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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
1. Applicant's amendments, filed January 21, 2026 are respectfully acknowledged and have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed January 21, 2026 and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Claims 1, 7, 10, and 14-17 are amended. Claim 18 is newly added.
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Drawings
2. The amendments to the drawings are respectfully acknowledged and are accepted.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 includes the limitation “a height of a bottom surface of the first electrode at a point at which the first electrode contacts with the organic compound layer”. The limitation is indefinite as applicant’s specification and drawings do not describe a point at which the first electrode contacts with the organic compound layer; what is taught instead appears to be “a height of a bottom surface of the first electrode below, when viewing the anode’s thickness, a point at which the first electrode contacts with the organic compound layer”. Examiner uses the latter limitation for examination purposes.
Further depending claims not mentioned inherit the deficiencies of their respective base claims and are rejected under similar rationale.
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 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.
Claims 1-6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (Yoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20200035941 A1, hereinafter “Yoo”).
Regarding Claim 1 (Currently Amended), Yoo teaches a light emitting device (par 0054 Fig 1 OLED display) comprising:
a plurality of pixels each including (1) a light emitting element and (2) a driving transistor configured to drive the light emitting element (par 0054 Fig 2 display area DA includes a plurality of pixels, each of which comprises a plurality of subpixels; par 0063 each subpixel may include a switching transistor ST, a driving transistor DT, and an organic light emitting diode OLE; high level voltage is supplied to the driving current line VDD for driving the organic light emitting diode OLE); and
a power supply wiring configured to supply a power supply voltage to the driving transistor (par 0063 Fig 2 high level voltage is supplied to the driving current line VDD for driving the organic light emitting diode OLE; par 0095 Fig 6B depletion electrode wiring DE is connected to VDD), wherein
the light emitting element includes (1) a first electrode, (2) an organic compound layer including a light emitting layer arranged on the first electrode, and (3) a second electrode arranged on the organic compound (par 0072 Figs 5, 6B light emitting element includes a first electrode ANO [i.e. ANOR, exposed area of the anode electrode ANOR by the bank BA is defined as the “Red” emission area]; par 0074 an organic compound/ light emitting layer EL comprising a hole injection layer HIL, a hole transport layer HTL, a light emission layer EML, an electron transport layer ETL and an electron injection layer EIL arranged on the first electrode ANO/ANOR; and par 0072 a second electrode CAT arranged on the organic light emitting layer EL), and wherein
where a first height is a height of a bottom surface of the first electrode at a point at which the first electrode contacts with the organic compound layer (the bottom surface of ANOR at [directly below in the Y direction in Fig 6B] a point at which ANOR contacts with the HTL/HIL portion of the organic compound layer EL may be defined in Fig 6B),
at least a part of the power supply wiring is arranged at one of (1) the same height as the first height (par 0095 Figs 5, 6B depletion electrode wiring DE, connected to VDD, is disposed between two neighboring anode electrodes [e.g. ANOR and ANOG] with a predetermined distance on a planarization layer PL, and thus is arranged at the same height as the first height as a bottom surface of the anode ANOR) and (2) a position closer to the second electrode than the first height.
Regarding Claim 2 (Original), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein at least a part of the power supply wiring is arranged to surround the first electrode (par 0121 Fig 9 depletion electrode wiring DE, connected to VDD, is disposed between neighboring first anode electrodes, such that the first anode electrode is surrounded by the depletion electrode/power supply wiring DE).
Regarding Claim 3 (Original), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein at least a part of the power supply wiring is arranged between first electrodes of adjacent pixels of the plurality of pixels (par 0095 Figs 5, 6B depletion electrode wiring DE, connected to VDD, is disposed between two neighboring anode electrodes [e.g. ANOR and ANOG] with a predetermined distance on a planarization layer PL, and thus is arranged at the same height as the first height as a bottom surface of the anode ANOR).
Regarding Claim 4 (Original), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein at least a part of the power supply wiring is electrically insulated from the second electrode by an insulating member (par 0104 Figs 5,6B at least a part of the power supply wiring VDD/DE is electrically insulated from the second electrode CAT by at least an organic insulating bank BA).
Regarding Claim 5 (Original), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the driving transistor is connected to the first electrode (par 0071 Fig 4 first electrode ANO serves as a pixel electrode and is connected to the drain electrode DD of the driving thin film transistor DT through the via hole PH).
Regarding Claim 6 (Original), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein the first electrode is an anode electrode, and the second electrode is a cathode electrode (par 0072 Figs 5, 6B light emitting element includes a first electrode ANO [i.e. ANOR, exposed area of the anode electrode ANOR by the bank BA is defined as the “Red” emission area]; and par 0072 a second electrode CAT arranged on the organic light emitting layer EL).
Regarding Claim 18 (New), Yoo teaches the device according to claim 1, further comprising a bank insulating layer covering an edge of the first electrode, wherein the point at which the first electrode contacts with the organic compound layer does not overlap with the bank insulating layer electrode (par 0072 Figs 5, 6B organic bank insulating layer BA covers an edge of the first electrode ANO; and par 0072 the point at which the ANO contacts with the organic compound layer EL/HIL does not overlap with the bank insulating layer BA).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20230292562 A1) in view of Choi et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20240431158 A1, hereinafter “Choi”).
Regarding Claim 7 (Currently Amended), You teaches a light emitting device (par 0058 Fig 1 OLED display device) comprising:
a plurality of pixels each including (1) a light emitting element and (2) a driving transistor configured to drive the light emitting element (paras 0123,0129,0131 Fig 12 the display device includes a plurality of pixels PX each including at least one light emitting diode LED and a driving transistor T1 configured to supply a driving current Id to the light emitting diode LED); and
a power supply wiring configured to supply a power supply voltage to the driving transistor (paras 0127,0131 Fig 12 the driving voltage line 172 is configured to supply a power supply voltage ELVDD to first electrode Ea1 of the driving transistor T1), wherein
the light emitting element includes (1) a first electrode, (2) a light emitting layer arranged on the first electrode, and (3) a second electrode arranged on the light emitting layer (par 0080 Fig 1 light emitting element LED includes a first electrode 191, a light emitting layer 370 arranged on the first electrode 191 [par 0078], and a second electrode 270 arranged on the light emitting layer 370 [par 0079]), and wherein
the first electrode has an opening, wherein the power supply wiring faces the second electrode through the opening (par 0108 Fig 8 first electrode pattern 191 has an opening 195, and at least a part of the power supply wiring 172 is arranged to overlap/face the second electrode 270 via the opening 195).
However, You appears not to expressly teach
wherein the power supply wiring is arranged to face the second electrode over the entire opening in at least one pixel.
Choi teaches
wherein the power supply wiring is arranged to face the second electrode over the entire
You and Choi are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device with opening provided in the anodes of You with the inclusion of the power supply wiring arranged to face the second electrode over the entire
Regarding Claim 10 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7, wherein a shape of the first electrode is a hexagonal shape (You par 0086 Fig 2 a shape of the first electrode 191 may be a hexagonal shape).
Regarding Claim 11 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7, wherein at least a part of the power supply wiring is insulated from the second electrode by an insulating member (You par 0074 Fig 1 at least a part of the power supply wiring 172 is insulated from the second electrode 270 by an insulating member at least 182).
Regarding Claim 12 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7, wherein the driving transistor is connected to the first electrode (You par 0131 Fig 12 driving transistor T1 is connected to the first, anode electrode of the LED through transistor T6).
Regarding Claim 13 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7, wherein the first electrode is an anode electrode, and the second electrode is a cathode electrode (You par 0080 Fig 1 light emitting element LED includes a first, anode electrode 191, and a second, cathode electrode 270).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20230292562 A1) in view of Choi et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20240431158 A1, hereinafter “Choi”) and further in view of Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20250301878 A1, hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding Claim 8 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7. However, You as modified appears not to expressly teach wherein the opening includes a plurality of openings provided in the first electrode.
Yang teaches wherein the opening includes a plurality of openings provided in the first electrode (par 0041 Fig 4 sub-anodes 301 are provided with one or a plurality of via holes 310 penetrating therethrough).
You Choi and Yang are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device with opening provided in the anodes of You/Choi with the inclusion of the a plurality of anode openings of Yang. The motivation would have been in order to provide improved water vapor evaporation from the planarization layer during heating steps in manufacturing (Yang par 0042).
Regarding Claim 9 (Original), You as modified teaches the device according to claim 7. However, You as modified appears not to expressly teach wherein a shape of the opening is a circular shape.
Yang teaches wherein a shape of the opening is a circular shape (par 0049 Fig 5 a shape of the opening 310 may be a circular shape).
You Choi and Yang are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device with opening provided in the anodes of You/Choi with the inclusion of the anode opening shape of Yang. The motivation would have been in order to provide improved water vapor evaporation from the planarization layer during heating steps in manufacturing (Yang par 0042).
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (Yoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20200035941 A1, hereinafter “Yoo”) in view of Akiyama et al. (U.S. Patent Application 20210384280 A1, hereinafter “Akiyama”).
Regarding Claim 14 (Currently Amended), Yoo teaches the light emitting device defined in claim 1. However, Yoo appears not to expressly teach an image capturing device comprising
an optical unit including a plurality of lenses;
an image capturing element configured to receive light having passed through the optical unit; and
a display unit configured to display an image captured by the image capturing element, wherein
the display unit includes a light emitting device according to claim 1.
Akiyama teaches an image capturing device comprising
an optical unit including a plurality of lenses (par 0087 Fig 17 image capturing device that includes an optical unit including a plurality of lenses);
an image capturing element configured to receive light having passed through the optical unit (par 0087 Fig 17 an image capturing element configured to receive light that has passed through the optical unit); and
a display unit configured to display an image captured by the image capturing element device (par 0087 Fig 17 the image capturing device may include a display unit configured to display information acquired by the image capturing element), wherein
the display unit includes a light emitting device according to claim 1 (par 0088 Fig 17 the display unit may comprise light emitting device 101).
Yoo and Akiyama are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the image capturing device of Akiyama with the inclusion of the light emitting device defined in claim 1 of Kim. The motivation would have been in order to provide the display for the camera viewfinder (Akiyama par 0089).
Regarding Claim 15 (Currently Amended), Yoo teaches a display device comprising a display unit including a light emitting device according to claim 1. However, Yoo appears not to expressly teach a housing provided with the display unit.
Akiyama teaches a housing provided with the display unit (par 0088 Fig 17 image capturing device 1100 comprises a housing 1104 provided with the display unit 1102).
Yoo and Akiyama are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display unit/light emitting device of Yoo with the inclusion of the image capturing device housing of Akiyama. The motivation would have been in order to provide the rear display for the camera (Akiyama par 0088).
Regarding Claim 16 (Currently Amended), Yoo teaches an electronic apparatus comprising a display unit including a light emitting device according to claim 1. However, Yoo appears not to expressly teach a housing provided with the display unit; and
a communication unit provided in the housing and configured to communicate with an outside.
Akiyama teaches a housing provided with the display unit (par 0092 Fig 18 communication device 1200 comprises a housing 1203 provided with the display unit 1201); and
a communication unit provided in the housing and configured to communicate with an outside (par 0092 Fig 18 housing 1203 may include a circuit, a printed board including the circuit, a battery, and a communication unit configured to communicate with an outside).
Yoo and Akiyama are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display unit/light emitting device of Yoo with the inclusion of the communication device of Akiyama. The motivation would have been in order to provide mobile phone device (Akiyama par 0088).
Regarding Claim 17 (Currently Amended), Yoo teaches the display device includes a light emitting device according to claim 1. However, Yoo appears not to expressly teach a wearable device including: a display device configured to display an image.
Akiyama teaches a wearable device including: a display device configured to display an image (par 0100 Fig 22A teaches a wearable device such as smart glasses to which the light emitting device 101 can be applied).
Yoo and Akiyama are analogous art as they each pertain to light emitting devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the wearable device of Akiyama with the inclusion of the light emitting device defined in claim 1 of Yoo. The motivation would have been in order to provide the display on the back surface side of the glasses lens (Akiyama par 0101).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 21, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MARK EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)270-7731. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9a-5p EST.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached on 571-270-7230. 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.
/MARK EDWARDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624