ETAILED 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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because Figure 9 shows element [0123] – “third passivation layer 172C” labeled as ‘173C’ although this element does not exist in the specification or other figures. Figures 10-20 do not show the elements of [0075] – “the light emission area EA” and [0076] – “non-light emission area NLA” although they are described in the method claim 20. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
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 14-15 and 18-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are:
Claims 14 requires “the second passivation layer overlaps the light emission area, and
the second passivation layer is in contact with the second bank layer” This is not described in combination with the description of the second passivation layer.
Page 8, column 2, paragraph [0123] states “The element passivation layer 172 according to an embodiment may include a first passivation layer 172A, a second passivation layer 172B, and a third passivation layer 172C.” The second passivation layer 172B, is not shown as contacting the second bank layer, element 163. However the first passivation layer 172A is shown to do so. The separate passivation layers are distinctly described in the specification and displayed in the figure but are unclear in the claims.
Claims 15 requires “wherein the element passivation layer further includes a
third passivation layer between the second passivation layer and the organic pattern in a direction perpendicular to the substrate, and
the second passivation layer and the third passivation layer overlap a tip of the second bank layer.” This is not described in combination with the description of the second passivation layer.
Page 8, column 2, paragraph [0123] states “The element passivation layer 172 according to an embodiment may include a first passivation layer 172A, a second passivation layer 172B, and a third passivation layer 172C.” The separate passivation layers are distinctly described in the specification and displayed in the figure but are unclear in the claims.
Claim 18 “an upper surface of the second bank layer, which is directed toward the second encapsulation layer, includes:
a first portion in contact with the first organic pattern;
a second portion in contact with the second passivation layer.” This is not described in combination with the description of the second passivation layer.
Page 8, column 2, paragraph [0123] states “The element passivation layer 172 according to an embodiment may include a first passivation layer 172A, a second passivation layer 172B, and a third passivation layer 172C.” The second passivation layer 172B, is not shown as contacting the second bank layer, element 163. However the first passivation layer 172A is shown to do so. The separate passivation layers are distinctly described in the specification and displayed in the figure but are unclear in the claims.
Claim 19 “a second passivation layer in contact with the second organic pattern.” This is not described in combination with the description of the second passivation layer.
Page 8, column 2, paragraph [0123] states “The element passivation layer 172 according to an embodiment may include a first passivation layer 172A, a second passivation layer 172B, and a third passivation layer 172C.” The second passivation layer 172B, is not shown as contacting the second organic pattern, element ELP2. However the first passivation layer 172A is shown to do so. The separate passivation layers are distinctly described in the specification and displayed in the figure but are unclear in the claims.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is that the passivation layers as described in the specification and shown in the figures.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13, 16-17, and 20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
In reference to claim 1, the prior art of record to the examiner’s knowledge does
not teach or render obvious, at least to one skilled in the art, the instant invention regarding an element passivation layer overlapping the non-light emission area and between the bank structure and the first encapsulation layer in a direction perpendicular to the substrate,
wherein the organic pattern includes a first side overlapping the light emission area and in contact with the first encapsulation layer, and a second side overlapping the non-light emission area and in contact with the element passivation layer.
Claims 2-13 depend on claim 1 and are therefore allowable.
The closest prior art of record is Choung et al. (US 20220077251 A1 – hereinafter Choung). Choung teaches a similar bank structure, organic pattern, and light emitting layer structure but without the passivation layer.
This specific structure of an element passivation layer overlapping the non-light emission area and between the bank structure and the first encapsulation layer in a direction perpendicular to the substrate,
wherein the organic pattern includes a first side overlapping the light emission area and in contact with the first encapsulation layer, and a second side overlapping the non-light emission area and in contact with the element passivation layer is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record. The instant application states that the beneficial effect of the pattern process for forming individual pixels is for [0004] – “In case of the display device of high resolution, since high pixel integration is desired, an interval between light emitting elements, which overlap each light emission area, may be narrowed. Therefore, the display device of high resolution may be formed by a pattern process of forming individual pixels rather than a process of using a fine metal mask.”
In reference to claim 16, the prior art of record to the examiner’s knowledge does
not teach or render obvious, at least to one skilled in the art, the instant invention regarding an element passivation layer between the first encapsulation layer and the second bank layer in a direction perpendicular to the substrate,
wherein a portion of the element passivation layer, which is in contact with first organic pattern, and another portion of the element passivation layer, which is in contact with the second organic pattern, are spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel with the substrate.
Claims 17-18 depend on claim 16 and are therefore allowable.
The closest prior art of record is Choung et al. (US 20220077251 A1 – hereinafter Choung). Choung teaches a similar bank structure, organic pattern, and light emitting layer structure but without the passivation layer.
This specific structure of an element passivation layer between the first encapsulation layer and the second bank layer in a direction perpendicular to the substrate,
wherein a portion of the element passivation layer, which is in contact with first organic pattern, and another portion of the element passivation layer, which is in contact with the second organic pattern, are spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel with the substrate is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record. The instant application states that the beneficial effect of the pattern process for forming individual pixels is for [0004] – “In case of the display device of high resolution, since high pixel integration is desired, an interval between light emitting elements, which overlap each light emission area, may be narrowed. Therefore, the display device of high resolution may be formed by a pattern process of forming individual pixels rather than a process of using a fine metal mask.”
In reference to claim 20, the prior art of record to the examiner’s knowledge does not teach or render obvious, at least to one skilled in the art, the instant invention regarding forming a hard mask at a portion overlapping the light emission area and a periphery of the light emission area, and removing the light emitting layer, the cathode electrode and the first encapsulation layer, which are positioned at a portion where the hard mask is not formed, through a wet etching process to form a first organic pattern and a first electrode pattern on the second bank layer; and
forming an element passivation layer entirely on the hard mask, and removing the element passivation layer through an etching process using the hard mask as a mask in combination with the other recited limitations.
This specific structure of forming a hard mask at a portion overlapping the light emission area and a periphery of the light emission area, and removing the light emitting layer, the cathode electrode and the first encapsulation layer, which are positioned at a portion where the hard mask is not formed, through a wet etching process to form a first organic pattern and a first electrode pattern on the second bank layer; and
forming an element passivation layer entirely on the hard mask, and removing the element passivation layer through an etching process using the hard mask as a mask is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record. The instant application states that the beneficial effect of the pattern process for forming individual pixels is for [0004] – “In case of the display device of high resolution, since high pixel integration is desired, an interval between light emitting elements, which overlap each light emission area, may be narrowed. Therefore, the display device of high resolution may be formed by a pattern process of forming individual pixels rather than a process of using a fine metal mask.”
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.”
Pertinent Art
For the benefits of the Applicant, US 20190189713 A1, US 20220077251 A1, and US 20200168693 A1 are cited on the record as being pertinent to significant disclosure through some but not all claimed features of the defined invention. These references fail to disclose the combination of limitations including specific element ranges.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to GARY ABEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-0246. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (Eastern).
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, CHAD M DICKE can be reached on (571) 270-7996. 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 ttps://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.
/GRA/
Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights