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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2019/0006626 A1~hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-4) a display device, comprising: a substrate (100) including a plurality of subpixels (see at least fig. 1) each comprising a light-emitting area and a non-light-emitting area (see at least figs. 1-4); an overcoating layer (170; [0052]) disposed on the substrate and having a plurality of micro-lenses ([0087]; see at least figs. 3 and 4) comprising concave portions and connection portions in the light-emitting area (see figs. 3 and 4); a first electrode (E1; [0091]-[0096]) disposed on the overcoating layer; a bank layer (190; [0104]) exposing a part of the first electrode on the overcoating layer and defining the light-emitting area (see figs. 3 and 4); a light-emitting layer (EL; [0098]; [0105]; figs. 3 and 4) covering the first electrode exposed by the bank layer; and a second electrode (E2; [0095]) disposed on the light-emitting layer, wherein the bank layer (190) comprises: a first bank area disposed adjacent to at least a part of the light-emitting area (EA) and having a first thickness (see figs. 3 and 4); and a second bank area having a second thickness larger than the first thickness (see figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-4) the bank layer (190) is made of a black material ([0104]).
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2022/0140291 A1~hereinafter “Kim”) of record.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-3) a display device, comprising: a substrate (100) including a plurality of subpixels (RWBG; best seen in at least fig. 2) each comprising a light-emitting area and a non-light-emitting area (see fig. 2); an overcoating layer (170; [0083]) disposed on the substrate and having a plurality of micro-lenses (180; [0070]-[0084]) comprising concave portions (181) and connection portions in the light-emitting area (see at least fig. 3); a first electrode (E1; [0075]) disposed on the overcoating layer; a bank layer (190; [0086]) exposing a part of the first electrode on the overcoating layer and defining the light-emitting area (see fig. 3); a light-emitting layer (EDL; [0078]-[0080]) covering the first electrode exposed by the bank layer; and a second electrode (E2; [0075]) disposed on the light-emitting layer, wherein the bank layer (190) comprises: a first bank area disposed adjacent to at least a part of the light-emitting area and having a first thickness (see fig. 3); and a second bank area having a second thickness larger than the first thickness (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-3) the bank layer (190) is made of a black material ([0086]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-3) the plurality of subpixels (RWBG) is arranged in a first direction (see fig. 2), and the first bank area (see fig. 2; i.e. the bank portion between W and B or B and G; [0072]) is disposed between the light-emitting areas of two subpixels adjacent to each other in the first direction among the plurality of subpixels (see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 2) the first bank area overlaps a data line extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-3) the light-emitting area (EA) has a length in a second direction (see fig. 2), which is perpendicular to the first direction, longer than a length in the first direction; and the first direction is a direction of a viewing angle of a user (see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-3) a circuit part (Tdr) disposed between the light-emitting areas of two subpixels adjacent to each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction among the plurality of subpixels (see fig. 2), wherein the second bank area overlaps the circuit part (see fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3-6 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2019/0006626 A1~hereinafter “Kim”) in view of Park et al. (US. Pub: 2022/0208895 A1~hereinafter “Park”) of record.
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses (in at least fig. 1) the plurality of subpixels (12) is arranged in a first direction (see fig. 1), but is silent about the first bank area is disposed between the light-emitting areas of two subpixels adjacent to each other in the first direction among the plurality of subpixels.
Park in the same field of a display device discloses (in at least fig. 4) a first bank area (190a; [0072]) is disposed between the light-emitting areas of two subpixels (R and G or G and B) adjacent to each other in the first direction among the plurality of subpixels ([0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the display device of Kim with the first bank area teaching of Park for the benefit of providing a display device with suitable protection against external pressure.
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses (in at least fig. 4) the first bank area (190a) overlaps a data line (DL) extending in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction.
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses (in at least figs. 1-4) the light-emitting area (EA) has a length in a second direction (see at least figs. 3 and 8), which is perpendicular to the first direction, longer than a length in the first direction (see at least figs. 3 and 8); and the first direction is a direction of a viewing angle of a user (see at least figs. 3 and 8).
Regarding claim 6, Park discloses (in at least figs. 1-4) a circuit part (DTr) disposed between the light-emitting areas of two subpixels adjacent to each other in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction among the plurality of subpixels (see at least fig. 4), wherein the second bank area (190b) overlaps the circuit part.
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses (in at least figs. 1-4) the substrate comprises: a display area in which the plurality of subpixels is disposed (see at least figs. 1-4); and a non-display area surrounding the display area (see at least figs. 1-4), wherein the non-display area comprises: a first bank extending from the display area (best seen in at least figs. 3 and 4); at least one trench pattern disposed to be closer to an outer periphery of the non-display area than the first bank (see figs. 3 and 4); but is silent about a plurality of second banks disposed to be closer to the outer periphery of the non-display area than the trench pattern, and wherein a thickness of the second bank is smaller than a thickness of the first bank.
Park in the same field of endeavor discloses (in at least fig. 4) a plurality of second banks (190a) disposed closer to the outer periphery of the non-display area (NEA) than the trench pattern, and wherein a thickness of the second bank (190a) is smaller than a thickness of the first bank (190b; [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention modify the display device of Kim with the plurality of second banks teaching of Park for the benefit of providing a display device with suitable protection against external pressure.
Regarding claim 16, Kim as modified by Park does not expressly disclose a thickness of the first bank is in a range from 2.5 to 3.5 μm, and a thickness of the second bank is in a range from 1.0 to 2.0 μm.
However, Park discloses (in at least [0072]) a thickness of the second bank (190a) is smaller than a thickness of the first bank (190b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider forming a thickness of the first bank of Kim as modified by Park in a range from 2.5 to 3.5 μm, and a thickness of the second bank is in a range from 1.0 to 2.0 μm through routine experimentation and optimization. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kim and Park discloses (in at least figs. 1-4 both refs) a side surface of the bank layer (190) in the first bank area overlaps the connection portions of the plurality of micro-lenses (180-1; 180-2); and a side surface of the bank layer in the second bank area (190b) overlaps some of the concave portions disposed at outer peripheries of the plurality of micro-lenses.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-14, 18 and 19 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.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a repair part disposed between the circuit part and the light-emitting area of each of the plurality of subpixels, wherein the bank layer further comprises a third bank area disposed to overlap the repair part. Claims 7-14, 18 and 19 are objected due to their dependency upon claim 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30.
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, James R. Greece can be reached at 571-272-3711. 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.
ELMITO BREVAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights