixels emitting light of a same color, in view of the equal spacing of Hong and the grid pattern of Sato, to cause optical effects – such as absorption, reflection, or diffraction – due to the pixel spacing, and therefore subpixel spacing, to be the same along either the first or second direction.
(Re Claim 19) Modified Sato teaches the transparent display device of claim 14, but has not been explicitly shown to teach a difference between a first spaced distance in the first direction and a second spaced distance in the second direction is less than 10% of the first spaced distance in subpixels emitting light of a same color.
Hong shows spacing pixels in a such that they are an equal distance from each other in either a first direction (DR1; Fig. 12) or a second direction (DR2; Fig. 12, ¶180).
Sato also shows forming a uniform grid pattern for the arrangement of pixels (Fig. 19).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the pixels of modified Sato such that a difference between a first spaced distance in the first direction and a second spaced distance in the second direction is less than 10% of the first spaced distance in subpixels emitting light of a same color, in view of the equal spacing of Hong and the grid pattern of Sato, to cause optical effects – such as absorption, reflection, or diffraction – due to the pixel spacing, and therefore subpixel spacing, to be the same along either the first or second direction.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 9-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
(Re Claim 6) The prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole: “where the third non-emission area is diverged from the second non-emission area and extended toward the transmissive area, and the third non-emission area is inclined with respect to the first signal line”, as set forth in the claimed combination.
Claim 7 depends from claim 6 and is allowable for at least the reasons stated above.
(Re Claim 9) The prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole: “wherein the fourth non-emission area is diverged from the second non-emission area and extended toward the transmissive area, and the fourth non-emission area is inclined with respect to the second signal line”, as set forth in the claimed combination.
Claim 10 depends from claim 9 and is allowable for at least the reasons stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher A Schodde whose telephone number is (571)270-1974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 1000-1800 EST.
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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571)272-2339. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A. SCHODDE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/ERIK T. K. PETERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
