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 .
This Office Action is made in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 07/21/2026. Claims 1-28 are currently pending in the application. Claims 16-27 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species II as indicated by the applicant in the RESPONSE TO ELECTION REQUIREMENT, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/03/2026. Claims 1-15 and 28 readable on the elected Species I as indicated by the Applicant are considered below.
Response to Arguments
The rejections of claims 1-15 and 28 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) in the previous Office action dated 04/21/2026 have been withdrawn in light of the amendment to the claims. However, see the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendment.
Notice to Applicant(s)
In order to compact the prosecution of the application and to inform the Applicant at least independent claims being broad, multiple sets of rejections are made so that the Applicant may narrow the claimed invention to be distinct from the prior arts.
Examiner notes that the specification is not the measure of invention. Therefore, limitations contained therein can’t be read into the claims for the purpose of avoiding the prior art. See In re Sporck, 55 CCPA 743, 386 F.2d 924, 155 USPQ 687 (1968).
Further, the names/ terms of the features/elements used in the instant application or instant claims may be different from the names/terms of the matching features/ elements of the prior arts; however, the matching features/ elements of the prior arts contain all characteristics/ functions of the features/elements DEFINED by the pending claims.
Note that in order to avoid confusion, the below citations in the below rejection(s) are mere one or more places in the reference to disclose the "claimed" limitation(s) and/or are directed to one or more of embodiments disclosed by the cited reference(s). In other words, the “claimed” features/limitations may be read in other places in the reference or other embodiments of the reference. In order to better understand how the claimed limitations are taught by the reference(s), a review of the entire reference(s) is suggested by the examiner. Applicant is reminded a prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention as not all relevant paragraphs may have been cited in the rejection. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Further, note that one or more prior art rejections to one or more claims are made because whether each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently, in a prior art reference, based on a level of one of ordinary skill in the art and all requirements of the test for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. §102 and/or a prima facie case of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103 must be met. In some cases, a single prior art reference and/or a combination of prior arts provides a stronger rejection of some of the pending claims while another single prior art reference and/or another combination of prior arts provides a stronger rejection of others of the pending claims because the pending claims may be broad to be read in at least one single prior art or at least one combination of prior arts. The purpose of such one or more prior art rejections to one or more claims is to suggest the Applicant to submit claim(s) closely directed to the Applicant’s invention and, as a result, to minimize the examination of the application.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 13-15 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by An et al. (US 2023/0004258 A1; hereinafter An.)
As per claim 1, An discloses a display device [100; Fig. 1] comprising:
a display panel [110; Fig. 1] comprising a display area [DA; Fig. 1] including a transmission area [one or more TAs shown in any of Figs. 2, 6-11], and a non-display area [NDA; Fig. 1] adjacent to the display area (see at least Fig. 1;) and
an input sensor [TSP] on the display panel (see at least Figs. 3, 6) and comprising a plurality of conductive patterns including at least elements [Y-TEL, X-TEL, Y-TL, X-TL/ DM] (see at least Fig. 5B;)
wherein the plurality of conductive patterns comprises:
a first sensing electrode [Y-TEL] comprising a plurality of first sensing patterns [Y-TE] arranged along a first/vertical direction and a plurality of bridge patterns [Y-BE] configured to connect adjacent two first sensing patterns of the plurality of first sensing patterns to each other (see at least Fig. 5B;)
a second sensing electrode [X-TEL] spaced from the first sensing electrode [Y-TEL] (see at least Fig. 5B) and comprising a plurality of second sensing patterns [X-TE] arranged along a second/horizontal direction crossing the first direction, the second sensing electrode [X-TE] being spaced from the first sensing electrode [Y-TE] (see at least Fig. 5B;) and
a transparent electrode (see at least any of Figs. 8A-11F, disclosing the claimed transparent electrode corresponding to a portion of the element [TAE/TAE1/TAE2] overlapping the transmission area [TA] or a whole element [TAE/TAE1/TAE2]) electrically connected to at least a portion of the first sensing electrode [Y-TEL] or the second sensing electrode [X-TEL] (see at least Fig. 5B and any of Figs. 8A-11F; ¶ 242, disclosing the transparent electrode TAE1 electrically connected with the touch sensor metal TSM1 of the sensing electrode [X-TEL] and the transparent electrode TAE2 electrically connected with the touch sensor metal TSM2 of the sensing electrode [Y-TEL],)
wherein each of the plurality of first sensing patterns [Y-TE] and the plurality of second sensing patterns [X-TE] comprises a plurality of mesh lines in which a transmission opening overlapping the transmission area is located (see at least Fig. 5B and any of Figs. 8A-11F,) and wherein the transparent electrode [a portion of or a whole TAE1/TAE2] overlaps at least a portion of the transmission area [TA] (see at least any of Figs. 8A-11F.)
As per claim 2, An discloses: wherein the display area further comprises a plurality of pixel areas (see at least any of Figs. 8A-8F, disclosing a claimed pixel area corresponding to areas [EA, BA] or only an area [EA]) adjacent to the transmission area [TA] and configured to emit light (see at least any of Figs. 6-11F.)
As per claim 3, An discloses: wherein, in the display area, a ratio of the transmission area [TA] to an entire area of the transmission area [TA] and the plurality of pixel areas is about 60% or more (see at least any of Figs. 2A-2C, 7A-7E.)
As per claim 4, An discloses: wherein the input sensor further comprises a cover insulating layer [T-ILD] between the first and second sensing electrodes and the transparent electrode (see the rejection of claim 1 regarding to the construed transparent electrode; further see at least Figs. 8D-8F, 9D-9F, 10D-10F, 11D-11F, disclosing the cover insulating layer [T-ILD] between the first and second metals [TSM2, TSM1] of the first and second sensing electrodes [Y-TE, X_TE] and the construed transparent electrode [a portion of TAE/TAE1/TAE2 overlapping the transmission area TA],) and wherein the transparent electrode is electrically connected to at least a portion of the first sensing electrode or the second sensing electrode through an upper contact hole that passes through the cover insulating layer (see at least Figs. 8D-8F, 9D-9F, 10D-10F, 11D-11F.)
As per claim 5, An discloses: wherein the transparent electrode overlaps at least a portion of a corresponding transmission area [TA] and at least a portion of a corresponding pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas (see the rejection of claim 1 for the claimed transparent electrode and the rejection of claim 2 for the claimed pixel area; further see at least any of Figs. 8A-11F.)
As per claim 6, An discloses: wherein the plurality of conductive patterns further comprises a dummy pattern [DM] at a same layer as the transparent electrode and insulated from the first sensing electrode and the second sensing electrode (see at least Fig. 5B; ¶ 188, disclosing the plurality of conductive patterns further comprising a dummy pattern [DM] formed of a same material and same layer as the first sensing electrode and the second sensing electrode and insulated from the first sensing electrode [Y-TEL] and the second sensing electrode [X-TEL]; further see at least any of Figs. 11A-11C, disclosing the element [TSM2] of the first sensing electrode [T-YEL] and the element [TSM1] of the second sensing electrode [X-TEL] at a same layer [T-ILD] as the transparent electrode [TAE1/TAE2]; thereby rendering the dummy pattern [DM] at a same layer [T-ILD] as the transparent electrode [TAE1/TAE2].)
As per claim 7, An discloses: wherein the plurality of pixel areas comprises a first pixel area, a second pixel area, and a third pixel area, and wherein the transmission area is adjacent to each of the first pixel area, the second pixel area, and the third pixel area along the second direction (see at least any of Figs. 2A-2C, 7A-7C.)
As per claim 13, An discloses: wherein the second sensing electrode [X-TEL] further comprises a connection pattern [X-BE] between adjacent two second sensing patterns [X-TE] of the plurality of second sensing patterns and having a shape integrated with the plurality of second sensing patterns (see at least Fig. 5B.)
As per claim 14, An discloses: wherein the input sensor further comprises a sensing insulating layer [T-ILD] between the plurality of bridge patterns [Y-BE] and the plurality of first sensing patterns [Y-TE], wherein each of the plurality of bridge patterns is electrically connected to corresponding one of the plurality of first sensing patterns through a lower contact hole defined in the sensing insulating layer (see at least Fig. 5B.)
As per claim 15, An discloses: wherein the transmission area comprises: a first transmission area overlapping the transparent electrode on a plane; and a second transmission area that does not overlap the transparent electrode on the plane (see at least Fig. 7A, disclosing the transmission area comprising: a first transmission area [TA] overlapping the transparent electrode [TAE1] on a plane; and a second transmission area [another TA overlapping the transparent electrode TAE2] that does not overlap the transparent electrode [TAE1] on the plane.)
As per claim 28, see the rejections of claims 1-3 for similar limitations. An further discloses: wherein a transmission opening overlapping the transmission area and a pixel opening overlapping a corresponding pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas are in the plurality of mesh lines (see the rejection of claim 2 for each pixel area comprising areas [EA, BKA] and a pixel opening corresponding to the area [EA]; further see at least Figs. 5B, 6, 7A, 8A.)
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 of this title, 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0217777 A1; hereinafter Kim.)
As per claim 8, An discloses the transparent electrode comprising transparent conductive element/material, but is silent to transparent conductive element/material being transparent conductive oxide, as claimed.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a related display device (see at least Abstract,) wherein the transparent electrode comprising transparent conductive element/material being transparent conductive oxide having a relatively high work function value (see at least ¶ 86: “… The transparent conductive layer may be made of a material having a relatively high work function value, such as indium tin oxide (ITO) or indium zinc oxide (IZO) …”.) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to modify at least the transparent electrode of Kim comprising transparent conductive oxide, in view of the teaching in the Kim reference, to improve the above modified display device of the An reference for the predictable result of improving a relatively high work function value of the transparent electrode.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An in view of Choi et al. (US 2022/0208860 A1; hereinafter Choi.)
As per claim 9, An discloses: wherein the display panel comprises a light emitting element [ED] configured to emit source light and overlapping a corresponding one of at least the plurality of pixel areas (see at least Figs. 6, 8A), and the light emitting element [ED] comprises: a first electrode [PE]; a light emitting layer [EL] stack on the first electrode [PE]; and a second electrode [CE] on the light emitting layer [EL] (see at least Fig. 6.) An is silent to the light emitting layer being a multi-layer light emitting layer comprising a first to fourth light emitting stacks and charge generation layers between the first, second, third, and fourth light emitting stacks, respectively, as claimed.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Choi discloses a related display device comprising a display panel (see at least Fig. 1; ¶¶ 38-39,) wherein the display panel comprises a multi-layer light emitting element [300] configured to emit source light and overlapping a corresponding one of at least the plurality of pixel areas (see at least Fig. 1; ¶ 52,) and the light emitting element (see Fig. 2 and the corresponding description if necessary) comprises: a first electrode [310]; a first light emitting stack [321] on the first electrode [310]; a second light emitting stack [322] on the first light emitting stack [321]; a third light emitting stack [323] on the second light emitting stack [322]; a fourth light emitting stack [324] on the third light emitting stack; a second electrode [330] on the fourth light emitting stack [324]; and charge generation layers [329a, 329b, 329c] between the first, second, third, and fourth light emitting stacks, respectively (see Fig. 2 and the corresponding description if necessary) wherein each of the first to fourth light emitting stacks comprises at least one an emission layer (see Fig. 2 and the corresponding description if necessary, disclosing the first light emitting stack [321] comprising emission layers [321re, 321be], the second light emitting stack [322] comprising an emission layer [322be], the third light emitting stack [323] comprising an emission layer [323ge], and the fourth light emitting stack [324] comprising an emission layer [324be],) thereby improving the white balance and increasing color viewing angle (see at least Abstract.)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to modify the display device of An to utilize the multi-layer light emitting element, in view of the teaching in the Choi reference, to improve the above modified display device of the An reference for the predictable result of improving the white balance and increasing color viewing angle. Accordingly, the above modified display device of the An reference obviously renders all limitations of this claim.
As per claim 10, the above modified An in view of Choi, as discussed in the rejection of claim 9, is silent to a light control layer, as claimed. However, Choi further discloses a light control layer [810-830] on the light emitting element [300] to transmit the source light or convert the source light into light having a different wavelength, thereby improving the visibility of the realized image (see at least Fig. 10; ¶ 87.) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of invention of the pending application to modify the display device of An to further include the light control layer, in view of the teaching in the Choi reference, to improve the above modified display device of the An reference for the predictable result of improving the visibility of the realized image. Accordingly, the above modified display device of the An reference obviously renders all limitations of this claim.
As per claim 11, the above modified An in view of Choi, as discussed in the rejection of claim 10, obviously renders: wherein the light control layer comprises: a bank [810] including a plurality of bank openings in which the color filters [820], as a plurality of light control patterns, are disposed, respectively (see Choi at least Fig. 10), wherein the plurality of light control patterns do not overlap the transmission area (see An at least Fig. 8A; and Choi at least Fig. 10.)
As per claim 12, the above modified An in view of Choi, as discussed in the rejection of claim 9, obviously renders: wherein the at least one emission layer in each of the first light emitting stack to the fourth light emitting stack does not overlap the transmission area (see An at least Fig. 8A and Choi at least Figs. 1-2.)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jimmy H Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-7675. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30AM-6PM.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae, can be reached at (571) 272-3017. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jimmy H Nguyen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
