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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) rejected have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Nanba et al. 20120104602 applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAE et al. 20150103500 in view of Nanba et al. 20120104602.
PNG
media_image1.png
443
631
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
414
662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
384
609
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
628
475
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, figs. 1-4 of Bae disclose a display device comprising:
a display module 110 comprising: a base substrate including a display area DA and a non-display area (MA/BA) adjacent to the display area; and
pads (IPD-110s) overlapping with the non-display area and disposed on the base substrate; and
a circuit board 120 comprising: a board 122; and connection pads (OPD-120s) disposed on the board and being in contact with the pads of the display module (IPD-110s – see par [0127],[0133]), respectively.
Bae does not disclose wherein each of the connection pads comprises: a first conductive layer disposed on the board in a thickness direction of the board.
a second conductive layer which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and
a third conductive layer which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the display module,
wherein, for each of the connection pads, the second conductive layer covers an entirety of a side surface of the first conductive layer in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board,
wherein, the side surface of the first conductive layer extends in the thickness direction of the board, and
wherein, the first conductive layer overlaps with the third conductive layer in the direction to intersecting the thickness direction of the board.
PNG
media_image5.png
305
457
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, fig. 8B of Nanba discloses a first board (bottom 1) and a second board (top 1). The first board comprising connection pads and being in contact with pads of the second board,
wherein each of the connection pads comprises: a first conductive layer 4 disposed on first board in a thickness direction of the board.
a second conductive layer 5 which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and
a third conductive layer 8 which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the second board,
PNG
media_image6.png
651
943
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein, for each of the connection pads, the second conductive layer 5 covers an entirety of a side surface of the first conductive layer 4 in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board,
wherein, the side surface of the first conductive layer 4 extends in the thickness direction of the board, and
wherein, the first conductive layer 4 overlaps with the third conductive layer 8 in the direction to intersecting the thickness direction of the board.
Note fig. 8B of Nanba is equivalent to applicant fig. 6A.
PNG
media_image7.png
324
676
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Note fig. 6A of Applicant shows the first board FCB and the second board PCB with the driving pad PDd and the second connection pad PD2 of contact.
PNG
media_image5.png
305
457
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a device of Bae comprising wherein each of the connection pads comprises: a first conductive layer disposed on the board in a thickness direction of the board.
a second conductive layer which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and
a third conductive layer which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the display module,
wherein, for each of the connection pads, the second conductive layer covers an entirety of a side surface of the first conductive layer in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board,
wherein, the side surface of the first conductive layer extends in the thickness direction of the board, and
wherein, the first conductive layer overlaps with the third conductive layer in the direction to intersecting the thickness direction of the board.
such as taught by Nanba in order to form a better connection by having high electrical connection reliability and mechanically structure.
Regarding claim 3, figs. 1-4 of Bae disclose a display device comprising:
a display module 110 comprising: a base substrate including a display area DA and a non-display area (MA/BA) adjacent to the display area; and
pads (IPD-110s) overlapping with the non-display area and disposed on the base substrate; and
a circuit board 120 comprising: a board 122; and connection pads (OPD-120s) disposed on the board and being in contact with the pads of the display module (IPD-110s), respectively.
Bae does not disclose wherein each of the connection pads comprises: a first conductive layer disposed on the board in a thickness direction of the board; a second conductive layer which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and a third layer which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in direct contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the display module, wherein at least a portion of the second conductive layer is in direct contact with the corresponding pads one of the pads of the display module, and wherein, the first conductive layer overlaps with the third conductive layer in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board.
However, fig. 8B of Nanba (as labeled by examiner in claim 1 rejection above) discloses a first board and a second board. The first board comprising connection pads and being in contact with pads of the second board,
wherein each of the connection pads comprises:
a first conductive layer 4 disposed on the board in a thickness direction of the board,
a second conductive layer 5 which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and
a third layer 8 which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in direct contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the display module, wherein at least a portion of the second conductive layer is in direct contact with the corresponding pads 9 one of the pads of the second board, and
wherein, the first conductive layer overlaps with the third conductive layer in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board (as labeled by examiner in claim 1 rejection above).
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a device of Bae comprising wherein each of the connection pads comprises: a first conductive layer disposed on the board in a thickness direction of the board; a second conductive layer which overlaps with the first conductive layer, is disposed on the first conductive layer and has a different material from that of the first conductive layer; and a third layer which overlaps with the second conductive layer, is disposed on the second conductive layer and is in direct contact with a corresponding one of the pads of the display module, wherein at least a portion of the second conductive layer is in direct contact with the corresponding pads one of the pads of the display module, and wherein, the first conductive layer overlaps with the third conductive layer in a direction intersecting the thickness direction of the board such as taught by Nanba in order to form a better connection by having high electrical connection reliability and mechanically structure
Regarding claim 2, fig. 8 of Nanab discloses further comprising: a resin 7 disposed between the base substrate (1) and the board (the other 1) and surrounding the pads of the display module and the connection pads.
Regarding claim 4, fig. 8B of Nanba discloses wherein the second conductive layer entirely overlaps with the first conductive layer, and the third conductive layer overlaps with at least a portion of the second conductive layer. The resulting structure would have been one meeting the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 5, Bae and Nanba disclose claim 1. Bae does not disclose wherein each of the pads comprises: a first driving conductive layer disposed on the base substrate; a second driving conductive layer disposed on the first driving conductive layer; and a third driving conductive layer disposed on the second driving conductive layer and being in contact with the third conductive layer.
However, fig. 8B of Nanba discloses the second board comprises pads and wherein each of the pads comprises: a first driving conductive layer disposed on the base substrate; a second driving conductive layer disposed on the first driving conductive layer; and a third driving conductive layer disposed on the second driving conductive layer and being in contact with the third conductive layer
In view of such teaching, it would have been obvious to form a display device of Bae and Nanba further comprising wherein each of the pads comprises: a first driving conductive layer disposed on the base substrate; a second driving conductive layer disposed on the first driving conductive layer; and a third driving conductive layer disposed on the second driving conductive layer and being in contact with the third conductive layer such as taught by Nanba in order to form a better connection by having electrically and mechanically structure.
Regarding claim 6, Bae and Sundahl disclose claim 5, but do not disclose wherein a material of the first driving conductive layer and a material of the third driving conductive layer are the same.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form a display comprising wherein a material of the first driving conductive layer and a material of the third driving conductive layer are the same in order to obtain a desire resistance. Note that although Bae and Sundahl do not teach exact the material of the semiconductor film as that claimed by Applicant, the material differences are considered obvious design choices and are not patentable unless unobvious or unexpected results are obtained from these changes. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences and therefore would have been obvious. Note In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416, In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Circ. 1990).
Bae and Nanba do not disclose of wherein a thickness of the second driving conductive layer is greater than a thickness of each of the first and third driving conductive layers.
However, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
As such it would have been obvious to form a display of Bae and Nanba comprising wherein a thickness of the second driving conductive layer is greater than a thickness of each of the first and third driving conductive layers in order to obtain a desired contact resistance.
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 VONGSAVANH SENGDARA whose telephone number is (571)270-5770. The examiner can normally be reached on Max flex.
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, PURVIS A. Sue can be reached on (571 )272-1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VONGSAVANH SENGDARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2829
Prosecution Insights