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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 12/02/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/02/2025.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. For example, a more descriptive title could be, “DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING ACTIVE LAYER OVERLAPPING BUFFER LAYER WITH SURFACE ROUGHNESS”.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 3, “located located” should read “located”; and
Claims 2-12 depend from claim 1, therefore, they inherit the objection to claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) 1-3, 5-7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2019/0206973 A1; hereinafter, “Kim”).
Regarding claims 1-3, 5-7 and 12:
re claim 1, Kim discloses a display device comprising:
a buffer layer 120 (Fig. 4 and [0065]) located on a substrate 100 [0065];
an active layer 210 (Fig. 4 and [0062]) located on the buffer layer 120, and including a channel region (e.g., portion of “210” that is underneath “220” in Fig. 4), a first region (underneath “261” in Fig. 4) located on a first side (left side) of the channel region, and a second region (portion of “210” that is underneath “266” in Fig. 4) located on a second side (right side) of the channel region;
a first conductor 261 (Fig. 4 and [0078]) located on the first region of the active layer; and
a second conductor 266 (Fig. 4 and [0078]) located on the second region of the active layer,
wherein in the buffer layer 120,
a portion of an upper surface overlapping the active layer 210 has a first surface roughness (inherent), and
a portion of the upper surface not overlapping the active layer 210 has a second surface roughness (inherent), and
wherein the first surface roughness and the second surface roughness are same, or are different in a predetermined range from each other (inherent because are either the same or different, wherein a predetermined range could be any value, e.g., zero to infinity);
re claim 2, the display device of claim 1, further comprising:
a gate insulating layer 220 (Fig. 4 and [0069]) located on the channel region;
a first electrode 262/263 (Fig. 4 and [0078]) electrically connected to the first conductor 261;
a second electrode 267/268 (Fig. 4 and [0078]) electrically connected to the second conductor 266; and
a third electrode 231/232 (Fig. 4 and [0069]) located on the gate insulating layer 220 and overlapping the channel region,
wherein the first conductor 261 is a first auxiliary electrode for an electrical connection between the first region and the first electrode 262/263, and the second conductor 266 is a second auxiliary electrode for an electrical connection between the second region and the second electrode 267/268;
re claim 3, the display device of claim 2, wherein a conductive material included in the first conductor 261 and the second conductor 266 comprises either a metal (e.g., Ti, Mo, [0080]) included in the third electrode 231/232 (e.g., Ti, Mo, [0073]) or a transparent conductive oxide.
re claim 5, the display device of claim 2, wherein the first electrode 262/263 (Fig. 4) comprises a first lower electrode 262 and a first upper electrode 263 electrically connected to each other,
wherein the second electrode 267/268 comprises a second lower electrode 267 and a second upper electrode 268 electrically connected to each other,
wherein the third electrode 230/231 comprises a third lower electrode 230 and a third upper electrode 231 electrically connected to each other, and
wherein the first lower electrode 262 (Cu, [0081]), the second lower electrode 267 (Cu, [0081]), and the third lower electrode 231 (Ti, Mo [0073]) commonly comprise a first metal, and the first upper electrode 263 (ITO [0083]), the second upper electrode 268 (ITO [0083]), and the third upper electrode 232 (Cu, Al [0074]) commonly comprise a second metal different from the first metal (i.e., the lower electrodes are not required to comprise the same first metal, also, the upper electrodes are not required to comprise the same second metal);
re claim 6, the display device of claim 5, further comprising a light shield 110 (Fig. 4) located between the substrate 100 and the buffer layer 120 and overlapping the channel region (e.g., the central portion of “210”),
wherein the light shield 110 comprises a lower light shield 111 [0063] and an upper light shield 112 [0064] located on the lower light shield 110,
wherein the lower light shield 111 comprises the first metal (e.g., Ti or Mo [0063]) included in the first lower electrode, the second lower electrode, and the third lower electrode 231; and
wherein the upper light shield 112 comprises the second metal (Cu or Al [0064]) included in the first upper electrode, the second upper electrode, and the third upper electrode 232;
re claim 7, the display device of claim 6, wherein the first lower electrode or the second lower electrode 267 (Fig. 4) is connected to the upper light shield 111 through through-holes of the buffer layer 120 and the gate insulating layer 220; and
re claim 12, the display device of claim 1, wherein at a boundary with an edge of the active layer, a difference in height (see “difference in height” in Fig. 4 below) between a portion of an upper surface of the buffer layer 120 overlapping the active layer 210 and a portion of the upper surface of the buffer layer 120 not overlapping the active layer 210.
Therefore, claims 1-3, 5-7 and 12 are anticipated by Kim.
PNG
media_image1.png
458
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim.
Kim anticipates claim 1 and discloses a difference in roughness in terms of a “difference in height” (see Fig. 4 above); however, Kim does not explicitly disclose a range of the surface roughness (difference in height). However, the current claim is deemed obvious because Kim discloses the general conditions of the claimed invention, and given Kim, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to find an optimum or workable range for the surface roughness (or difference in height), wherein a roughness of about 10% would ensure a relatively thick buffer layer portion underneath pad 700 (in Fig. 4 of Kim), thereby providing a bonding pad having a proper height and rigidity. Furthermore, note it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 8-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 is allowed primarily because the prior art of record cannot anticipate or render obvious first and second gate insulating layer part that cover first and second ends as recited in current claim 4 (when combined with claims 1 and 2);
Claim 8 is allowed primarily because the prior art of record cannot anticipate or render obvious the lower line comprising an oxide semiconductor included in the active layer as recited in the current claim (when combined with claim 1); and
Claims 9-10 are allowed primarily because the prior art of record cannot anticipate or render obvious the storage capacitor comprising a third capacitor electrode located under the first capacitor electrode as recited in claim 9 (when combined with claim 1), and claim 10 depends from claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed on the attached PTO-892 disclose devices with buffer layers and light shielding layers have some similarity to that of the current invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEX H MALSAWMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (4-12 Hours, between 5:30AM-10PM).
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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.
/LEX H MALSAWMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892