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
Claims 10-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06/01/2026.
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, 3-6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0358250 A1~hereinafter “Lee”).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses (in at least figs. 5, 8A and 8B; [0043]-[0044]) a light-emitting diode display device, comprising: a substrate (1; [0031]); a first electrode (2; [0031]) over the substrate; a first bank layer (5) on the first electrode and having a first opening exposing the first electrode (see fig. 5); an adhesive layer (9, B) including a first portion (B; [0043]) on the first electrode exposed through the first opening (see fig. 5); and a light-emitting element (6) provided on the first portion of the adhesive layer (B), wherein the first portion has a side surface provided with a plurality of unevenness (best seen in at least figs. 8A and 8B).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) the first bank layer (5) has a protrusion protruding upward from a top surface of the first bank layer corresponding to the first opening.
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) a width of the protrusion decreases as a distance from the top surface of the first bank layer (5) increases.
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) a width of the first opening (see fig. 5) decreases as a distance from the first electrode (2) increases.
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) a width of the first opening increases as a distance from the first electrode increases.
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) the light-emitting element (6) includes a first element electrode electrically connected to the first electrode (2) through the first portion and a second element electrode (4) being in contact with the second electrode (3).
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) 2, 7-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US. Pub: 2020/0358250 A1~hereinafter “Lee”).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses (in at least figs. 5, 8A and 8B) the adhesive layer further includes a second portion (9) on the first bank layer (5), and wherein the second portion (9) is separated from the first portion (see fig. 5), but fails to disclose second portion has a side surface provided with a plurality of unevenness.
However, Lee discloses (in at least figs. 8A and 8B) a side surface of the first portion of the adhesive (B) provided with a plurality of unevenness.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to consider forming the second portion of the adhesive layer of Lee with a plurality of unevenness in order to facilitate good adhesion to the bank layer.
Regarding claim 7, Lee does not expressly disclose the first bank layer includes black particles.
However, it is well-known in the art to form bank layer includes black particles in order to improve the contrast of the display device as evident by Zhao et al. (CN: 115498090 A~ hereinafter “Zhao”) which discloses “in the step S1, the number of the supporting wall is consistent with the retaining wall, and when preparing, by adding carbon black particles and light absorbing material in the preparation material of the supporting wall to prepare the supporting wall of the light absorbing, or preparing the reflecting layer or the light absorbing layer by means of localized evaporation or sputtering on the side surface of the supporting wall to prepare the reflecting layer or the light absorbing layer, so that the supporting wall is combined with the retaining wall to form a light-tight structure surrounded by the chip, and the contrast of the display device is further increased.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the bank layer of Lee with the bank layer of Zhao in order to improve the contrast of the display device.
Regarding claim 8, Lee does not expressly disclose a power line provided between the substrate and the first bank layer; and a second electrode on the light-emitting element and electrically connected to the power line.
However, it is well-known in the art to form a display device comprised of, in part, a power line provided between the substrate and the first bank layer; and a second electrode on the light-emitting element and electrically connected to the power line as evident by Kim et al. (US. Pub: 2022/0352277 A1~ hereinafter “Kim”) at least figs. 6, 8 and 9 paragraphs ([0153]).
Accordingly, 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 Lee with the power line arrangement of Kim in order to supply power to the display device.
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses (in at least fig. 5) a first protection layer (P; [0022]) provided between the adhesive layer (9, B) and the second electrode (3); but fails to disclose a second bank layer on the second electrode and having a second opening corresponding to the first opening; and a second protection layer on the second bank layer.
However, it is well-known in the art to form a display device comprised of, in part, a second bank layer on the second electrode and having a second opening corresponding to the first opening; and a second protection layer on the second bank layer as evident by YOO et al. (US. Pub: 2024/0038748 A1~ hereinafter “YOO”) at least figs. 9-11.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Lee with the teachings of YOO in order to provide suitable support and protection to the device.
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