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 “a first pixel in the first area, the first pixel including at least one second emission area; and a second pixel in the second area, the second pixel including at least one first emission area and at least one second emission area” as cited in claims 1, 8, 13 and 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
Claims 1-16 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.
Regarding claims 1, the Examiner is unclear about the limitation “a first pixel in the first area, the first pixel including at least one second emission area; and a second pixel in the second area, the second pixel including at least one first emission area and at least one second emission area.” It appears the Applicant is using “pixels and sub-pixels” interchangeably in the claims based on the specification. Therefore, for purpose of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best understood. Claims 2-9 are rejected due to their dependency upon claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, the Examiner is unclear about the limitation “a first pixel in the first area; and a second pixel in the second area, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel are pixels having a same color, wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes at least one emission area, and wherein a number of the emission areas in the second pixel is greater than a number of the emission areas in the first pixel.” It appears the Applicant is using “pixels and sub-pixels” interchangeably in the claims based on the specification. Therefore, for purpose of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best understood. Claims 9-12 are rejected due to their dependency upon claim 8.
Regarding claim 13, the Examiner is unclear about the limitation “a first pixel in the first area; a second pixel in the second area; and lenses respectively corresponding to the first pixel and the second pixel, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel have a same color.” It appears the Applicant is using “pixels and sub-pixels” interchangeably in the claims based on the specification. Therefore, for purpose of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best understood. Claims 14-15 are rejected due to their dependency upon claim 13.
Regarding claim 16, the is unclear about the limitation “a first pixel in the first area, the first pixel including at least one of a second emission area; and a second pixel in the second area, the second pixel including at least one of a first emission area and the at least one of the second emission area…” It appears the Applicant is using “pixels and sub-pixels” interchangeably in the claims based on the specification. Therefore, for purpose of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best understood.
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, 8-10 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Hong et al. (US. Pub: 2023/0217690 A1~hereinafter “Hong”) of record.
Regarding claim 1, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-5) a display device comprising: a first area (EA1; [0045]) and a second area (EA2; [0045]) adjacent to the first area; a first pixel in the first area (SP1), the first pixel including at least one second emission area (EA2; see fig. 1); and a second pixel in the second area (SP2; see fig. 2), the second pixel (SP2) including at least one first emission area (EA1) and at least one second emission area (EA2), wherein a half-spherical lens (232) is disposed in the first emission area (EA1), and wherein a half-cylindrical lens (234) is disposed in the second emission area (EA2).
Regarding claim 2, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8; [0137]) the first emission area (EA1) in the second area is turned on, and the second emission area in the second area is turned off in a first mode.
Regarding claim 3, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8; [0138]) the first emission area in the second area is turned off, and the second emission area in the second area is turned on in a second mode.
Regarding claim 8, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) a display device comprising: a first area (EA1) and a second area (EA2) adjacent to the first area on a substrate (110); a first pixel (SP1) in the first area; and a second pixel (SP2) in the second area, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel are pixels having a same color (see fig. 8; [0047]), wherein each of the first pixel and the second pixel includes at least one emission area (see figs. 1-5 and 8), and wherein a number of the emission areas in the second pixel is greater than a number of the emission areas in the first pixel (see figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 9, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8; [0047]) the first pixel and the second pixel are green or blue pixels.
Regarding claim 10, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) each of the first pixel (SP1) and the second pixel (SP2) includes a first emission area (EA1) and a second emission area (EA2), wherein a half-cylindrical lens (230) is disposed on the first emission area of the first pixel (see fig. 1), and wherein a half-spherical lens (230) is disposed on the first emission area of the second pixel (see fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) a display device comprising: a first area (see fig. 1) and a second area (see fig. 1) adjacent to the first area on a substrate (110); a first pixel (SP1) in the first area; a second pixel (SP2) in the second area; and lenses (232, 234) respectively corresponding to the first pixel and the second pixel (see at least fig. 1), wherein the first pixel and the second pixel have a same color (as evident by at least figs. 1-5 and 8), and wherein a number of the lenses (230) corresponding to the second pixel is greater than a number of the lenses corresponding to the first pixel (as evident by at least figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 14, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) the first pixel comprises a plurality of first emission areas (see figs. 3-5), and wherein the lenses corresponding to the first pixel are configured to cover the plurality of first emission areas (see figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 15, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) the lenses (230) corresponding to the first pixel are half-cylindrical lenses (322, 234), and wherein the lenses (230) corresponding to the second pixel comprise a half-cylindrical lens and a half-spherical lens (see figs. 1-5).
Regarding claim 16, Hong discloses (in at least figs. 1-8) a vehicle comprising: a body ([0139]; i.e. the body is an inherit feature of the vehicle) having a motor mounted therein; at least one display panel in the body ([0140]), the at least one display panel including: a first area (EA1) and a second area (EA2) adjacent to the first area on a substrate (110); a first pixel (SP1) in the first area (EA1), the first pixel including at least one of a second emission area (EA2); and a second pixel (SP2) in the second area, the second pixel (SP2) including at least one of a first emission area (EA1) and the at least one of the second emission area (EA2), wherein the first emission area includes a half-spherical lens (232), and wherein the second emission area includes a half-cylindrical lens (234).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 11-12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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