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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The prior art documents submitted by applicant in the Information Disclosure Statements filed on 08/13/2023 and 05/28/2025 have been considered and made of record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-10 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al, (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2020/0091464 A1), hereinafter referenced as Park.
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches a display device comprising: a substrate (Fig.20, element #110) including first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, elements #PA1, #PA2 and #PA3) and a non-emission area corresponding to a boundary between the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, element #PB, Fig.1, element #PB extends between sub-pixels rows and columns); a display element layer including light emitting elements respectively disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas on the substrate (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #ED1, #ED2 and #ED3); a light conversion layer disposed on the display element layer (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #341, #342, #345, #320, #353a, #393a and #355a), and including a bank disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, element #320); and a color filter layer disposed on the light conversion layer, and including first, second, and third color filters, wherein one of the first, second, and third color filters is disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 extend in the non-emission area).
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a first layer disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345); and a second layer covering the first layer (Fig.20, element #353a), and the bank is disposed in the non-emission area on the second layer (Fig.20, element #320 is disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB, on top of element #353a).
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches the display device of claims 1 and 2 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a low refractive layer disposed on the second layer (Fig.20, element #393a, paragraph [0192], row 1); and a third layer covering the low refractive layer (Fig.20, element #355a).
Regarding claim 5, Park teaches the display device of claims 1, 2 and 4 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 4, wherein at least one of the first, second, and third color filters contacts the third layer (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 contact element #355a).
Regarding claim 6, Park teaches the display device of claims 1 and 2 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein the first layer is formed by a photolithography process. Note that the limitation “wherein the first layer is formed by a photolithography process” is being treated as a product by process limitation and as such only the structure is required to meet the limitation (MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 7, Park teaches the display device of claim 1 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 1 wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process. Note that the limitation “wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process” is being treated as a product by process limitation and as such only the structure is required to meet the limitation (MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 8, Park teaches a display device comprising: a substrate (Fig.20, element #110) including first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, elements #PA1, #PA2 and #PA3) and a non-emission area corresponding to a boundary between the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, element #PB; Fig.1, element #PB extends between sub-pixels rows and columns); a display element layer including light emitting elements respectively disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas on the substrate (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #ED1, #ED2 and #ED3); a light conversion layer disposed on the display element layer (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #341, #342, #345, #320, #353a, #393a and #355a), and including a bank disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, element #320); and a color filter layer disposed on the light conversion layer, and including first, second, and third color filters, wherein two of the first, second, and third color filters are disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 extend in the non-emission area).
Regarding claim 9, Park teaches the display device of claim 8 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 8, wherein the first and the second color filters are disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, the first color filter, element #331, and the second color filter, element #333, are disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB) and the first color filter is disposed on the second color filter in the non-emission area (Fig.20, element #331 is disposed on the left side of element #333, in the non-emission area, element #PB).
Regarding claim 10, Park teaches the display device of claims 8 and 9 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 9, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a first layer disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345); and a second layer covering the first layer (Fig.20, element #353a), the bank is disposed in the non-emission area on the second layer (Fig.20, element #320 is disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB, on top of element #353a).
Regarding claim 12, Park teaches the display device of claims 8, 9 and 10 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a low refractive layer disposed on the second layer (Fig.20, element #393a, paragraph [0192], row 1); and a third layer covering the low refractive layer (Fig.20, element #355a).
Regarding claim 13, Park teaches the display device of claims 8, 9, 10 and 12 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 12, wherein at least one of the first, second, and third color filters contacts the third layer (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 contact element #355a).
Regarding claim 14, Park teaches the display device of claims 8, 9 and 10 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein the first layer is formed by a photolithography process. Note that the limitation “wherein the first layer is formed by a photolithography process” is being treated as a product by process limitation and as such only the structure is required to meet the limitation (MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 15, Park teaches the display device of claim 8 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 8, wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process. Note that the limitation “wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process” is being treated as a product by process limitation and as such only the structure is required to meet the limitation (MPEP 2113).
Regarding claim 16, Park teaches a method of fabricating a display device, the method comprising: providing a substrate (Fig.20, element #110) including first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, elements #PA1, #PA2 and #PA3) and a non-emission area corresponding to a boundary between the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, element #PB; Fig.1, element #PB extends between sub-pixels rows and columns); forming, on the substrate, a display element layer including light emitting elements respectively disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas on the substrate (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #ED1, #ED2 and #ED3); forming, on the display element layer, a light conversion layer (Fig.20, layer comprising elements #341, #342, #345, #320, #353a, #393a and #355a), including a bank disposed in the non-emission area (Fig.20, element #320); and forming, on the light conversion layer, a color filter layer including first, second, and third color filters, wherein forming the color filter layer comprises forming one of the first, second, and third color filters in the non-emission area on the bank (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 extend in the non-emission area).
Regarding claim 17, Park teaches the method of claim 16 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the method of claim 16, wherein forming the light conversion layer comprises: forming a first layer in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345); and forming a second layer covering the first layer (Fig.20, element #353a), the bank is formed in the non-emission area on the second layer (Fig.20, element #320 is disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB, on top of element #353a).
Regarding claim 18, Park teaches the method of claims 16 and 17 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein forming the light conversion layer comprises: forming a low refractive layer on the second layer (Fig.20, element #393a, paragraph [0192], row 1); and forming a third layer covering the low refractive layer (Fig.20, element #355a), at least one of the first, second, and third color filters contacts the third layer (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 contact element #355a).
Claims 2-3 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park.
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the display device of claim 1 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 1, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a first layer disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345); and a second layer covering the first layer (Fig.20, element #355a), and the bank is disposed in the non-emission area on the second layer (Fig.20, element #320 is disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB, on top of element #355a).
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches the display device of claims 1 and 2 as set forth in the anticipation rejection (for claim 2 rejection right above). Park further teaches the display device of claim 2, wherein at least one of the first, second, and third color filters contacts the second layer (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 contact element #355a).
Regarding claim 10, Park teaches the display device of claims 8 and 9 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park further teaches the display device of claim 9, wherein the light conversion layer further includes: a first layer disposed in the first, second, and third sub-pixel areas (Fig.20, layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345); and a second layer covering the first layer (Fig.20, element #355a), the bank is disposed in the non-emission area on the second layer (Fig.20, element #320 is disposed in the non-emission area, element #PB, on top of element #355a).
Regarding claim 11, Park teaches the display device of claims 8, 9 and 10 as set forth in the anticipation rejection (for claim 10 rejection right above). Park further teaches the display device of claim 10, wherein at least one of the first, second, and third color filters contacts the second layer (Fig.20, elements #331, #333 and #335 contact element #355a).
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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Yoon et al, (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2018/0202616 A1) hereinafter referenced as Yoon.
Regarding claim 19, Park teaches the method of claims 16 and 17 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park teaches the first layer is a wavelength conversion layer which may be formed by an inkjet method (Fig.20, first layer formed by elements #341, #343 and #345, paragraph [0179], rows 1-4). Park does not teach the method of claim 17, wherein the first layer is formed by a photolithography process. Yoon teaches wherein the first layer is a wavelength conversion layer formed by a photolithography process (paragraph [0075], rows 1-5). Thus, both references Park and Yoon teach a wavelength conversion layer, made by different methods and used to change the color of the light emitted from the display light source. A person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that the inkjet method used by Park could have been replaced by the photolithographic method disclosed by Yoon because both serve the same purpose of providing a wavelength conversion layer. Furthermore, a person skilled in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of providing a wavelength conversion layer used to change the color of the light emitted from the display light source. Photolithographic processes are well known in the semiconductor industry and can be easily integrated with most of the manufacturing processes of displays.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of disclosed prior art, Kim et al, (Korean Patent Publication Number, KR20220088545A, the US publication of the same patent application will be used here, US 2024/0049552 A1) hereinafter referenced as Kim.
Regarding claim 20, Park teaches the method of claim 16 as set forth in the anticipation rejection. Park does not teach the method of claim 16, wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process. Kim teaches wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process (paragraph [0168] rows 1-3). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Kim and disclose wherein the first, second, and third color filters are formed by a photolithography process. Photolithographic processes are well known in the semiconductor industry, offer high resolution for small pixels and can be easily integrated with most of the manufacturing processes of displays.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRISTIAN A TIVARUS whose telephone number is (703)756-4688. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00 AM -5:00 PM 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, Dale Page can be reached at (571)270-7877. 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.
/CRISTIAN A TIVARUS/Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights