DETAILED ACTION
This Notice is responsive to communication filed on 4/29/2026.
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 Group I, reading on claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 4/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 19 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 4/29/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9/13/2023 and 8/18/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-9, 10, 12, 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394), and further in view of Choi et al. (US 20200287164).
Regarding claim 1, Kum teaches an array substrate comprising:
a substrate Fig. 3: 120;
an active layer Fig. 3: 126 disposed above the substrate Fig. 3: 120, the active layer Fig. 3: 126 comprising doped regions and one or more channel regions (annotated);
a first metal layer Fig. 3: 132+130 disposed at a side of the active layer Fig. 3: 126 away from the substrate Fig. 3: 120, the first metal layer Fig. 3: 132+130 comprising a source Fig. 3: 130 and a drain Fig. 3: 132, the source Fig. 3: 130 and the drain Fig. 3: 132 being in contact with the doped regions respectively (shown in Fig. 3);
a first passivation layer Fig. 3: 134 disposed at a side of the first metal layer Fig. 3: 132+130 away from the substrate Fig. 3: 120;
a flat layer Fig. 3: 138, 144 disposed at a side of the first passivation layer Fig. 3: 134 away from the substrate Fig. 3: 120, the flat layer Fig. 3: 138
being provided with one or more moisture discharge holes;
a second passivation layer Fig. 3: 154 disposed at a side of the flat layer Fig. 3: 138 away from the substrate Fig. 3: 120; and
one or more hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 2: 140, 142, 143 disposed between the active layer Fig. 3: 126 and the second passivation layer Fig. 3: 154, the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 covering at least the channel regions (shown in Fig. 3). Para. 0059 teaches a same material forming layers 140 and 142/143.
PNG
media_image1.png
683
769
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kum does not explicitly teach moisture discharge holes, but teaches drain contact holes Fig. 3: 139.
Choi teaches the following claim limitation not explicitly disclosed by Kum:
• being provided with one or more moisture discharge holes Fig. 14: 740H (para. 0202-0203);
Choi teaches through holes in the insulating layer 740 used to expel moisture of the planarization layer 720, preventing the lifting of a cover layer formed of a metal or oxide that would be otherwise caused if through holes were not present (para. 0141, para. 0198, para. 0202-0203).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Choi in order to protect the cover layer by having through holes to expel moisture (i.e. outgassing holes) from a planarization layer in the device (para. 0203).
Regarding claim 2, Kum, in combination with Choi, teaches the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 14: 740H is disposed to penetrate through at least the flat layer Fig. 14: 740 (i.e. insulating layer).
Regarding claim 3, Kum, in combination with Choi, teaches the array substrate according to claim 2, wherein a depth of each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 14: 740H is equal to a thickness of the flat layer Fig. 14: 740. The through hole going through the flat layer in Fig. 14 at the flat layer is equal to a depth of the flat layer.
Regarding claim 4, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 3, wherein a corresponding hydrogen barrier layer of the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 above any one of the one or more channel regions (annotated above) is arranged continuously. Fig. 3 shows the barrier layer 142 is continuous over the channel region of the active layer.
Regarding claim 7, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein the array substrate further comprises a common electrode layer Fig. 3: 140, the common electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 is disposed between the flat layer Fig. 3: 138 and the second passivation layer Fig. 3: 154, the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 and the common electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 are disposed in a same layer (shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 7, wherein the common electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 comprises a common electrode (para. 0054), and the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 are spaced apart from the common electrode (shown in Fig. 2, 3).
Regarding claim 9, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 8, wherein the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 are formed of a same material as the common electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 (para. 0059).
Regarding claim 10, Kum discloses the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 3: 139 is disposed to penetrate through the flat layer Fig. 3: 138, and each of the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 140 is filled in a corresponding moisture discharge hole Fig. 3: 139 of the moisture discharge holes (shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 3: 142 are disposed at the side of the first passivation layer Fig. 3: 134 away from the substrate Fig. 3: 120, and the flat layer Fig. 3: 144 is disposed at a side of each of the hydrogen barrier layers away Fig. 3: 142 from the substrate Fig. 3: 120.
Regarding claim 16, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein a material for forming the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 2: 142,143 comprises at least one of indium tin oxide, indium zinc oxide, or indium gallium zinc oxide (para. 0059).
Regarding claim 17, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein the array substrate further comprises a second metal layer Fig. 3: 122, the second metal layer Fig. 3: 122 is disposed on the substrate Fig. 3: 120, and the second metal layer Fig. 3: 122 comprises a gate, the source Fig. 3: 130 is connected to the gate (para. 0048).
Regarding claim 18, Kum teaches a display panel Fig. 2: 110 comprising the array substrate according to claim 1.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394) and Choi et al. (US 20200287164) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Watabe et al. (JP 2019113601A).
Regarding claim 5, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 2:
wherein each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 3: 139 is disposed to penetrate through the flat layer Fig. 3: 138 and a corresponding hydrogen barrier layer of the hydrogen barrier layers, and
at least a portion of the second passivation layer is disposed within the moisture discharge holes.
Watabe discloses the following claim limitations not disclosed by Kum:
wherein each of the moisture discharge holes is disposed to penetrate through a corresponding hydrogen barrier layer of the hydrogen barrier layers Fig. 37: 120, and
at least a portion of the second passivation layer Fig. 37: 121 is disposed within the moisture discharge holes (shown in Fig. 37).
Para. 0093 teaches an ITO material layer 120 disposed on a passivation layer 110, and another insulating film 121 (i.e. second passivation layer) disposed thereon. Fig. 37 shows the insulating film 121 disposed within the hole.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Watabe in order to form through holes to connect the oxide semiconductor to the drain or source electrodes (para. 0027).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394), Choi et al. (US 20200287164) and Watabe et al. (JP 2019113601A) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Ono (US 20160329390).
Regarding claim 6, Ono discloses the following claim limitations not disclosed by Kum and Watabe:
the array substrate according to claim 5, wherein a distance between an edge of each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 15b: 150a, 150b and an edge of a corresponding channel region of the channel regions is greater than 10 microns.
Paragraph 0171 teaches a channel length L2 with a distance of about 12µm, which is greater than the claimed 10 microns. Shown in Fig. 15b, the channel length is a distance between one edge of the hole 150a on the left and a right edge of the channel region which ends at the left edge of hole 150b.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum and Watabe with Ono in order to achieve a reduction in the on-state resistance and high definition of pixels using the channel length taught by Ono (para. 0173).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394) and Choi et al. (US 20200287164) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhao et al. (US 20220320211).
Regarding claim 11, Kum discloses the array substrate according to claim 1:
wherein each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 3: 139 is disposed to penetrate through the flat layer Fig. 3: 138, a corresponding hydrogen barrier layer of the hydrogen barrier layers, and the second passivation layer,
the array substrate further comprises a pixel electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 disposed at a side of the second passivation layer away from the substrate, and
the pixel electrode layer Fig. 3: 140 is filled in the moisture discharge holes Fig. 3: 139 (shown in fig. 3).
Zhao teaches the following claim limitations not disclosed by Kum:
wherein each of the moisture discharge holes (annotated below) is disposed to penetrate through a corresponding hydrogen barrier layer Fig. 2: 20 (para. 0062) of the hydrogen barrier layers, and the second passivation layer Fig. 2: 212, and
a pixel electrode Fig. 2: 220 disposed at a side of the second passivation layer Fig. 2: 212 away from the substrate Fig. 2: 201.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Zhao in order to connect the pixel electrode to the source or drain electrode (para. 0051).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394) and Choi et al. (US 20200287164) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gao et al. (US 20190326331).
Regarding claim 13, Gao discloses the following limitations not disclosed by Kum:
the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein a depth of each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 4: 420 is less than a thickness of the flat layer Fig. 4: 400 (para. 0044 teaches a pit that has a depth less than the thickness of the first portion for the purpose of accommodating a portion of the LC layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Gao in order to create an array substrate with an LC layer having pits with a depth less than a first portion to accommodate the LC layer making the layer more uniform and eliminating the display defect at the edge of the functional area (para. 0044).
Regarding claim 14, Kum teaches the array substrate according to claim 1:
wherein a part of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 3: 139 are disposed to penetrate through the flat layer Fig. 3: 138 (The hole going through the flat layer in Fig. 3 at the flat layer is equal to a depth of the flat layer.), and
a depth of each of another part of the moisture discharge holes is less than a thickness of the flat layer.
Gao discloses the following limitations not disclosed by Kum:
the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein a depth of each of the moisture discharge holes Fig. 4: 420 is less than a thickness of the flat layer Fig. 4: 400 (para. 0044 teaches a pit that has a depth less than the thickness of the first portion for the purpose of accommodating a portion of the LC layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Gao in order to create an array substrate with an LC layer having pits with a depth less than a first portion to accommodate the LC layer making the layer more uniform and eliminating the display defect at the edge of the functional area (para. 0044).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al. (US 20140175394) and Choi et al. (US 20200287164) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seo et al. (US 20160211309).
Regarding claim 15, Seo discloses the following claim limitation not disclosed by Kum: the array substrate according to claim 1, wherein the moisture discharge holes Fig. 2: 230a, 230b are arranged at equal intervals. Seo teaches out-gassing holes formed in the planarization layer to discharge residual gas (para. 0079) that are formed within a constant width range (para. 0081).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecting filing date of the invention to modify Kum with Seo in order to control the residual gas that can degrade an organic emission layer, which can result in a pixel contraction phenomenon (para. 0082).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NKECHINYERE ESIABA whose telephone number is (571)272-0720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10am-5pm EST.
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571) 272-5055. 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.
/Nkechinyere Esiaba/Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights