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 .
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.
Claims 1, 3-7, and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2023/0066997; hereinafter referred to as Lee ‘997) in view of Ji et al. (US 2024/0215415).
Regarding claim 1, Lee ‘997 discloses a display device comprising: pixels comprising light emitting elements disposed in respective emission areas, the pixels including first pixels and second pixels (abstract, figs. 3-4, ¶ 62-73; see also figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, emission areas EMA, pixels PXL2 and PXL1; see also fig. 11);
conductive patterns disposed in a touch sensing layer on the light emitting elements and comprising a touch electrode (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, touch sensor TS with conductive patterns CP1, CP2; see also fig. 11)
and a bridge pattern electrically connected to the touch electrode (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, bridge pattern BRP1; see also figs. 8-9);
a first light blocking layer disposed in a non-emission area around the emission areas to surround the emission areas (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, light blocking pattern LBP2; see also fig. 11);
and a second light blocking layer disposed on the first light blocking layer and surrounding the emission areas of the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, light blocking pattern LBP1),
the display device further comprising a light blocking pattern disposed in a same layer as at least one of the conductive patterns of the touch sensing layer and surrounding the emission areas of the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, light blocking pattern LBP3),
one of the touch electrode and the bridge pattern is disposed in the same layer as the light blocking pattern and contain a same material as the light blocking pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; e.g., LBP3 configured as CP1; see also ¶ 143-149).
Lee ‘997 fails to disclose a first light blocking layer disposed on and separated from the touch sensing layer.
Ji teaches a first light blocking layer disposed on and separated from the touch sensing layer (figs. 12-14, ¶ 197-199, protective layer CLA disposed between input-sensing electrodes and BM1).
Lee ‘997 and Ji are both directed to display devices with touch sensors and light blocking layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Lee ‘997 with the device of Ji since such a modification protects input-sensing electrodes from moisture and oxygen (Ji, ¶ 199) and prevents leakage of light at a particular viewing angle (Ji, ¶ 5).
Regarding claim 3, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the touch sensing layer comprises: a first conductive layer comprising the bridge pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, e.g., CP1/BRP1; see also ¶ 143-149; see also figs. 8-9);
a second conductive layer comprising the touch electrode (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, e.g., CP2; see also ¶ 143-149; see also figs. 8-9);
and an insulating layer disposed between the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, e.g., INS1; see also ¶ 143-149; see also figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 4, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the first conductive layer further comprises the light blocking pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; see also ¶ 143-149),
and the bridge pattern and the light blocking pattern are spaced apart from each other (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; see also ¶ 143-149).
Regarding claim 5, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the first conductive layer further comprises the light blocking pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; see also ¶ 143-149),
and the bridge pattern and the light blocking pattern are integral with each other (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; e.g., LBP3 configured as CP1; see also ¶ 143-149; see also figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 6, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the insulating layer is disposed on the first conductive layer, and the second conductive layer is disposed on the insulating layer (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, e.g., CP1, INS1, and CP2; see also ¶ 143-149; see also figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 7, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the first conductive layer further comprises the light blocking pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1; see also ¶ 143-149),
and the light blocking pattern is disposed closer to the light emitting elements of the second pixels than are the touch electrode and the first light blocking layer (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1, CP1 below CP2; see also ¶ 143-149 and figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 10, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the light blocking pattern is disposed closer to the emission areas of the second pixels than is the touch electrode (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1, CP1 below CP2; see also ¶ 143-149 and figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 11, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein each of the pixels comprises a plurality of emission areas comprising a first emission area emitting light of a first color, a second emission area emitting light of a second color, and a third emission area emitting light of a third color (figs. 15-16, see ¶ 68, ¶ 108).
Regarding claim 12, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the light blocking pattern individually surrounds each of the emission areas disposed in each of the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, PXL1).
Regarding claim 13, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the light blocking pattern surrounds the plurality of emission areas disposed in each of the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, PXL1).
Regarding claim 14, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the touch electrode and the light blocking pattern are disposed in different conductive layers in the touch sensing layer and do not overlap each other (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, e.g., CP2 and LBP3; see also ¶ 143-149 and figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 15, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the touch electrode and the light blocking pattern are disposed in different conductive layers in the touch sensing layer and partially overlap each other (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 may be provided in the same layer as CP1 or BRP1, e.g., LBP3 configured as CP1; see also ¶ 143-149 and figs. 8-9, e.g., SP1/SP2 overlap BRP1).
Regarding claim 16, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the first light blocking layer covers the touch electrode and the light blocking pattern (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 located under LBP2, LBP2 located under LBP1; e.g., LBP3 configured as CP1; see also ¶ 143-149 and figs. 8-9).
Regarding claim 17, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the second light blocking layer overlaps a part of the first light blocking layer (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, LBP3 located under LBP2, LBP2 located under LBP1).
Regarding claim 18, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the second light blocking layer is not disposed in the first pixels, and the second light blocking layer is disposed in the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, PXL2 and PXL1).
Regarding claim 19, Lee ‘997 discloses wherein the first light blocking layer comprises openings exposing the emission areas of the first pixels and openings exposing the emission areas of the second pixels (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, PXL2 and PXL1, see also fig. 11),
and a size of the openings in the first light blocking layer exposing the emission areas of the first pixels and a size of the openings in the first light blocking layer exposing the emission areas of the second pixels are different (figs. 15-17, ¶ 227-247, PXL2 and PXL1, see also fig. 11).
Regarding claim 20, this claim is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee ‘997 in view of Ji as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2019/0051711; hereinafter referred to as Lee ‘711).
Regarding claim 8, Lee ‘997 in view of Ji fails to explicitly disclose wherein the second conductive layer further comprises the light blocking pattern.
Lee ‘711 teaches wherein the second conductive layer further comprises the light blocking pattern (fig. 13B, ¶ 253, light absorbing pattern ABS may be formed on SP1-2; see also figs. 15-16, ¶ 258-266).
Lee ‘997 in view of Ji and Lee ‘711 are both directed to display devices with touch sensors and light blocking layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Lee ‘997 in view of Ji with the device of Lee ‘711 since such a modification improves reflective color and viewing angle/luminance ratio (Lee ‘711, ¶ 5, ¶ 265).
Regarding claim 9, Lee ‘711 further teaches wherein the insulating layer comprises a dummy hole overlapping the light blocking pattern under the light blocking pattern, and a part of the light blocking pattern extends into the dummy hole (fig. 13B, ¶ 253; see also figs. 15-16, ¶ 258-266, ABS extends down from IS-IL1 to TFE).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 KEITH L CRAWLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7616. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-6 ET.
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 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.
/KEITH L CRAWLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights