Canon - CNT Display - USP 7,419,416

Canon - CNT Display

United States Patent 7,419,416
Tsukamoto September 2, 2008

Electron emission element, electron source, image display device, and method of manufacturing the same

Abstract

A method of manufacturing an electron emission element, including forming common wire electrodes (signal lines) (4a, 4b) on a substrate (1) and forming electron emission units including fibrous material assemblies (6a, 6b) on the common wire electrodes (4a, 4b), respectively, for preventing abnormal discharge caused by an antistatic film (7) with no deterioration in characteristics of the electron emission element. The electrode forming is followed by forming resist patterns (40a, 40b) covering at least part of the common wire electrodes (4a, 4b) before the antistatic film is formed. Thereafter the resist patterns (40a, 40b) on the common wire electrodes (4a, 4b) are removed together with the antistatic film (7) before the electron emission unit is formed, so that the electron emission units made of the fibrous material assemblies (6a, 6b) are formed on the common wire electrodes (4a, 4b) from which the resist patterns (40a, 40b) have been removed.

Inventors: Tsukamoto; Takeo (Atsugi, JP)

Assignee: Canon Kabushiki Kaisha (Tokyo, JP)

Appl. No.: 11/021,473
Filed: December 23, 2004
Foreign Application Priority Data
Dec 26, 2003 [JP] 2003-432500

According to a first aspect of the present invention, preferably the fibrous material is a carbon nano-tube or a graphite nanofiber.
......
(6) By using printing paste material containing the fibrous material (carbon nano-tubes in this embodiment) and properly containing organic material, inorganic material, and photosensitive organic material, the fibrous material assemblies 6a and 6b that are electron emission units are formed by printing on a part of the common wire electrodes (signal lines) 4a and 4b, respectively. Thereafter, they are precisely shaped by photolithography using light transmitted from a rear face of the substrate 1.

Source

Spindt-type cathodes with aligned carbon nanotube emitters

Ding, M.Q. Xinghui Li Guodong Bai Jinjun Feng Fuquan Zhang Fujiang Liao
Vacuum Electron. Res. Inst., Nat. Lab. for High-power Vacuum Electron., Beijing, China;

This paper appears in: Vacuum Electron Sources Conference, 2004. Proceedings. IVESC 2004. The 5th International

Publication Date: 6-10 Sept. 2004

On page(s): 117- 119
ISSN:
ISBN: 0-7803-8437-7
INSPEC Accession Number: 8324401
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/IVESC.2004.1414156
Date Published in Issue: 2005-04-11 09:55:01.0

Abstract
Two kinds of Spindt-type cathode arrays with vertically aligned carbon nanotubes (CNTs) emitters were fabricated. One process involved direct growth of CNTs from the bottom of each micro-cell and the other process was to grow CNTs on Mo tips in Spindt-type cathode arrays. The former had fairly good consistent emitters with a number of CNTs, whereas the latter showed a few or single CNTs in micro-sized cells could be formed.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1414156&isnumber=30641

China - and we all know this is where the action is (Da Ling, for example - not a successful example but an example, nevertheless!).

It would not surprise me in the least should Canon-Sony-FET's commercial offering be thusly constructed. What would surprise me is the presence of plain old unadulterated Spindt tips! Those do NOT work!! I assume this new offering does. Thus the NECESSITY of something to make it work - CNTs and/or carbon coat. That's my position and I am sticking to it! Till proved wrong.

Another thing that would not surprise me is Canon up to its neck in this, and I do not mean just supplying the IP. I do like surprises, however!!!!

NNPP now ~ $1 - going to $5, $10, $50?

I think so, in light of this CEO letter to shareholders:

[My bolding]

A Periodic Report - March 2008

I wanted to update you on our progress during the last quarter and share some insights into the current year.

First, a few administrative details. As many of you know, the company has primarily done business as Applied Nanotech Inc. on a daily operating basis and has used Nano-Proprietary, Inc. as our public face. I haven't been with the company long enough to fully understand the reasoning behind this, but I think you will agree it no longer makes sense. At the annual meeting this year, one of the items on the agenda will be a change of the name of NPI to Applied Nanotech Holdings, Inc. This change, along with a standardization of logos and stationary is designed to present a more consistent image to the world and remove some of the confusion as to who we are. Our subsidiary, Applied Nanotech, Inc. will continue to exist primarily due to ongoing contractual obligations.

We have scheduled our annual shareholder meeting for May 20, 2008 at the Austin Renaissance Hotel. Following the meeting, which will start at 10:00 am, we will be conducting tours at our headquarters facilities. For those of you who have never had the opportunity to visit us, this is the ideal opportunity.

The last quarter, bringing 2007 to a close and ending my first year at NPI, was certainly an unexpectedly busy time. The financial results are best told by reviewing the 10K, but in summary, our 4th quarter sales of $1,077,149 and net loss of $965,511 were in line with our expectations. Adding these to our already strong year to date numbers (by historical company standards) gave us our best showing from operations in the company history. Losses were, of course, impacted by our huge legal fees from on-gong litigation. We expect these type expenses to be significantly lower in 2008. On the Canon matter, we are primarily waiting for the appeals process to grind forward. Keesmann related expenses will be sharply reduced due to the additional defendants (those other than Keesmann) offer to pay a settlement to us while simultaneously withdrawing their financial support of Keesmann. We are asking the court for an expeditious trial in the Keesmann matter with the hope of resolving this matter during 2008.

Working on the Keesmann matter was only one of the things that kept the fourth quarter busy. Final work on the hydrogen sensor and supporting the integration into our customer's product occupied the sensor team. This customer, who has already entered into a royalty bearing license and technology transfer agreement, is planning an April product announcement. We expect this agreement to be royalty bearing during 2008.

I also couldn't be happier with the progress we are making on printable copper inks. We have met our customers’ design specifications and are capable of manufacturing consistent batches of material in sufficient quantity to allow the delivery of samples to our customers' prospects. Our current activity revolves around securing sufficient quantities of nano-particles to allow production lot sizes to be manufactured by our customer. We fully expect this project to leave the development phase during 2008 resulting in a production license and royalties.

Mitsui has made the initial payment extending their "option to a license" agreement with us and we are actively negotiating a Master License with Mitsui that would allow them to issue sub-licenses within their market areas. Although we do not have complete transparency through to the end potential licensee, Mitsui has asked us to approve negotiating guidelines for two of the potential sub-licensees that they are working with. We believe they are working with a total of five potential licensees.

As significant as our business results have been, the progress in obtaining new patents and expanding the geographical coverage of our portfolio overshadows them because they are at the heart of future results. We have had our first patent issued in Japan (see press release dated 1/31/08) and our recent nano-biological patent (see press release dated 2/28/08) are key milestones.

As I am writing this, we are expecting our quarterly revenue for the almost completed first quarter to be in the $800 - $900,000 range, consistent with the past few quarters. After these billings, we will have at least $3.3 million in research backlog. We, of course, have sales efforts underway across our business lines to generate additional research projects that will hopefully yield IP with lasting value.

I continue to be optimistic about the prospects for the business and hope you will make an effort to join us for our annual shareholder meeting.

Sincerely,

Thomas F. Bijou

http://www.nano-proprietary.com/InvestorRelations/ShareHolderCommunications.asp

Canon US Reissue Patent 40,062 Feb. 12, 2008

This recent Canon US reissue patent is of interest in that it pertains to SED type subject matter but includes the possibility that a carbon layer on the cathode is not an absolute necessity (though it is mentioned as a possibility) and can consist solely of SnO2 (tin oxide):

United States Patent RE40,062

Yoshioka , et al. February 12, 2008

Display device with electron-emitting device with electron-emitting region insulated from electrodes

Abstract

A display device includes an electron-emitting device which is a laminate of an insulating layer and a pair of opposing electrodes formed on a planar substrate. A portion of the insulating layer is between the electrodes and contains fine particles of an electron emitting substance, that portion acting as an electron emitting region. Electrons are emitted from the electron emission region by applying a voltage to the electrodes, thereby stimulating a phosphorous to emit light.

Inventors: Yoshioka; Seishiro (Hiratsuka, JP), Nomura; Ichiro (Atsugi, JP), Suzuki; Hidetoshi (Yokohama, JP), Takeda; Toshihiko (Yokohama, JP), Kaneko; Tetsuya (Yokohama, JP), Banno; Yoshikazu (Machida, JP), Yokono; Kojiro (Yokohama, JP)

Assignee: Canon Kabushiki Kaisha (Tokyo, JP)
Appl. No.: 09/587,249
Filed: June 2, 2000

Related U.S. Patent Documents

Application Number - Filing Date - Patent Number - Issue Date
08396066 Feb., 1995
08191065 Feb., 1994
07705720 May., 1991
07218203 Jul., 1988 5066883
Reissue of: 08479000 Jun., 1995 05759080 Jun., 1998
Foreign Application Priority Data

Jul 15, 1987 [JP] 62-174837
Oct 02, 1987 [JP] 62-250448
Oct 09, 1987 [JP] 62-255063
Oct 09, 1987 [JP] 62-255068
Apr 27, 1988 [JP] 63-102485
Apr 27, 1988 [JP] 63-102486
Apr 27, 1988 [JP] 63-102487
Apr 27, 1988 [JP] 63-102488
Jun 21, 1988 [JP] 63-154516 [A very early date!!]

http://tinyurl.com/38p9b3

Canon is up to something - I'm not sure what. This requires some analysis to see if their SED development can be based on this patent and bypass our IP.

These clams get my attention as noted by --[]-- my comments in the brackets:

.Iadd.6. A method of fabricating an electron-emitting device which comprises a pair of electrodes and a layer disposed between the electrodes, the method comprising the steps of: disposing the pair of electrodes in first and second regions on a substrate, respectively; and providing the layer between the regions, the layer comprising a metal and a semiconductor, and being in contact with the electrodes so that current flows from one of the electrodes to another one of the electrodes through the layer by a voltage applied between the electrodes, wherein the metal is Pd..Iaddend.[No carbon required - no fine particles required]

.Iadd.7. The method of claim 6, wherein the semiconductor is selected from the group consisting of carbon and SnO.sub.2..Iaddend.[Carbon OR SnO.sub.2]

.Iadd.8. A method of fabricating an electron-emitting device, comprising the steps of: disposing a pair of electrodes in first and second regions on a substrate, respectively; and providing a layer between the regions, the layer comprising carbon and a metal, and being in contact with the electrodes so that current flows from one of the electrodes to another one of the electrodes through the layer by a voltage applied between the electrodes, wherein the metal is Pd..Iaddend.[No carbon required - no fine particles required]

.Iadd.9. A method of fabricating an electron-emitting device, comprising the steps of: disposing a pair of electrodes in first and second regions on a substrate, respectively; and providing a layer between the regions, the layer comprising carbon and a metal, and being in contact with the electrodes so that current flows from one of the electrodes to another one of the electrodes through the layer by a voltage applied between the electrodes, wherein the layer comprises primarily carbon..Iaddend.[Carbon is required]

.Iadd.10. A method of fabricating an electron-emitting device, comprising the steps of: disposing a pair of electrodes in first and second regions on a substrate, respectively; and providing a layer between the regions, the layer being in contact with the electrodes so that current flows from one of the electrodes to another one of the electrodes through the layer by a voltage applied between the electrodes, the layer comprising an insulating material and at least some conductive particles which protrude from a surface of the layer, wherein the conductive particles comprise Pd..Iaddend.[No carbon required - conductive particles are required]

.Iadd.11. The method of claim 10, wherein the insulating material is SiO.sub.2..Iaddend.[No carbon required]

Don't know if this is the way to avoid carbon. Carbon is certainly contemplated! But NOT a requirement!! Is carbon the BEST? Unknown - but likely so. Does NPI's IP cover a non-carbon variation anyway? I think so!

BTW - what is added in the reissue appears between '.Iadd.' and '.Iaddend.'

The original US patent 5,759,080 is here:
Link

These are the claims:
1. A method of preparing an electron-emitting device, comprising the steps of:

forming electrodes opposed to each other on a substrate;

forming between the electrodes and in contact therewith an insulating layer in which fine particles are completely enclosed; and

etching the insulating layer so as to partially expose the fine particles.

2. A method of preparing an electron-emitting device comprising the steps of:

forming electrodes opposed to each other on a substrate;

forming between the electrodes and in contact therewith a semiconductor layer in which fine particles are completely enclosed; and

etching the semiconductor layer so as to partially expose the fine particles.

3. A method of preparing an electron-emitting device, comprising the steps of:

(i) forming a semiconductor layer on a substrate;

(ii) forming electrodes on said semiconductor layer; and

(iii) dispersing fine particles between said electrodes.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein said semiconductor layer comprises a layer comprising an amorphous silicon semiconductor, a crystallized silicon semiconductor, or a compound semiconductor.

5. The method of claim 3, wherein said semiconductor layer has a film thickness of from 50 angstroms to 10 .mu.m.

All original claims require the presence of 'fine particles'. The Reissue claims 6-48 do NOT so require these 'fine particles' in every claim!!

Claims 1-5 inclusive are original while claims 6-48 are added in the reissue patent.