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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) based upon an application filed in KOREA on 12/04/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 13-14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over US20160049454A1; Park et al.; (hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches a display device ([0003]) comprising:
a substrate (#202, Figures 5A-C) comprising a light emitting area and a circuit area (#EA and #NEA, [0053]);
a reflection reduction layer (#204) comprising an open area (#OA) corresponding to the light emitting area (#EA) and a reflection prevention area (#204) outside of the open area (#OA);
a buffer layer (#207, Figure 6, [0131]) disposed on the reflection reduction layer (#204); and
an emission layer (#272-278) disposed on the buffer layer (#207).
Regarding Claim 13, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches a color filter (#268, Figures 5A-C) disposed between the emission layer (#272-278) and the substrate (#202).
Regarding Claim 14, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches the reflection reduction layer comprises a black property (#204, black matrix).
Regarding Claim 16, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches the reflection reduction layer is heat resistance to a predetermined temperature or greater ([0081] or [0132], black matrix #204 comprises heat tolerance organic compounds).
Regarding Claim 17, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches the display device excludes a polarizer ([0070]).
Regarding Claim 18, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches thicknesses of the reflection reduction layer varies in the circuit area ([0049] or [0085], Figure 6, black matrix #204 can have uneven surface),
wherein thicknesses of the buffer layer varies in the circuit area ([0085] and [0131], buffer #207 can have uneven surface due to surface of black matrix #204), and
wherein a combined thickness of the reflection reduction layer and the buffer layer is constant in the circuit area ([0136]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20100025847A1; Park et al.; (hereinafter “Park”) in view of US20160013259A1; Yang et al.; (hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding Claim 10, Park teaches the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further teaches a plurality of subpixels (Figure 2, [0096]) disposed over the substrate (#202),
wherein the reflection reduction layer is not disposed in a light emitting area of a second subpixel among the plurality of subpixels (Figures 5A-C, black matrix #204 includes openings #OA corresponding to emission area).
Park does not explicitly teach the reflection reduction layer is disposed in a light emitting area of a first subpixel among the plurality of subpixels.
However, Yang teaches a display device ([0003]), comprising a reflection reduction layer (#602, Figure 7A, light shield layer) is disposed in a light emitting area of a first subpixel (#450, white pixel region) among the plurality of subpixels ([0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Park with the teaching of Yang in order to reduce the high reflectance of external light in white pixel region caused by the absence of polarizer in the display according to Yang, [0038-0041].
Regarding Claim 11, Park in view of Yang teaches the semiconductor package as described in claim 10, wherein Park further teaches the first subpixel is a white subpixel emitting white color light ([0096]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Yang, and further in view of US20220069259A1; Hwang et al.; (hereinafter “Hwang”).
Regarding Claim 12, Park in view of Yang teaches the semiconductor package as described in claim 10.
Park in view of Yang does not explicitly teach an optical density of the reflection reduction layer corresponding to the light emitting area of the first subpixel is approximately 0.1 to 0.6.
However, Hwang teaches an optical density of the reflection reduction layer corresponding to the light emitting area of the first subpixel (see rejection of claim 10) is approximately 0.1 to 0.6 ([0061], bank #190 comprises of resin containing black pigment with an optical density of about 0.65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Park in view of Yang with the teaching of Hwang in order to achieve superior light leakage prevention ability and high luminance using black bank material over conventional black matrix according to Hwang, [0005-0006].
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of US20200081344A1; Ishikawa et al.; (hereinafter “Ishikawa”).
Regarding Claim 15, Park teaches the semiconductor package as described in claim 1.
Park does not teach the reflection reduction layer is configured to comprise a mixture of red and blue properties.
However, Ishikawa teaches a reflection reduction layer is configured to comprise a mixture of red and blue properties ([0005] or [0026], a light shielding material can comprise red and blue pigments).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Park with the teaching of Ishikawa, as it would be a simple substitution of one known element (black matrix material of Park) for another (light shielding material of Ishikawa) to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of KR20220079080A; Yoon Myung Chul; (hereinafter “Chul”); see attached patent machine translation.
Regarding Claim 19, Park teaches a display device ([0003]) comprising:
a substrate (#202, Figures 5A-C) comprising a light emitting area and a circuit area (#EA and #NEA, [0053]);
a reflection reduction layer (#204) having a first area with a first optical density (portions of black matrix #204 absorbing light through substrate);
a buffer layer (#207, Figure 6, [0131]) disposed on the reflection reduction layer (#204); and
an emission layer (#272-278) disposed on the buffer layer (#207).
PNG
media_image1.png
699
938
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Park does not explicitly teach a second area with a second optical density different from the first optical density.
However, Chul teaches a display device ([0003]), comprising a second area (#141, Figure 8 or 9, [0110], low-reflection layer #141 having same layers as light-blocking layer #150) with a second optical density different from a first optical density (layer #150 further comprises conductive metal layer #153 different from layer #141).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Park with the teaching of Chul in order to improve low-reflection characteristics and minimize a decrease in transmittance in a light-emitting area.
Regarding Claim 20, Park in view of Chi teaches the display device as described in claim 19, wherein Park further teaches a thickness of the first area is different from a thickness of the second area (see rejection of claim 19, Figure 8 or 9 of Chul, layers #140 and #150 have different thicknesses).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 2, Park discloses the display device as described in claim 1, wherein Park further discloses a repair area (#OA, Figure 5A-C) disposed in the circuit area ([0076-0078]), wherein the reflection reduction layer (#204) further comprises a first part that is an outer area of the repair area (portions of #204 surround repair open areas #OA).
None of the prior art of record discloses or makes obvious the limitation: "a second part that corresponds to the repair area and has a thickness less than the first part" recited in claim 2, in combination of the other claimed elements.
Therefore, claim 2 is allowed, and claims 3-9 are allowed at least by virtue of their dependency on claim 2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20130119387A1 – Figures 1 & 10
US20110127499A1 – Figure 1F
KR20160013443A – Figures 6 & 9
US9202855B1 – Figure 5
US20040125265A1 – Figure 9
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6967. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:00 am - 6:00 pm 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, CHRISTINE S KIM can be reached on (571)272-8458. 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.
/TIEN TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/CHRISTINE S. KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights