Signed.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 replacement drawings were received on 09/16/2025. These drawings are not sufficient to overcome the drawing objections made in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 06/20/2025, as explained below.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 12 and 121. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 10, 11, 15, 16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. in US 2002/0105030 A1 (hereinafter You) and Misaki in US 2021/0119007 A1 (hereinafter Misaki).
Regarding claim 10, You teaches in FIG. 22 and related text, A thin film transistor, comprising:
an active layer (42, [0028]) disposed on a side (top side) of a base substrate (10, [0026]);
a source-drain layer (602, [0030]) disposed on a side (top side) of the active layer (42) away from the base substrate (10),
wherein the source-drain layer (602) at least comprises a source (602 on left) and a drain (602 on right) which are separated;
and a protective electrode layer (610/603, [0112]) disposed on a side of the source-drain layer (602) away from the base substrate (10), wherein the protective electrode layer (610/603) covers the source (602 on left) and the drain (602 on right), and a portion of the protective electrode layer covering the source (610/603 on left) is insulated from a portion of the protective electrode layer covering the drain (610/603 on right); and
wherein the protective electrode layer (610/603) comprises a first protective electrode (610/603 on left) covering the source (602 on left) and a second protective electrode (610/603 on right) covering the drain (602 on right);
wherein the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) covers a left side surface, a top surface and a right side surface of the source (602 on left, see annotated FIG. 22 below), the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) is in direct contact with the left side surface, the top surface and the right side surface of the source (602 on left, annotated FIG. 22), and the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) covers a left side surface, a top surface and a right side surface of the drain (602 on right, annotated FIG. 22), the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) is in direct contact with the left side surface, the top surface and the right side surface of the drain (602 on right, annotated FIG. 22); and wherein a left side surface of the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) is flush with a left side surface of the active layer (42), and a right side surface of the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) is flush with a right side surface of the active layer (42);
PNG
media_image1.png
329
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated FIG. 22 (You)
You does not teach the first protective electrode extends to a top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer, the second protective electrode extends to the top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer; and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the first protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the source, and an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the drain.
Misaki teaches in FIG. 18 and related text, a first protective electrode (22s/23s, [0074]) extends to a top surface of an active layer (18sl, [0071]) and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer (18sl), a second protective electrode (22d/23d, [0074]) extends to the top surface of the active layer (18sl) and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer (18sl); and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode (22d/23d) on a base substrate (12) is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of a drain (21d, [0074]).
You and Misaki are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are directed to thin film transistors for display devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify You in view of Misaki because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of You such that the first protective electrode extends to a top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer, the second protective electrode extends to the top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer; and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the first protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the source, and an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the drain, as taught by Misaki, in order to avoid unwanted redox reactions in the device (Misaki, [0074]).
Regarding claim 11, You as modified by Misaki teaches the thin film transistor according to claim 10. You further teaches wherein the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) and the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) are spaced apart from each other.
Regarding claim 15, You as modified by Misaki teaches the thin film transistor of claim 10. You further teaches wherein the orthographic projection of the source (602 on left) and the orthographic projection of the drain (602 on right) on the base substrate (10) are within an orthographic projection of the active layer (42) on the base substrate (10).
Regarding claim 16, You as modified by Misaki teaches the thin film transistor of claim 10. You teaches further comprising: a third protective electrode (601 on left, [0111]) disposed between the active layer (42) and the source (602 on left), and a fourth protective electrode (601 on right) disposed between the active layer (42) and the drain (602 on right).
Regarding claim 18, You as modified by Misaki teaches the thin film transistor according to claim 16. You teaches further comprising: a gate (26, [0026]) disposed on a side of the active layer (42) close to the base substrate (10), and a gate insulating layer (30, [0027]) disposed between the gate (26) and the active layer (42).
Regarding claim 19, You teaches in FIGS. 9, 22 and related text, a display ([0020]), comprising: a base substrate (10, [0026]), and a plurality of thin film transistors (transistor array, FIG. 9) disposed on the base substrate (10), wherein each thin film transistor of the plurality of thin film transistors comprises:
an active layer (42, [0028]) disposed on a side (top side) of the base substrate (10);
a source-drain layer (602, [0030]0 disposed on a side (top side) of the active layer (42) away from the base substrate (10), wherein the source-drain layer (602) at least comprises a source (602 on left) and a drain (602 on right) which are separated;
and a protective electrode layer (610/603, [0112]) disposed on a side of the source-drain layer (602) away from the base substrate (10), wherein the protective electrode layer (610/603) covers the source (602 on left) and the drain (602 on right), and a portion of the protective electrode layer covering the source (610/603 on left) is insulated from a portion of the protective electrode layer covering the drain (610/603 on right); and
wherein the protective electrode layer (610/603) comprises a first protective electrode (610/603 on left) covering the source (602 on left) and a second protective electrode (610/603 on right) covering the drain (602 on right);
wherein the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) covers a left side surface, a top surface and a right side surface of the source (602 on left, see annotated FIG. 22 below), the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) is in direct contact with the left side surface, the top surface and the right side surface of the source (602 on left, annotated FIG. 22), and the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) covers a left side surface, a top surface and a right side surface of the drain (602 on right, annotated FIG. 22), the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) is in direct contact with the left side surface, the top surface and the right side surface of the drain (602 on right, annotated FIG. 22); and wherein a left side surface of the first protective electrode (610/603 on left) is flush with a left side surface of the active layer (42), and a right side surface of the second protective electrode (610/603 on right) is flush with a right side surface of the active layer (42);
You does not explicitly teach a display panel; the first protective electrode extends to a top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer, the second protective electrode extends to the top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer; and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the first protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the source, and an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the drain.
Misaki teaches in FIG. 1 a display panel (D, [0065]) comprising a TFT substrate (10, [0064]). Misaki further teaches in FIG. 18 and related text, a first protective electrode (22s/23s, [0074]) extends to a top surface of an active layer (18sl, [0071]) and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer (18sl), a second protective electrode (22d/23d, [0074]) extends to the top surface of the active layer (18sl) and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer (18sl); and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode (23s/23d) on a base substrate (12) is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of a drain (21d, [0074]).
You and Misaki are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are directed to thin film transistors for display devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify You in view of Misaki because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of You:
to include a display panel, as taught by Misaki, in order to provide light emitting elements and TFTs that display an image in a display device, and
such that the first protective electrode extends to a top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer, the second protective electrode extends to the top surface of the active layer and is in direct contact with the top surface of the active layer; and wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the first protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the source, and an area of an orthographic projection of the second protective electrode on the base substrate is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the drain, as taught by Misaki, in order to avoid unwanted redox reactions in the device (Misaki, [0074]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. in US 2002/0105030 A1 (hereinafter You) and Misaki in US 2021/0119007 A1 (hereinafter Misaki) in view of Li in US 2019/0181161 A1 (hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 17, You as modified by Misaki teaches substantially the entire claimed thin film transistor according to claim 16. You further teaches wherein a material of the protective electrode layer (610/603) comprises a molybdenum alloy ([0084]).
You does not teach wherein a material of the source-drain layer comprises metal copper, and a material of the protective electrode layer comprises a molybdenum-niobium alloy.
Misaki teaches that copper is a suitable replacement for aluminum as a source-drain layer ([0169]).
Li teaches a material of a protective electrode layer comprises a molybdenum-niobium alloy ([0003]).
You, Misaki and Lee are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are directed to thin film transistors for display devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify the combined structure of You and Misaki in view of Li because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined structure of You and Misaki such that:
a material of the source-drain layer comprises metal copper, as taught by Misaki, in order to increase the electrical conductivity of the source-drain layer (Misaki, [0169]; noting copper has a higher electrical conductivity than aluminum), and
a material of the protective electrode layer comprises a molybdenum-niobium alloy, as taught by Li, in order to protect the copper in the source-drain layer (Li, [0003]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You et al. in US 2002/0105030 A1 (hereinafter You) and Misaki in US 2021/0119007 A1 (hereinafter Misaki) in view of Tanaka in US 2012/0001332 A1 (hereinafter Tanaka).
Regarding claim 20, You as modified by Misaki teaches a display device comprising a display panel according to claim 19. You as modified by Misaki does not explicitly teach a power supply assembly, wherein the power supply assembly is configured to supply power to the display panel.
Tanaka teaches a display device which “is provided with a means for supplying current to the display element in each of a plurality of pixels” ([0153)).
You, Misaki and Tanaka are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are directed to thin film transistors for display devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify the combined structure of You and Misaki in view of Tanaka because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display panel of You and Misaki to include a power supply assembly, wherein the power supply assembly is configured to supply power to the display panel, as taught by Tanaka, since TFTs and display panels require a power supply assembly in order to operate.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks on page 11 regarding the status of the claims in the Instant Application are acknowledged.
Applicant’s remarks on page 11 regarding the replacement drawing sheet is acknowledged. The replacement drawing sheet is objected to for reference characters 12 and 121 not being mentioned in the description.
Applicant’s remarks regarding the rejections made in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 06/20/2025 (hereinafter previous Office Action) under 35 USC 112(b) are acknowledged. Applicant has amended claims 10, 11, 15 and 19 as suggested by the Examiner in the previous Office Action.
In response, the Examiner finds these amendments sufficient to provide clarity and definiteness to the claims and hereby withdraws those rejections in the Instant Office Action.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 11-12 regarding rejections made in the previous Office Action under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka are acknowledged.
In response, the arguments are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the Tanaka reference applied in the previous Office Action for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 12-13 regarding rejections made in the previous Office Action under 35 USC 103 over Misaki and Tanaka are acknowledged. Specifically, Applicant argues in the first three paragraphs of page 13 regarding the Misaki reference that neither layer 23 nor layer 22 of Misaki teaches the limitations of amended claim 10 regarding the first and second protective electrode.
In response, the arguments are moot because the new ground of rejection interprets both layers 23 and 22 of Misaki to constitute first and second protective electrodes.
Applicant argues in the fourth paragraph of page 13 that Misaki cannot disclose the limitations “the first protective electrode covers a left side surface, a top surface and a right side surface of the source, the first protective electrode is in direct contact with the left side surface, the top surface and the right side surface of the source”, and similarly for the second protective electrode.
In response, the arguments are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the Misaki reference applied in the previous Office Action for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. However, the Examiner notes that “left side”, “right side” and “top” are all relative terms that require a reference point for interpretation. Absent a reference point recited in the claim, any fixed point may be used as a reference point to interpret a “left side surface”, a “right side surface”, and a “top surface”.
Applicant argues on page 14 that claims 1-3 and 5-9 should be rejoined.
In response, the Examiner maintains the restriction as set forth in the Office Action mailed on 11/26/2024 since the product/apparatus claims do not contain allowable subject matter.
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 STEPHEN LEE JOHNSON JR whose telephone number is (571)270-3217. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8am-5pm.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571)272-1670. 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.
/S.L.J./Examiner, Art Unit 2811
/LYNNE A GURLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights