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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitation “the at least a second adjusting layer comprises multiple layers, and refractive indices of at least some of the layers are different and are greater than the refractive index of the first adjusting layer” as stated in claim 16, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 19 is 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 19 recites “the refractive index of the first adjusting layer is N3, and 2.1≤N3≤2.2 is satisfied; the refractive index of the second adjusting layer is N4, and 1.5≤N4≤1.6 is satisfied”, the recitation renders the claim indefinite since it contradicts the previously claimed limitation “a refractive index of the first adjusting layer being less than a refractive index of the second adjusting layer” stated in base claim 1.
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, 13, 15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeon (US 2016/0197308 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon discloses a display panel, comprising: a substrate (110); a light-emitting layer (230) comprising a plurality of light-emitting units formed on a side of the substrate; and a light adjusting layer (310) arranged on a side of the light-emitting layer (230) away from the substrate and comprising at least a first adjusting layer (312, 313) and at least a second adjusting layer (311), the first adjusting layer and the second adjusting layer being alternately stacked along a direction away from the substrate (Fig. 9), a refractive index of the first adjusting layer (312, 313) being less than a refractive index of the second adjusting layer (311, Fig. 9), and the first adjusting layer (312, 313) being arranged on each of an end of the light adjusting layer close to the substrate and an end of the light adjusting layer away from the substrate (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 2, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein an orthographic projection of the light adjusting layer (310) on the substrate covers the substrate, the first adjusting layer (312) is continuous in a direction parallel to the substrate, and the second adjusting layer (311) is continuous in the direction parallel to the substrate.
Regarding claim 3, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein the at least a first adjusting layer comprises two first adjusting layers (312, 313), the two first adjusting layers are configured as a first sub-adjusting layer (312) and a second sub-adjusting layer (313) arranged in a direction away from the substrate respectively, and one second adjusting layer (311) is provided and located between the first sub-adjusting layer and the second sub-adjusting layer (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 13, Jeon discloses a display panel further comprising an encapsulation layer (410), wherein the encapsulation layer (410) is located on a side of the light adjusting layer (310) away from the substrate and is in contact with the light adjusting layer, and a thickness of the light adjusting layer is D, wherein 120nm≤D≤260nm is satisfied (¶[0094]).
Regarding claim 15, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein the at least a first adjusting layer comprises multiple layers (312, 313), and refractive indices of at least some of the layers are different and are smaller than the refractive index of the second adjusting layer (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 18, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein a material of the first adjusting layer (312) comprises molybdenum oxide or silicon dioxide (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 19, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein the refractive index of the first adjusting layer is N3, and 2.1≤N3≤2.2 is satisfied (¶[0016]); the refractive index of the second adjusting layer is N4, and 1.5≤N4≤1.6 is satisfied (¶[0016]).
Regarding claim 20, Jeon discloses a display device comprising the display panel (Fig. 2).
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) 6, 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon (US 2016/0197308 A1) in view of Abe et al. (US 2006/0102912 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Jeon fails to exemplify wherein the light adjusting layer comprises a plurality of light adjusting portions arranged to be spaced apart from each other, the light adjusting portions are located on sides of the light-emitting units away from the substrate, and each light adjusting portion is correspondingly arranged for one light emitting unit in one color.
Abe discloses a display panel, comprising: a substrate (18); a light-emitting layer (4) comprising a plurality of light-emitting units (2) formed on a side of the substrate; and a light adjusting layer (1) arranged on a side of the light-emitting layer, wherein the light adjusting layer (1) comprises a plurality of light adjusting portions arranged to be spaced apart from each other, the light adjusting portions (1) are located on sides of the light-emitting units (2) away from the substrate, and each light adjusting portion (1) is correspondingly arranged for one light emitting unit (2) in one color (Fig. 1) in order to provide individually spaced light-emitting units. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to provide the light adjusting layer comprising light adjusting portions as disclosed by Abe in the display panel of Jeon in order to provide individually spaced light-emitting units.
Regarding claim 7, Jeon discloses a display panel wherein the at least a first adjusting layer comprises two first adjusting layers and configured as a first sub-adjusting layer (312) and a second sub-adjusting layer (313) arranged in a direction away from the substrate, one second adjusting layer (311) is provided and located between the first sub-adjusting layer (312) and the second sub-adjusting layer (313).
Regarding claim 10, Jeon in view of Abe discloses a display panel wherein the plurality of light-emitting units comprise a first light-emitting unit (2), a second light-emitting unit (2) and a third light-emitting unit (2), a wavelength of a light emitted by the first light-emitting unit is 460nm (¶[0053] of Abe, blue), a wavelength of a light emitted by the second light-emitting unit is 530nm (¶[0053] of Abe, green), and a wavelength of a light emitted by the third light-emitting unit is 620nm (¶[0053] of Abe, red); the plurality of light adjusting portions (2) comprise a first light adjusting portion (1), a second light adjusting portion (1) and a third light adjusting portion (1) arranged to be spaced apart from each other (Fig. 1), the first light adjusting portion (1) is located on a side of the first light-emitting unit away from the substrate (18), the second light adjusting portion (1) is located on a side of the second light-emitting unit away from the substrate (18), and the third light adjusting portion (1) is located on a side of the third light-emitting unit away from the substrate (18). Same rationale for combining stated in claim 6 applies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 8-9, 11-12, 14 and 16-17 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim(s) 4, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 4, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the second adjusting layer is defined as a first fixed value; a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is D1, and a refractive index of the first sub-adjusting layer is N1, wherein D1=P1*N1+Q1, 0≤P1≤100 and -120≤Q1≤221 are satisfied; a thickness of the second sub-adjusting layer is D2, and a refractive index of the second sub-adjusting layer is N2, wherein D2=P2*N2+Q2, -100≤P2≤0 and -60≤Q2≤251 are satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 5, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 5, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the second adjusting layer is defined as a first fixed value; a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is D1, and an refractive index of the first sub-adjusting layer is N1, wherein D1=P1*N1+Q1, 0≤P1≤100 and -120≤Q1≤221 are satisfied; a thickness of the second sub-adjusting layer is D2, and a refractive index of the second sub-adjusting layer is N2, wherein D2=P2*N2+Q2, -100≤P2≤0 and 170≤Q2≤221 are satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 8, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 8, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is D1, wherein 15nm≤D1≤40nm; a thickness of the second sub-adjusting layer is D2, and a wavelength of a light emitted by the light-emitting unit opposite to the second sub-adjusting layer along a thickness direction of the substrate is W, wherein D2 = M*W2+V*W+S, -0.009≤M≤-0.003, 3.7≤V≤9.0 and -2240≤S≤-740 are satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 9, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 9, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the second adjusting layer is defined as a first fixed value; a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is positively correlated with a refractive index of the first sub-adjusting layer, and a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is D1, wherein 15nm≤D1≤40nm is satisfied; a thickness of the second sub-adjusting layer is D2, and a wavelength of a light emitted by the light-emitting unit opposite to the second sub-adjusting layer along a thickness direction of the substrate is W, wherein D2=M*W2+V*W+S, -0.009≤M≤-0.003, 3.7≤V≤9.0 and -2300≤S≤-800 are satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 11, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 11, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the second sub-adjusting layer is D2, and a refractive index of the second sub-adjusting layer is N2; for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the first light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, and for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the first light adjusting portion, D2=-100*N2+281 is satisfied; for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the second light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, and for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the second light adjusting portion, D2=(2*e-12) N2+161 is satisfied; for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the third light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, and for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the third light adjusting portion, D2=-100*N2+131 is satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 12, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 12, and specifically comprising the limitation of a thickness of the first sub-adjusting layer is D1, a refractive index of the first sub-adjusting layer is N1, and a refractive index of the second sub-adjusting layer is N2; for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the first light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, and for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the first light adjusting portion, D2=-100*N2+221 is satisfied; for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the second light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, and for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the second light adjusting portion, D2=(2*e-12) N2+101 is satisfied; and for a part of the first sub-adjusting layer located within the third light adjusting portion, D1=100*N1-119 is satisfied, for a part of the second sub-adjusting layer located within the third light adjusting portion, D2=-100*N2+191 is satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 14, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 14, and specifically comprising the limitation of an optical film layer and an encapsulation layer, wherein the optical film layer is located on a side of the light adjusting layer away from the substrate and is in contact with the light adjusting layer, the encapsulation layer is located on a side of the optical film layer away from the substrate, and a thickness of the light adjusting layer is D, wherein 60nm≤D≤200nm is satisfied.
Regarding claim(s) 16, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 16, and specifically comprising the limitation of the at least a second adjusting layer comprises multiple layers, and refractive indices of at least some of the layers are different and are greater than the refractive index of the first adjusting layer.
Regarding claim(s) 17, the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim(s) 17, and specifically comprising the limitation of a material of the first adjusting layer comprises a fluorine-containing organic compound, a polymer or a metal oxide; and a material of the second adjusting layer comprises fluorenes, spirofluorenes, or diazinecans.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mizuno (KR 20120083496 A) discloses a display panel, comprising: a substrate; a light-emitting layer formed on a side of the substrate; and a light adjusting layer arranged on a side of the light-emitting layer, wherein the light adjusting layer comprises a plurality of light adjusting layers.
Jeon (US 2019/0197924 A1) discloses a flexible display device including a substrate with an active area having a bending portion and a flat portion, and a peripheral area surrounding the active area; a first emission unit located in the bending portion; a second emission unit located in the flat portion; a first protective layer covering the second emission unit; an optical stack covering the first emission unit and including two or more interfaces having a difference in an index of refraction of 0.1 or more; and a second protective layer covering the first protective layer and the optical stack together.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
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 on (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.
/Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Prosecution Insights