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
Claim 19-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/4/2026.
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.
Claim 3 and 11-18 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.
Claim 3 requires wherein the bank comprises: a lower part surrounding the first intermediate layer; and an upper part surrounding the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer and having higher liquid repellency than the lower part.
Claim 11 requires the bank comprises a lower part surrounding the first intermediate layer, and an upper part surrounding the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer and having higher liquid repellency than the lower part.
This implies the lower part, and the upper banks surround the entire layer, this is inconsistent with the specification.
Figure 6 depicts the lower portion and upper portion BNP1 and BNP2 respectively. BNP1 does not surround the first intermediate layer instead it surrounds only lower portion of the intermediate layer and BNP2 only surrounds an upper portion of the light emitting layer a represented in figure 6.
The it unclear the scope to surround an element in view of the disclosure. To surround appears to require only a portion be surrounded and not the entirety
As to claim 3 it is unclear how the side relates to a pinning point Applicant does not structurally link the elements.
As to claim 4, applicant does not interrelate the third height the or the liquid repellency to the upper part already recited in claim 3. The third height appears to be the upper portion of the bank, and the fluorine provides the higher liquid repellency.
As to claims 6 and 16 the phrase exposed is unclear since it is actually covered by the intermediate layer light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer. At the very least applicant should link the exposed portion to where the layers are; at the moment the claim does not structurally link the exposed region to these layers thus is indefinite. It is unclear what the electrode is exposed to.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7, 9, 11-13, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Kim 20160284776.
As to claim 1, Applicant does not define a relative top, or bottom further orientation is arbitrary thus an oriented structure of Kim:
PNG
media_image1.png
650
1330
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reads on a light emitting element disposed in an emission area (figure 7 and 8) ; and a bank surrounding the emission area (item 120 and 130), wherein the light emitting element comprises: a first electrode (item 190); a first intermediate layer disposed on the first electrode, having a first height lower than a height of the bank (item 180 or 170 the heigh is smaller or less than the height of 120)), and surrounded by the bank figure 7; a light emitting layer disposed on the first intermediate layer (360), having a second height higher than the first height, and surrounded by the bank (relative size is smaller than the bank item 120 which surrounds item 360); a second intermediate layer disposed on the light emitting layer (item 350), having the second height, and surrounded by the bank figure 7 and 8); and a second electrode disposed on the second intermediate layer (item 110), a top surface of the first intermediate layer is in contact with a side surface of the bank at a first pinning point of the first height (items 170a and 180 contacts are pinned at the interface of 170 an 180 and the interface of 180 ad 190), and top surfaces of the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer are in contact with the side surface of the bank at a second pinning point of the second height (PP31).
The phrase “height” is not limiting to a maximal height or a top surface height it merely implies a height of existence.
b. As to claim 3, Kim wherein the bank comprises: a lower part surrounding the first intermediate layer (region below 130a or above if looking at the unmodified figures); and an upper part surrounding the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer and having higher liquid repellency than the lower part (120 upwards including 130 item 130 is described as lyophobic which pushes away the material 170) .
c. As to claim 4, Kim teaches wherein the bank contains fluorine contained in a surface at a height higher than or equal to a third height lower than a height of a top surface of the bank (item 130a paragraph 10).
d. As to claim 5, Kim teaches the pinning is shorter than the height of the bank.
e. As to claim 7, recitation of hole or electron transport is non-limiting since the materials are interchangeable, and applicant does not set forth any objective standard as to how well one or the other performs the function. Thus, Kim teaches wherein the first intermediate layer comprises at least one of a hole injection layer or a hole transport layer (180a or 170a), and the second intermediate layer comprises an electron transport layer (item 150a and 140a).
f. As to claim 9, Kim teaches wherein the second electrode is disposed on the second intermediate layer and the bank (item 110 on item 120) and is entirely disposed in a display area comprising a plurality of emission areas comprising the emission area (figure 7).
g. As to claim 11, Kim teaches A display device comprising: a light emitting element disposed in an emission area ( figure 7 and or 8 or modified figures 7 and 8 above); and a bank surrounding the emission area (items 120 and 130), wherein the light emitting element comprises: a first electrode (110 or 190); a first intermediate layer disposed on the first electrode (items 340a 350a or 180 and 170), having a first height lower than a height of the bank (figure 7 and 8 or modified versions), and surrounded by the bank (figures 7 and 8 or modified versions); a light emitting layer disposed on the first intermediate layer (item 360a), having a second height higher than the first height, and surrounded by the bank (relative heigh item 360a figures 7 and 8); a second intermediate layer disposed on the light emitting layer (items 180 190 or items 350 340 or combination), having a height higher than or equal to the second height, and surrounded by the bank (figures 7 and 8 or modified version); and a second electrode disposed on the second intermediate layer (item 190 or item 110), and the bank comprises a lower part surrounding the first intermediate layer (half way up 122 or part half away 340 or portion surrounding item 180 122 portion), and an upper part surrounding the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer and having higher liquid repellency than the lower part (item 122 and 123 and remaining portion of item 121 the remaining part above over the half way point or the remaining or 123 and 121 ). Applicant does not limit that a part of the lower portion cannot surround a part light emission layer and vice versa.
The phrase “height” is not limiting to a maximal height or a top surface height it merely implies a height of existence.
h. As to claim 12, Kim teaches wherein the second intermediate layer is having the second height (flip version item 340 and 340 have a height at the pinning location height is not thickness or maximal height).
i. As to claim 13, Kim teaches in a rotated version wherein a top surface of the first intermediate layer is in contact (the side surface of 170 act as “top surfaces” in the rotated interpretation) with a side surface of the bank at a first pinning point of the first height (these are in contact with as side surface of item 120 and 130 at pinning points), and top surfaces of the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer are in contact with the side surface of the bank at a second pinning point of the second height (same manner the side edge acts as a top surface of item 340 350 and 360 and both meet the side of 120 at pp31).
j. As to claim 15, Kim teaches wherein the bank contains fluorine contained in a surface at a height higher than or equal to a third height lower than a height of a top surface of the bank (item 130a paragraph 10).
k. As to claim 17, recitation of hole or electron transport is non-limiting since the materials are interchangeable, and applicant does not set forth any objective standard as to how well one or the other performs the function. Thus, Kim teaches wherein the first intermediate layer comprises at least one of a hole injection layer or a hole transport layer (180a or 170a), and the second intermediate layer comprises an electron transport layer (item 150a and 140a).
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(s) 8, 10, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim.
As to claims 8 and 18, Kim does teach wherein the light emitting layer comprises a quantum dot.
However, it was known to provide quantum dots in the emission layers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to provide quantum dots in the emission to provide the expected outcomes using conventional expected outcomes of provide expected outcomes of improved light emission.
As to claim 10, Kim does not teach the thickness 90 Angstrom or less.
However, it was known to provide electrodes with a thickness of 90 angstroms.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the art at the time of filing to provide the thickness of the electrode of 90 angstroms or less to use conventional thickness and provide expected outcomes of good electrical contact.
As to claim 16, Kim teaches (non-flipped version) wherein the bank covers an edge portion of the first electrode (item 110) and exposes a remaining area comprising a central portion of the first electrode (see figure 7 and 8).
Kim does not teach a side surface of the bank is inclined at an angle of about 70° or more with respect to a top surface of the first electrode.
Applicant shows no unexpected results for the angle. Further such angles were known for banks relative to electrode at the time of filing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the bank is inclined at an angle of about 70° or more with respect to a top surface of the first electrode.
To use known inclines to provide expected outcomes of light reflection providing wide angle illumination.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2,6, and 14 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.
As to claim 2 and 14, Kim does not teach the additional limitation of wherein a side surface of the light emitting layer is in contact with the side surface of the bank between the first pinning point and the second pinning point. Instead, Kim teaches contact at a singular point and not a suggest continuous side.
Claim 14 would be allowable if the 112 b rejections are overcome.
As to claims 6, Kim does not teach wherein the bank covers an edge portion of the first electrode, and exposes a remaining area comprising a central portion of the first electrode, and the side surface of the bank is inclined at an angle of about 70° or more with respect to a top surface of the first electrode in conjunction with elements like a top surface of the first intermediate layer is in contact with a side surface of the bank at a first pinning point of the first height, and top surfaces of the light emitting layer and the second intermediate layer are in contact with the side surface of the bank at a second pinning point of the second height.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nakatani 20100289728 and Takata 20180234548 provide a discussion of pinning and ink layers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW L REAMES whose telephone number is (571)272-2408. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:00 am-4:00 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, William F. Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
/MATTHEW L. REAMES/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
/MATTHEW L REAMES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
