Appeal 2006-2611
Application 10/356,118
over two or more different colored pixels and forming at least one organic
layer 15 in relationship to the common emissive layer. The sole argument
advanced by Appellants with respect to this rejection is that Yoneda fails to
teach "selecting the thickness of an organic layer for one or more different
colored pixels so that light produced by the common emissive layer(s) is
tuned for different colors of the color filter array or the color change module
array" (sentence bridging pages 15-16 of principal Brief). However, we
agree with the Examiner that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art that the thickness of organic layers 15 must be selected so as
not to interfere with the tuning of the different colors of the color filter array.
Manifestly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not choose a thickness for
organic layers 15 that militates against the color tuning of the device. In any
event, as noted above, Miyashita clearly establishes that it was known in the
art to adjust the thicknesses of the layers to affect the proper color balance
and brightness.
As for the separately argued claim 4 recitation that "the common
emissive layer has an emission spectrum in the blue region of the visible
spectrum," we agree with the Examiner that the white emission of Yoneda
necessarily comprises blue light. Moreover, as properly noted by the
Examiner, Yoneda explicitly teaches that "a blue luminous material, for
example, is used as the material for the luminous layer 14" (col. 5, ll.
15-16).
As a final point, we note that Appellants base no argument upon
objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected results.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007