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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 9-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20240147766 to Adachi et al. (Adachi) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20200119101 to Lee et al. (Lee) and further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 20210234112 to Seo et al. (Seo).
Regarding Claim 1, Adachi teaches in Fig. 72 at least, a display device comprising:
a display element layer, including a light-emitting element 63R, G, B;
an optical layer 65-72 disposed on the display element layer, wherein the light-emitting element includes:
a first light-emitting element 63R overlapping a first light-emitting region 63R, and including a first light-emitting layer 69 left;
a second light-emitting element 63G overlapping a second light-emitting region, and including a second light-emitting layer 69 right; and
a third light-emitting element 63B overlapping a third light-emitting region, and including a third light-emitting layer 69 middle, the first light-emitting layer and the second light-emitting layer respectively include a first quantum dot and a second quantum dot, the third light-emitting layer includes an organic light-emitting material ([0241], each of 63R, G, B may be QD or OLED),
but does not explicitly teach:
a base layer; a circuit layer disposed on the base layer; the display element layer is disposed on the circuit layer; and the optical layer includes: a first color filter overlapping the first light-emitting region; a second color filter overlapping the second light-emitting region; and a third color filter overlapping the third light-emitting region, and including scattering particles.
However, in analogous art, Lee teaches a base layer 141, a circuit layer 142 and an optical layer 110 analogous to Fig. 72 of Adachi over the circuit layer. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Lee to control each individual subpixel of Adachi.
Adachi and Lee do not explicitly teach a color filter. However, in analogous art, Seo teaches a color filter 205B, G, R over light emitting units 201, having scattering particles [0011]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to include the teaching of Seo to improve color emission, as taught by Seo throughout.
Regarding Claim 2, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the scattering particles comprise at least one of zinc oxide, titanium oxide [0018], and silicon oxide.
Regarding Claim 9, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the optical layer further comprises:
light-blocking portions 206 respectively disposed between the first color filter, the second color filter, and the third color filter.
Regarding Claim 10, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the optical layer further comprises:
an overcoat layer (126 of Lee) disposed on the first to third color filters.
Regarding Claim 11, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the first to third light-emitting elements respectively generate first to third light, and the third light is blue color light having a central wavelength of in a range about 420 nm to about 480 nm (63B emits blue light) .
Regarding Claim 12, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the first light-emitting layer comprises a first host and a first dopant, the second light-emitting layer comprises a second host and a second dopant, the first dopant comprises the first quantum dot, and the second dopant comprises the second quantum dot (definition of QLED, Adachi teaches any of the LEDs may be QLED).
Regarding Claim 13, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the third light-emitting layer comprises a third host and a third dopant, and the third host and the third dopant each comprises the organic light-emitting material (definition of OLED, Adachi teaches any of the LEDs may be OLED).
Regarding Claim 14, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 13, wherein the third dopant comprises a delayed fluorescent dopant (Adachi, [0073]).
Regarding Claim 15, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 1, wherein the light-emitting element comprises:
a first electrode 66;
a light-emitting layer 69 disposed on the first electrode; and
a second electrode 71 disposed on the light-emitting layer, and the light-emitting layer comprises the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting layer, and the third light-emitting layer (Fig. 72 of Adachi).
Regarding Claim 16, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 15, wherein the light-emitting element further comprises a capping layer (204, Seo) disposed on the second electrode.
Regarding Claim 17, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 15, wherein the first light-emitting element further comprises a first electron transport region 70 disposed on the first light-emitting layer, the second light-emitting element further comprises a second electron transport region disposed on the second light-emitting layer, and the first electron transport region and the second electron transport region each comprise an inorganic material (Adachi teaches a “wide variety of choices” of materials, person of ordinary skill may select from well known inorganic or organic materials with an expectation of success, see MPEP 2143E).
Regarding Claim 18, Adachi, Lee and Seo teach the display device of claim 15, wherein the third light-emitting element further comprises a third electron transport region disposed on the third light-emitting layer, and the third electron transport region comprises an organic material (Adachi teaches a “wide variety of choices” of materials, person of ordinary skill may select from well known inorganic or organic materials with an expectation of success, see MPEP 2143E).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The cited prior art does not teach a filter portion directly over a scattering portion of suspended titanium oxide particles in context with the rest of the claim.
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.”
Claims 3-8 and 19 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: Claim 3 is allowable for the same reason as Claim 20.
Regarding Claim 19, the cited prior art does not teach that the third light-emitting layer comprises: a (3-1)-th light-emitting layer disposed on the first electrode; and a (3-2)-th light-emitting layer disposed on the (3-1)-th light-emitting layer, and the third light-emitting element further comprises a charge generation layer disposed between the (3-1)-th light-emitting layer and the (3-2)-th light-emitting layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVREN SEVEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5666. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00- 5:00 Pacific.
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 Kim can be reached at (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.
/EVREN SEVEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights