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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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 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) 1-2, 4-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US PG Pub. No. 2021/0313498) in view of Mishima (US PG Pub. No. 2021/0202877). Regarding Claim 1 , Kim discloses, at least in figure 5: A display device, comprising: a first electrode (21, ¶ [0095]) and a second electrode (22, ¶ [0095]) that are disposed on a substrate (11, ¶ [0098]) and spaced apart from each other (see fig.) ; a light emitting element (30, ¶ [0071]) disposed between the first electrode (21) and the second electrode(22) ; a first pixel electrode (CNE1, ¶[0097]) disposed on the first electrode (21) , the first pixel electrode (CNE1) being electrically connected to a first end portion of the light emitting element (30) and the first electrode (21) ; and a second pixel electrode (CNE2, ¶ [0097]) disposed on the second electrode(22) , the second pixel electrode (CNE2) being electrically connected to a second end portion of the light emitting element (30) , Kim disclose s in ¶ [00133]) wherein each of the first electrode (21) and the second electrode (22) has a multi-layer structure including a first layer and a second layer disposed on the first layer, the first layer includes a metal reflecting light, Kim fails to disclose: and the second layer includes tungsten oxide. Mishima teaches in paragraph [0249] using “tungsten oxide” as an electrode material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use tungsten oxide for the second material in the electrodes of Kim, as taught by Mishima, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin,125USPQ 416. Regarding Claim 2, Kim discloses in figure 5 , wherein the first pixel electrode (CNE1) includes at least one of indium tin oxide (ITO) (¶ [0152]) , indium zinc oxide (IZO), zinc oxide ( ZnO x ), and indium gallium zinc oxide (IGZO), and the first pixel electrode (CNE1) is in direct contact with the second layer of the first electrode (21) . Regarding Claim 4, Kim fails to disclose: wherein the second layer has a thickness in a range of about 50 Å to about 300 Å . However, since the second layer contains reflective material (tungsten oxide) and changing the thickness will affect its reflectivity and transmittivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a thickness of the second layer in the device of Kim, 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). Regarding Claim 5 , Kim fails to disclose: wherein the first layer has a thickness in a range of about 500 Å to about 2000 Å . However, since the first layer also contains reflective material and changing the thickness will affect its reflectivity and transmittivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a thickness of the second layer in the device of Kim, 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). Regarding Claim 6 , Kim fails to disclose wherein each of the first electrode (21) and the second electrode (22) further includes a third layer disposed under the first layer, and the third layer and the first layer include a same material. However since the third layer contains the same material as the first layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing layer date of the claimed invention, to provide the third layer in the device of Kim since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Regarding Claim 7, Kim discloses in figure 5: , further comprising: an insulating layer (19, ¶ [0121]) disposed under the first electrode (21) and the second electrode (22) ; and a metal layer (CDP, ¶ [0117]), disposed between the substrate (11) and the insulating layer (19) , wherein the first electrode (21) is in electrical contact with the metal layer (CDP) through a contact hole (CT1, ¶ [0129]) penetrating the insulating layer (19) . Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses in figure 5: further comprising: an insulating layer (19) disposed under the first electrode (21) and the second electrode (22) ; and a metal layer (CDP) disposed between the substrate (11) and the insulating layer (19) , wherein the first electrode (21) is in electrical contact with the metal layer (CDP) through a contact hole (CT1) penetrating the insulating layer (19). Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (498) and Mishima (877) and further in view of Park et al (US PG Pub. No. 2020/0381507 ) . Regarding Claim 3, Kim discloses: wherein the first layer includes aluminum (¶ [0012] but fails to disclose: and the first layer does not include any alloy. Park teaches that either aluminum and/or aluminum alloy can be used for a conductive layer in a display device (¶ [0089]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to try aluminum with or without aluminum alloy in the electrodes of Kim, as taught by Park, since it involves a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (MPEP 2143 lB ). Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (498) and Mishima (877) and further in view of Yamazaki et al (US PG Pub. No. 2022/0384398). Regarding Claim 12, Kim fails to disclose in figure 5: further comprising: a color conversion layer disposed above the light emitting element (30) , the color conversion layer converting a wavelength of light incident from the light emitting element (30) . Kim discloses in paragraph [0091] that all light sources may emit light of the same color. In such case, obtaining other colors or a white light device, color conversion would be required. Yamazaki explains this in paragraph [0339] where the light emitting layers both emit blue light that is converted to a desired color when striking the conversion layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing layer date of the claimed invention, to provide a color conversion layer above the light emitting elements of Kim, as taught by Yamazaki, to obtain other colors than those of the light emitting elements. Claim(s) 13 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (498) in view of Lee et al (US PG Pub. No. 2021/0408441) and further in view of Yamazaki et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0040350). Regarding Claim s 13 and 18 , Kim discloses in figure 5: A display device (title) , comprising: a pixel disposed in a display area (PAS2 is in the center of it) ; and a pad disposed in a non-display area (right of the center) located at a side of the display area, wherein the pad includes: a first pad electrode (PAD-R, ¶ [0097]) disposed on a metal layer (WPD, ¶ [0076]) ; and a second pad electrode (PAD-C, ¶ [0097]) disposed on the first pad electrode (PAD-R) , Kim fails to disclose: the first pad electrode has a multi-layer structure including a first layer and a second layer disposed on the first layer, the first layer includes a metal reflecting light, and the second layer includes tungsten oxide. Lee teaches in paragraph [0 066 ] a pad electrode (127) with a three-layer structure including a layer of Aluminum and a layer of Tungsten (both reflective ). ( First and third metal layers with the same material , claim 18 ). Yamazaki teaches in paragraph [0485] using either tungsten or tungsten oxide for electrode material. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing layer date of the claimed invention, to provide a multilayer structure for the first pad electrode of Kim, as taught by Lee and use a metal reflecting light (aluminum) for the first layer and tungsten (as taught by Lee) or its replacement tungsten oxide, as suggested by Yamazaki, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin,125USPQ 416. Regarding Claim 16 , Kim fails to disclose: wherein the second layer has a thickness in a range of about 50 Å to about 300 Å . However, since the second layer contains reflective material (tungsten oxide) and changing the thickness will affect its reflectivity and transmittivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a thickness of the second layer in the device of Kim, 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). Regarding Claim 17 , Kim fails to disclose: wherein the first layer has a thickness in a range of about 500 Å to about 2000 Å . However, since the first layer also contains reflective material and changing the thickness will affect its reflectivity and transmittivity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a thickness of the second layer in the device of Kim, 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). Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (498), Lee (441), Yamazaki (350) and further in view of Park et al (US PG Pub. No. 2020/0381507). Regarding Claim 15 , Kim discloses: wherein the first layer includes aluminum (¶ [0012] but fails to disclose: and the first layer does not include any alloy. Park teaches that either aluminum and/or aluminum alloy can be used for a conductive layer in a display device (¶ [0089]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to try aluminum with or without aluminum alloy in the electrodes of Kim, as taught by Park, since it involves a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (MPEP 2143 lB ). Allowable Subject Matter Claim s 8 -9, 11, 14 and 19-20 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. Regarding Claim 8 , the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 8 , and specifically comprising the limitation of “ wherein the metal layer has a multi-layer structure including a fourth layer and a fifth layer disposed on the fourth layer, the fourth layer includes a material having an electrical conductivity higher than an electrical conductivity of the fifth layer, and the fifth layer of the metal layer is in direct contact with the third layer of the first electrode ” including the remaining limitations Similarly, Regarding Claim 9 the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 9 and specifically comprising the limitation of “wherein the metal layer has a multi-layer structure including a fourth layer and a sixth layer disposed under the fourth layer, the fourth layer includes a material having an electrical conductivity higher than an electrical conductivity of the sixth layer, and the fourth layer of the metal layer is in direct contact with the third layer of the first electrode” including the remaining limitations. Again, Regarding Claim 11 the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 11 and specifically comprising the limitation of “wherein the metal layer has a multi-layer structure including a fourth layer and a fifth layer disposed on the fourth layer, the fourth layer includes a material having an electrical conductivity higher than an electrical conductivity of the fifth layer, and the fifth layer of the metal layer is in direct contact with the first layer of the first electrode” Including the remaining limitations. Regarding Claim 14 the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 14 and specifically comprising the limitation of “ and the second pad electrode is in direct contact with the second layer of the first pad electrode” including the remaining limitations. Examiner Note: the second pad electrode (PAD-R) of Kim above would be in direct contact with the bottom (first layer) of the first pad electrode (PAD-C) Regarding Claim 19 , the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 19 and specifically comprising the limitation of “ wherein the metal layer has a multi-layer structure including a fourth layer and a fifth layer disposed on the fourth layer, the fourth layer includes a material having an electrical conductivity higher than an electrical conductivity of the fifth layer, and the fifth layer of the metal layer is in direct contact with the third layer of the first pad electrode ” including the remaining limitations. . Regarding Claim 20 , the references of the Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in Claim 20 and specifically comprising the limitation of “ wherein the metal layer has a multi-layer structure including a fourth layer and a sixth layer disposed under the fourth layer, the fourth layer includes a material having an electrical conductivity higher than an electrical conductivity of the sixth layer, and the fourth layer of the metal layer is in direct contact with the third layer of the first pad electrode ” including the remaining limitations. CONTACT INFORMATION Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DONALD L RALEIGH whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3407 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 7AM -3 PM . 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 James R. Greece can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3711 . 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. /DONALD L RALEIGH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875