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 because:
Some numbers, letters, and reference characters cross or mingle with the lines so as to interfere with its comprehension. See placement of 151, 121, 120, and 119 in Fig. 2, for example. See 37 CFR 1.84(p)(3), which recites “Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines.”
The meaning of some dashed lines is unclear. See left side of Fig. 2, for example.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4), which recites “the same reference character must never be used to designate different parts”, because reference character “110” has been used to designate two different parts in Fig. 2, for example.
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A, drawn to Figs. 2-3, in the reply filed on 01/27/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 4-9 and 13-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/27/2026.
Claim Objections
Independent claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Independent claim 1 recites “the first display panel comprises a first anode layer” whereas independent claim 10 recites “the first display panel comprises a first anode”. The distinction, if any, between a first anode and a first anode layer is unclear. The Examiner suggests --the first display panel comprises a first anode layer-- in independent claim 10 for consistency with Applicant’s disclosure.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 11-12 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.
Claim 11 recites “the first anode is arranged in the first anode”. The meaning, if any, of this limitation is unclear.
Claim 12 recites “the third anode is arranged in the first anode”. The meaning, if any, of this limitation is unclear.
For prior art examination purposes only, limitations appearing in claims 11 and 12 shall be interpreted as having meaning consistent with limitations appearing in claims 2 and 3, respectively.
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 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US 20190081122 A1).
As recited in independent claim 10, Kim et al show a display device (“Display Device …” [Title]).
As recited in independent claims 1 and 10, Kim et al show a double-sided display panel 1, comprising a substrate 100, and further comprising a first display panel (above substrate 100, for example) and a second display panel (below substrate 100, for example) that are arranged opposite to each other (see arrangement above and below substrate 100); wherein the first display panel (above substrate 100, for example) and the second display panel (below substrate 100, for example) are arranged (see arrangement) on the substrate 100; wherein a display surface (upper surface, for example) of the first display panel (above substrate 100, for example) and a display surface (lower surface, for example) of the second display panel (below substrate 100, for example) are arranged (see arrangement) to face away from each other (upward and downward from substrate 100, respectively); wherein the first display panel (above substrate 100) comprises a first anode layer (including 11), a first light-emitting layer (including 13), and a first cathode layer (including 12) that are stacked in sequence (“OLED1 … may include a first anode 11 facing a first cathode 12 and a first organic light-emitting layer 13 between the first anode 11 and the first cathode 12” [0054]), and wherein the second display panel (below substrate 100) comprises a second anode layer (including 21), a second light-emitting layer (including 23), and a second cathode layer 22 that are stacked in sequence (“OLED2 may be on the second planarization layer 252 and may include a second anode 21 facing a second cathode 22 and a second organic light-emitting layer 23 between the second anode 21 and the second cathode 22” [0065]); wherein the first anode layer (including 11) and the second anode layer (including 21) are connected to each other (see connection between 11 and drain A3, and see connection between 21 and drain A3, for example); wherein an orthogonal projection (vertical projection in Figs. 3 and 18, for example) of the first anode layer (including 11) on the substrate 100 overlaps or coincides (see overlap in Figs. 3 and 18; see also coincidence in Figs. 3 and 18) with an orthogonal projection (vertical projection in Figs. 3 and 18, for example) of the second anode layer (including 21) on the substrate 100.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 20190081122 A1) in view of Niu et al (US 20140306204 A1).
Claims 1 and 10 show a device and panel as described above.
As recited in claims 2 and 11 (to the extent understood), Kim et al show that the first anode layer (including 11) and the second anode layer (including 21) are respectively arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) on two sides (upper and lower sides) of the substrate 100 that face away from each other (upward and downward from substrate 100), wherein there is defined a through hole (“second source through hole SH2 may be formed to penetrate not only the supporting substrate 100” [0086]) in the substrate 100, wherein the first anode layer (including 11) and the second anode layer (including 21) are connected (insofar as both 11 and 21 are connected to drain A3) through the through hole (including SH2); wherein the first display panel (above substrate 100) comprises a first pixel PX1, wherein the second display panel (below substrate 100) comprises a second pixel PX2, wherein the first pixel PX1 and the second pixel PX2 are arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) on opposite sides (upper and lower sides) of the substrate 100; wherein the first pixel PX1 comprises a first anode 11, a first light-emitting element 13, and a first cathode 12 that are stacked in sequence (“OLED1 … may include a first anode 11 facing a first cathode 12 and a first organic light-emitting layer 13 between the first anode 11 and the first cathode 12” [0054]); wherein the second pixel PX2 comprises a second anode 21, a second light-emitting element 23, and a second cathode 22 that are stacked in sequence (“OLED2 may be on the second planarization layer 252 and may include a second anode 21 facing a second cathode 22 and a second organic light-emitting layer 23 between the second anode 21 and the second cathode 22” [0065]); wherein the first anode 11 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the first anode layer (including 11), wherein the second anode 21 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the second anode layer (including 21), wherein the first light-emitting element 13 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the first light-emitting layer (including 13), wherein the second light-emitting element 23 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the second light-emitting layer (including 23), wherein the first cathode 12 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the first cathode layer (including 12), wherein the second cathode 22 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the second cathode layer (including 22); wherein the first anode 11 and the second anode 21 are connected (11 is connected to A3 and 21 is connected to A3) through the through hole SH2.
As recited in independent claims 2 and 11, Kim et al are silent regarding whether wherein the first cathode and the second cathode are independently controlled.
As recited in independent claims 2 and 11, Niu et al teach that a first cathode (see second electrode in Fig. 4, for example) and a second cathode (see first electrode in Fig. 4, for example) are independently controlled (“proper voltage can be applied to the first electrode 1 and the second electrode 5 respectively so as to control the voltage between the first electrode 1 and the shared electrode 3 and the voltage between the second electrode 5 and the shared electrode 3 independently” [0037]).
Moreover, the Examiner finds that independently controlled cathodes were predictable before the effective filing date.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to independently control the two cathodes of Kim et al as taught by Niu et al. The rationale is as follows: one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to display different information on first and second displays of a dual display as suggested by Niu et al (“generally the TFT and one electrode (generally an anode electrode) of the OLED pixel are integrated together to use the TFT to drive these two OLEDs at the same time, thus, independent control of these two OLEDs can’t be implemented. … there needs a novel double-sided organic light-emitting diode which can emit light at the both ends of which the light emitting of each side can be controlled independently” [0004]-[0005]).
As recited in claims 3 and 12 (to the extent understood), Kim et al show that the first display panel (above substrate 100) further comprises a third pixel PX3, wherein the second display panel (below substrate 100) further comprises a fourth pixel PX4; wherein the third pixel PX3 and the fourth pixel PX4 are arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) on the two sides (above and below substrate 100) of the substrate 100 that face away from each other (upward and downward); wherein the third pixel PS3 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) adjacent to the first pixel PX1, wherein the second pixel PX2 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) adjacent to the fourth pixel PX4; wherein the third pixel PX3 comprises a third anode 31, a third light-emitting element 33, and a third cathode 32 that are stacked in sequence (“OLED3 may include a third anode 31 facing a third cathode 32 and a third organic light-emitting layer 33 between the third anode 31 and the third cathode 32” [0078]); wherein the fourth pixel PX4 comprises a fourth anode 41, a fourth light-emitting element 43, and a fourth cathode 42 that are stacked in sequence (“OLED4 may include a fourth anode 41 facing a fourth cathode 42 and a fourth organic light-emitting layer 43 between the fourth anode 41 and the fourth cathode 42” [0081]); wherein the through hole (including SH2) comprises a first through hole SH2 and a second through hole (see hole through 100 through which 41 connects to 31); wherein the third anode 31 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the first anode layer (including 11 and 31), wherein the fourth anode 41 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the second anode layer (including 21 and 41), wherein the third light-emitting element 33 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the first light-emitting layer (including 13 and 33), wherein the fourth light-emitting element 43 is arranged (see arrangement in the drawings) in the second light-emitting layer (including 23 and 43), wherein the third cathode 32 is arranged in the first cathode layer (including 12 and 32), wherein the fourth cathode 42 is arranged in the second cathode layer (including 22 and 42); wherein the first anode 11 and the second anode 21 are connected (see connection in the drawings) through the first through hole SH2, wherein the third anode 31 and the fourth anode 41 are connected (see connection in the drawings) through the second through hole (see rightmost hole through substrate 100 through which 31 and 41 are connected); and wherein the first anode 11 and the third anode 31 are not connected to each other (insofar as “310 may an organic material, e.g., a polyacrylic resin or a PI resin” [0058], wherein these are insulating materials), wherein the second anode 21 and the fourth anode 41 are not connected to each other (“320 … may include the same material as the first pixel-defining film 310” [0075]).
As recited in claims 3 and 12, Kim et al are silent regarding whether the third cathode and the fourth cathode are independently controlled.
See teachings, findings, and rationale above for claims 2 and 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Transwall (Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), TransWall: A Transparent Double-sided Touch Display Facilitating Co-located Face-to-face Interactions, 27 March 2014 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5z52GfN83DU)) shows a transparent double-sided touch display empowering users on opposite sides to play a competitive flip and spell game.
Higginbotham et al (US Pat. No. 5896575 A) show a dual-sided display with “the capability of displaying either the same or two different images on the two sides of the display” (see Fig. 5 and its description in the text).
Masakatsu (JP 2005316656 A) shows a dual-sided display.
Masashi (JP 05-053991 A) shows a dual-sided display.
Motoharu (JP 06-195151 A) shows a dual-sided display.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julie Anne Watko whose telephone number is (571)272-7597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 9AM-5PM, Wednesday 10:30AM-5PM, Thursday-Friday 9AM-5PM, and occasional Saturdays.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
JULIE ANNE WATKO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Julie Anne Watko/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
03/19/2026