DETAILED ACTION This Office action is in response to the election filed 15 December 2025. Claims 1-18 are currently pending. 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 Species II, claims 1-4, 6-9, and 11-18, in the reply filed on 22 January 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-18 are drawn to non-elected Species I, Figs. 10-22, a display device including a portion of the insulating layer is located between the wiring and the common electrode, wherein the pixel electrode is in contact with a first portion of the first region and not in contact with a second portion of the first region. Claim s 5 and 1 0-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 22 January 2026 . 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. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “ recess portion extending over a plurality of pixels arranged side-by-side in the second direction , the recess portion is arranged continuously with the contact hole ” (as in claim 6) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 § 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, 3-4, 6, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2022/0308379 A1 to Ozeki et al. (hereinafter “Ozeki”). Regarding independent claim 1 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses a display device comprising a plurality of pixels arranged in a matrix on a substrate along a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction, each of the plurality of pixels comprises: a transistor Tr1 (¶ 0041) ; a first wiring W1 (¶ 0044) arranged over the transistor and electrically connected to the transistor (Fig. 1) ; a first transparent conductive layer ZTCO (¶ 0044) arranged over the first wiring W1 and electrically connected to the transistor Tr1 (Fig. 1) ; a first insulating layer IL4 (¶ 0047) arranged on the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO , and having a contact hole PCON (¶ 0047) ; and a second transparent conductive layer PTCO (¶ 0047) arranged on the first insulating layer IL4 and electrically connected to the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO via the contact hole (Fig. 1) , wherein the first insulating layer IL4 has a recess portion (Fig. 1 - SP / CTCO2/IL6/ PTCO disposed therein) overlapping the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO , the recess portion is continuous with the contact hole PCON , and the contact hole is arranged at a bottom part of the recess portion (Fig. 1) . Regarding claim 3 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first insulating layer IL4 in the recess portion is 70% or more and 75% or less with respect to the thickness of the first insulating layer without the recess portion (“recess portion” may be interpreted and defined to meet the recited thickness range) . Regarding claim 4 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 1, further comprising: a common auxiliary electrode CMTL (¶ 0041) arranged over the second transparent conductive layer PTCO ; and a third transparent conductive layer CTCO2 (¶ 0041) arranged over the common auxiliary electrode, wherein the recess portion (Fig. 1 - SP /CTCO2/IL6/PTCO disposed therein) overlaps the common auxiliary electrode CMTL (Fig. 1). Regarding independent claim 6 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses a display device comprising a plurality of pixels arranged in a matrix on a substrate along a first direction and a second direction intersecting the first direction, each of the plurality of pixels comprises: a transistor Tr1 (¶ 0041) ; a first wiring W1 (¶ 0044) arranged over the transistor and electrically connected to the transistor (Fig. 1) ; a first transparent conductive layer ZTCO (¶ 0044) arranged over the first wiring W1 and electrically connected to the transistor Tr1 (Fig. 1) ; a first insulating layer IL4 (¶ 0047) arranged on the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO , and having a contact hole PCON (¶ 0047) ; and a second transparent conductive layer PTCO (¶ 0047) arranged on the first insulating layer IL4 and electrically connected to the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO via the contact hole (Fig. 1) , wherein the first insulating layer IL4 has a recess portion (Fig. 1 - extends downward from PCON into IL4 , SP /CTCO2/IL6/PTCO disposed therein) extending over a plurality of pixels arranged side-by-side in the second direction (Fig. 12, “recess portion” is interpreted to include multiple PCON from side-by-side pixels in D1 direction), the recess portion is arranged continuous ly with the contact hole PCON (Fig. 1) , and the contact hole is arranged at a bottom part of the recess portion overlapping the first transparent conductive layer ZTCO (Fig. 1) . Regarding claim 8 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 6, wherein a thickness of the first insulating layer IL4 in the recess portion is 70% or more and 75% or less of the thickness of the first insulating layer without the recess portion (“recess portion” may be interpreted and defined to meet the recited thickness range) . `Regarding claim 9 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 6, further comprising: a common auxiliary electrode CMTL (¶ 0041) arranged over the second transparent conductive layer PTCO ; and a third transparent conductive layer CTCO2 (¶ 0041) arranged over the common auxiliary electrode, wherein the recess portion (Fig. 1 - SP /CTCO2/IL6/PTCO disposed therein) overlaps the common auxiliary electrode CMTL (Fig. 1) . 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. 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. 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 2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozeki. Regarding claim 2 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 1, however fails to expressly disclose wherein an interval between the first wirings of two pixels adjacent to each other in the second direction is 4 μm or more and 8 μm or less, and a contact area between the first transparent conductive layer and the second transparent conductive layer is 40% or more of the interval between the first wirings. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the above interval between the first wirings of two pixels adjacent to each other in the second direction and contact area size , since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F .2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Here, the interval and contact area size are result effective variables because they affect the overall size and resolution of the display device . Thus , the ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify pitch and contact area size for the purpose of i ncreasing display device resolution . Regarding claim 7 , Ozeki (Fig. 1) discloses t he display device according to claim 6, wherein an interval of the first wirings of two pixels adjacent to each other in the second direction is 4 μm or more and 8 μm or less, and a contact area between the first transparent conductive layer and the second transparent conductive layer is 40% or more of the interval between the first wirings. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the above interval between the first wirings of two pixels adjacent to each other in the second direction and contact area size , since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch , 617 F .2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Here, the interval and contact area size are result effective variables because they affect the overall size and resolution of the display device . Thus , the ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify pitch and contact area size for the purpose of increasing display device resolution. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Candice Y. Chan whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9013 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 8:30 am - 5 pm ET . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Steven B. Gauthier can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-0373 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT CANDICE Y. CHAN Examiner Art Unit 2813 21 March 2026 /STEVEN B GAUTHIER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813