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 .
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 11, 12, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bok (20200393936), in view of Kim (20210226174).
PNG
media_image1.png
364
447
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Bok teaches a display device comprising:
a substrate (fig. 14: SUB) including a display area (fig. 14: TSA; par. 270 teaches that TSA overlaps DA) and a pad area (fig. 14: PDA2) on one side of the display area;
a plurality of conductive layers (fig. 14: AP and BML) on the substrate, and in the display area and the pad area;
a passivation layer (fig. 14: 141) on the conductive layers; and
a plurality of light-emitting elements (fig. 14: 170; please note there are multiplicity of 170s) on the passivation layer and in the display area, the plurality of light-emitting elements being spaced apart from one another,
wherein at least one of the conductive layers comprises a first metal layer, a second metal layer on the first metal layer, and a third metal layer on the second metal layer (please see AP in figure above which shows multiple layers L1-L6; further, prior art teaches that each L# can be made up of multiple layers, e.g. par. 789),
the first metal layer comprises Ti (par. 307 teaches that L1 is the same material as the light blocking layer (BML); par. 789 teaches that the BML is composed of materials such as Ti), the second metal layer comprises aluminum (Al) or an Al alloy (par. 307 teaches L2 being made of the same material 122; par. 372 teaches 122 being composed of Al or Al alloy), and the third metal layer comprises V or titanium (Ti) (par. 307 teaches L3 being made of same material as 125; par. 374 teaches 125 being composed of Ti).
Bok fails to teach:
the first metal layer comprises vanadium (V)
Bok teaches that L1 is the same material as the light blocking layer. The material chosen for a light blocking layer is chosen based on its opacity and this Ti is used in Bo. However, it would have been obvious to use Vanadium as a light blocking material, since it would have been known in the art at the time of filing that Vanadium has high light absorption and is thus frequently used as a light blocking layer, as seen in prior art Kim, par. 244.
Further, as taught in Kim, par. 244, materials Ti and V are functional equivalents when it comes to be used for light blocking purposes. Thus, substituting V for Ti, in Bok, amounts to a simple substitution of materials known to provide the same predictable results.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA, at the time of filing, to utilize aforementioned teachings of the prior art(s) in the primary prior art(s) due to aforementioned reason(s).
Regarding claim 11, Bok, in view of Kim, teaches a display device of claim 1, further comprising:
a first conductive layer (BML) on the substrate; a buffer layer (BF1) on the first conductive layer; a semiconductor layer (121) on the buffer layer; a gate insulating layer (130) on the semiconductor layer; a second conductive layer (122) on the gate insulating layer; an interlayer insulating layer (141) on the second conductive layer; and a third conductive layer (125) between the interlayer insulating layer and the passivation layer, wherein the first conductive layer comprises the first, second, and third metal layers (please see rejection for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 12, Bok, in view of Kim, teaches a display device of claim 11, wherein the second conductive layer comprises the first, second, and third metal layers (please see rejection for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 16, Bok teaches a display device comprising:
a substrate (fig. 14: SUB) including a display area (fig. 14: TSA; par. 270 teaches that TSA overlaps DA) and a pad area (fig. 14: PDA2) on one side of the display area;
a first conductive layer on the substrate and comprising a lower metal layer (BML) in the display area and a first pad wire (L1) in the pad area (par. 307 teaches that L1 is the same material as the light blocking layer (BML); par. 789 teaches that the BML is composed of materials such as Ti);
a buffer layer (BF1) on the first conductive layer;
a semiconductor layer (121) on the buffer layer and overlapping with the lower metal layer in the display area;
a gate insulating layer (130) on the semiconductor layer and the buffer layer;
a second conductive layer on the gate insulating layer and comprising a gate electrode (122) overlapping with the semiconductor layer and in the display area, and a second pad wire (L2) overlapping with the first pad wire and in the pad area (par. 307 teaches L2 being made of the same material 122; par. 372 teaches 122 being composed of Al or Al alloy);
a first interlayer insulating layer (141) on the second conductive layer;
a third conductive layer on the first interlayer insulating layer and comprising a capacitor electrode (125) overlapping with the gate electrode and in the display area;
a second interlayer insulating layer (142) on the third conductive layer;
a fourth conductive layer (123/124) on the second interlayer insulating layer and comprising a first connection electrode connected to the semiconductor layer and the lower metal layer (please note that all elements seen in fig. 14 are connected to all other elements in a physical manner), and in the display area;
a passivation layer (160) on the fourth conductive layer; and
a plurality of light-emitting elements (170) on the passivation layer and spaced apart from one another,
the first metal layer comprises Ti (par. 307 teaches that L1 is the same material as the light blocking layer (BML); par. 789 teaches that the BML is composed of materials such as Ti), the second metal layer comprises aluminum (Al) or an Al alloy (par. 307 teaches L2 being made of the same material 122; par. 372 teaches 122 being composed of Al or Al alloy), and the third metal layer comprises V or titanium (Ti) (par. 307 teaches L3 being made of same material as 125; par. 374 teaches 125 being composed of Ti).
Bok fails to teach:
the first metal layer comprises vanadium (V)
Bok teaches that L1 is the same material as the light blocking layer. The material chosen for a light blocking layer is chosen based on its opacity and this Ti is used in Bo. However, it would have been obvious to use Vanadium as a light blocking material, since it would have been known in the art at the time of filing that Vanadium has high light absorption and is thus frequently used as a light blocking layer, as seen in prior art Kim, par. 244.
Further, as taught in Kim, par. 244, materials Ti and V are functional equivalents when it comes to be used for light blocking purposes. Thus, substituting V for Ti, in Bok, amounts to a simple substitution of materials known to provide the same predictable results.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA, at the time of filing, to utilize aforementioned teachings of the prior art(s) in the primary prior art(s) due to aforementioned reason(s).
Regarding claim 19, Bok, in view of Kim, teaches a display device of claim 16, wherein at least one of the second conductive layer or the third conductive layer comprises the first, second, and third metal layers (par. 372 and 374).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 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: a display device of claim 1, wherein a thickness of the second metal layer is greater than a thickness of the first metal layer and a thickness of the third metal layer, and the thickness of the first metal layer is greater than the thickness of the third metal layer.
Claim 3 is objected based on its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 is objected based on its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 5 is objected based on its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 6 is objected based on its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 7 is objected based on its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 8 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: a display device of claim 1, wherein the at least one of the conductive layers includes a void between the first metal layer and the third metal layer due to removal of part of the second metal layer therefrom.
Claim 9 is objected based on its dependency on claim 8.
Claim 10 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: a display device of claim 1, wherein the second metal layer comprises an aluminum (Al)-nickel (Ni)-lanthanum (La) alloy, and the Al-Ni-La alloy has a total Ni-La content of 0.1 at% or less based on a total atomic composition of the Al-Ni-La alloy.
Claim 13 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: a display device of claim 11, wherein the third conductive layer comprises a base layer comprising Ti, a middle layer on the base layer and comprising Al or an Al alloy, and an upper layer on the middle layer and comprising Ti.
Claim 14 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: a display device of claim 11, further comprising: a first pad wire in the pad area and in the same layer as the first conductive layer; and a second pad wire on the first pad wire and in the same layer as the second conductive layer.
Claim 15 is objected to based on its dependency on claim 14.
Claim 17 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: a display device of claim 16, wherein a thickness of the second metal layer is greater than a thickness of the first metal layer and a thickness of the third metal layer, and the thickness of the first metal layer is greater than the thickness of the third metal layer.
Claim 18 is objected to to as being dependent on clam 17.
Claim 20 is 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: a display device of claim 16, wherein the fourth conductive layer comprises a base layer comprising Ti, a middle layer on the base layer and comprising Al or an Al alloy, and an upper layer on the middle layer and comprising Ti.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB E HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5370. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri.
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.
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.
/CALEB E HENRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818