DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication filed 22 August 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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the Invention I Species 1 (FIG. 6) embodiment in the reply filed on 25 March 2026 is acknowledged.
Accordingly, claims 8-10 and 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected embodiment, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Response to Arguments
Rejection of claim 1
Applicant’s arguments, detailed in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment (filed 22 August 2026) at 7-10, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
A new rejection of claim 1 appears below.
Rejection of claims 2 and 5-7
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 2 and 5-7 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
Claims 2 and 5-7 depend from claim 1 and include all features of claim 1. Therefore, for at least the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1, Applicant respectfully submits that the cited references fail to render obvious the features of claims 2 and 5-7.
Id. at 10. Claim 1 is rejected below. Accordingly, arguments that claims 2 and 5-7 are allowable by virtue of their dependency from claim 1 are unpersuasive.
Applicant further states:
In addition, claims 5-7 further define particular metal-layer structures and alloy- layer thicknesses. Claim 5 recites that the metal layer comprises a first metal layer comprising titanium, a second metal layer on the first metal layer and comprising aluminum, and a third metal layer on the second metal layer and comprising titanium. Claim 6 further recites direct contact between the third metal layer and the alloy layer, and claim 7 recites an alloy-layer thickness of about 50 A to about 100 A. The cited combination does not appear to provide a reason why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have selected Yao's optional Mo/W/Nb combination, applied it to Yoo's display structure, and further arranged it in direct contact with a Ti/AI/Ti metal-layer stack at the recited thickness. Rather, the rejection appears to rely on Applicant's disclosure as a roadmap for selecting and arranging these features.
Id. Careful review of each of the rejections of claims 5-7 (below) reveals that each of the features disclosed in claims 5-7 is addressed in those rejections. The Examiner further notes that Applicant’s assertion that “the rejection appears to rely on Applicant’s disclosure as a roadmap for selecting and arranging these features” is entirely conclusory and any lacks any meaningful legal or factual support. See MPEP § 2145(I) (“Arguments presented by applicant cannot take the place of evidence in the record.”).
Rejection of claim 3
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 3 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
Applicant states:
Nor does Murata appear to provide a reason why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the Yoo/Yao structure to arrive at Applicant's claimed Ti/Al metal layer protected by the claimed Mo/W/Nb alloy layer.
Murata appears to be directed to a different material system and purpose. Murata describes a Mo-based thin-film interconnect having Nb and W as additive elements, with the remainder being Mo and unavoidable impurities. The claim, in contrast, is directed to an alloy layer on a Ti/Al-containing metal layer in a display device, where the alloy layer protects the metal layer from oxidation and supports reliable conductive-ball contact. Thus, the cited references do not provide an apparent reason to combine Murata's Mo- based interconnect disclosure with Yoo and Yao in a manner that would yield the claimed display-device layer structure.
Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment (filed 22 August 2026) at 10-11. Careful review of the rejections of claim 3 (below) reveals that each of the features disclosed in claim 3 is addressed in the rejection of claim 3.
Rejection of claim 4
Applicant’s arguments, detailed in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment (filed 22 August 2026) at 7-10, with respect to claim 4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection of claim 4 has been withdrawn.
Rejection of claims 11-14
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 11-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0260438 (effectively filed Jan. 31, 2023) (hereinafter “Yoo”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0379631 (filed Oct. 22, 2021) (hereinafter “Yao”), and further in view of WIPO Publication No. WO2009119804A1 (filed Mar. 27, 2009) (hereinafter “Murata”) (translation attached).
Regarding independent claim 1, Yoo discloses: A display device (FIG. 1, display device 100, [0044]) comprising:
a substrate (FIG. 4, substrate 101, [0044]);
a metal layer (FIG. 4, depicting a metal layer comprising, e.g., pad PD1, [0090]) on the substrate and comprising titanium (Ti) and aluminum (Al) (FIG. 4, depicting wherein the pad PD1 is on the substrate 101; [0090]: “For example, each of the plurality of input pads PD1 and the plurality of output pads PD2 may have a Ti/Al/Ti stacked structure.”).
Yoo does not specifically disclose an alloy layer on the metal layer.
In the same field of endeavor, Yao discloses a display device (FIG. 1, depicting a light emitting substrate, [0044]) including a metal layer (FIG. 1, e.g., pads 2, [0044]) and an alloy layer (FIG. 1, oxidation protection layer 3, [0044]) on the metal layer (FIG. 1, depicting wherein the oxidation protection layer 3 is on the pad 2). Regarding the oxidation protection layer, in [0004], Yao states: “The light-emitting substrate can avoid oxidation of pads in the light-emitting region, ensuring the reliable electrical connection between the light-emitting units and the light-emitting substrate, and improving the product yield.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display device of Yoo by adding the oxidation protection layer of Yao in order to avoid oxidation of the pad electrodes and improve product yield. See Yao [0004].
While Yao discloses wherein the oxidation protection layer 3 may include various combinations of alloyed elements, including molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), and niobium (Nb) (FIG. 1, [0048]: “X includes one or any combination of Al, Sn, Pb, Au, Ag, In, Zn, Bi, Mg, Ga, V, W, Y, Zr, Mo, Nb, Pt, Co, or Sb. Ni and X have the oxidation resistance, so as to prevent a surface of the oxidation protection layer from being oxidized. In addition, in embodiments of the present disclosure, the oxidation resistance can be achieved by adding an anti-oxidation CuNiX alloy film layer on the first pads without an additional anti-oxidation process, which greatly simplifies the process flow and reduces the mass production cost.”), Yoo in view of Yao does not specifically disclose a specific alloyed combination of molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), and niobium (Nb) together.
In the same field of endeavor, Murata discloses an alloyed combination of molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), and niobium (Nb) (“That is, in the present invention, in a thin film wiring in which a metal film is formed on a substrate, the metal film contains 2 to 15 atomic% of Nb as the additional element, and 2 to 15 atomic% of W when the total amount of Mo and additional elements is 100 atomic% 2 to 20 atomic%, Nb + W at 30 atomic% or less, the balance being Mo and unavoidable impurities.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1). Regarding the composition, Murata states: “By selecting the Mo alloy film of the present invention, it is possible to have low resistance, excellent heat resistance, corrosion resistance and adhesion to the substrate, and it is possible to suppress the occurrence of warpage to a large substrate, so that thin film wiring for electronic parts It is a technology that can not be missed.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display device of Yoo and Yao by substituting the alloy layer composition of Murata for the oxidation protection layer 3 in order to improve electrical resistance, heat resistance, corrosion resistance, adhesion, and to suppress warpage. See Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1. The Examiner further notes that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a known corrosion/oxidation resistant material such as one including the materials disclosed in Murata, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.07 (citing In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (C.C.P.A. 1960)). One would be motivated to choose an alloy containing Mo, W, and Nb over other materials depending on manufacturing considerations such as cost of materials, time it takes to process the layer, and/or achievement of desired properties, as disclosed in Murata with respect to the amounts of Mo, W, and Nb present in the alloy.
Regarding claim 2, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein the alloy layer (FIG. 1, oxidation protection layer 3) overlaps the metal layer and contacts an upper surface of the metal layer (Yao FIG. 1; Yoo FIG. 4; depicting wherein the oxidation protection layer 3, added to the display device 100 of Yoo, would result in a configuration wherein the oxidation protection layer 3 overlaps the pad PD1 and contacts an upper surface of the pad PD1).
Regarding claim 3, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein an amount of niobium in the alloy layer is about 5 at% to about 15 at% with respect to a total amount of elements in the alloy layer (“That is, in the present invention, in a thin film wiring in which a metal film is formed on a substrate, the metal film contains 2 to 15 atomic% of Nb as the additional element, and 2 to 15 atomic% of W when the total amount of Mo and additional elements is 100 atomic% 2 to 20 atomic%, Nb + W at 30 atomic% or less, the balance being Mo and unavoidable impurities.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1).
Regarding claim 5, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein the metal layer (FIG. 4, e.g., pad PD1) comprises: a first metal layer comprising titanium (FIG. 4; [0090]: “For example, each of the plurality of input pads PD1 and the plurality of output pads PD2 may have a Ti/Al/Ti stacked structure.”); a second metal layer on the first metal layer and comprising aluminum (FIG. 4; [0090]: “For example, each of the plurality of input pads PD1 and the plurality of output pads PD2 may have a Ti/Al/Ti stacked structure.”); and a third metal layer on the second metal layer and comprising titanium (FIG. 4; [0090]: “For example, each of the plurality of input pads PD1 and the plurality of output pads PD2 may have a Ti/Al/Ti stacked structure.”).
Regarding claim 6, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein the third metal layer directly contacts the alloy layer (Yao FIG. 1; Yoo FIG. 4; [0090]: “For example, each of the plurality of input pads PD1 and the plurality of output pads PD2 may have a Ti/Al/Ti stacked structure.”; depicting wherein the oxidation protection layer 3, added to the display device 100 of Yoo, would result in a configuration wherein the oxidation protection layer 3 directly contacts the pad PD1 and contacts an upper surface of the pad PD1, which would be the titanium layer).
Regarding claim 7, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein a thickness of the alloy layer is about 50 Å to about 100 Å (Yao FIG. 1; [0009]: “Optionally, in the above light-emitting substrate according to embodiments of the present disclosure, a thickness of the oxidation protection layer is in a range of 10 nm to 100 nm.”).
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo in view of Yao, Murata, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0190225 (filed Dec. 28, 2015) (hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 11, Yoo in view of Yao and Murata further discloses wherein the substrate (FIG. 4, substrate 101) comprises a display area (FIG. 1, display area AA, [0044]) and a pad area adjacent to the display area (FIG. 1, pad area PA1 adjacent to the display area AA), the metal layer comprises a pad electrode in the pad area (FIGS. 1/4, depicting wherein the metal layer comprises a pad PD1 in the pad area PA1) and a line in the display area (FIGS. 1/4, depicting wherein the metal layer comprises a connection electrode 155).
Yoo in view of Yao and Murata does not specifically disclose wherein the alloy layer overlaps an entirety of the metal layer in a plan view of the display device.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses a display device including line in a display area, wherein the line is a multilayer including a protective layer. Regarding the connection cover line, in [0094], Kim states: “The connection cover line 192 is provided on the connection line 161. The connection cover line 192 is provided to cover the upper surface and side surface of the connection line 161. In this case, the extent of oxidation of the connection cover line 192 may be smaller than the extent of oxidation of the connection line 161, and thus the upper surface of the connection line 161 is not easily corroded.”
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display device of Yoo by adding the connection cover line 192 of Kim to the connection electrode 155 of Yoo in order to reduce oxidation of connection electrode 155. See Kim [0094].
Kim does not specifically disclose wherein the connection cover line 192 is formed from a specific alloyed combination of molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), and niobium (Nb) together.
In the same field of endeavor, Murata discloses an alloyed combination of molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), and niobium (Nb) (“That is, in the present invention, in a thin film wiring in which a metal film is formed on a substrate, the metal film contains 2 to 15 atomic% of Nb as the additional element, and 2 to 15 atomic% of W when the total amount of Mo and additional elements is 100 atomic% 2 to 20 atomic%, Nb + W at 30 atomic% or less, the balance being Mo and unavoidable impurities.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1). Regarding the composition, Murata states: “By selecting the Mo alloy film of the present invention, it is possible to have low resistance, excellent heat resistance, corrosion resistance and adhesion to the substrate, and it is possible to suppress the occurrence of warpage to a large substrate, so that thin film wiring for electronic parts It is a technology that can not be missed.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the disclosed display device of Yoo and Yao by substituting the alloy layer composition of Murata for the material of the connection cover line 192 in order to improve electrical resistance, heat resistance, corrosion resistance, adhesion, and to suppress warpage. See Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1. The Examiner further notes that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a known corrosion/oxidation resistant material such as one including the materials disclosed in Murata, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.07 (citing In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (C.C.P.A. 1960)). One would be motivated to choose an alloy containing Mo, W, and Nb over other materials depending on manufacturing considerations such as cost of materials, time it takes to process the layer, and/or achievement of desired properties, as disclosed in Murata with respect to the amounts of Mo, W, and Nb present in the alloy.
Moreover, the addition of the connection cover line as modified by Murata would result in a configuration wherein the connection cover line 192 and oxidation protection layer 3, which include the alloy disclosed in Murata, overlap an entirety of the pad PD1 and the interlayer connection layer 155 in a plan view of the display device.
Regarding claim 12, Yoo in view of Yao, Murata, and Kim further discloses wherein at least a portion of an upper surface of the alloy layer on the pad electrode is exposed (Yao FIG. 1; Yoo FIG. 4; depicting wherein the oxidation protection layer 3, added to the display device 100 of Yoo, would result in a configuration wherein at least a portion of the oxidation protection layer 3 is exposed, just as the oxidation protection layer 3 is exposed in Yao).
Regarding claim 13, Yoo in view of Yao, Murata, and Kim further discloses an integrated circuit (FIG. 4, data driver chip D-IC, [0048]) connected to the pad electrode (FIG. 4, depicting wherein the data driver chip D-IC is connected to the pad PD1); and a conductive ball connecting the integrated circuit and the pad electrode (FIG. 4, conductive balls CBL connecting the data driver chip D-IC and the pad PD1).
Regarding claim 14, Yoo in view of Yao, Murata, and Kim wherein the conductive ball penetrates the alloy layer and contacts the pad electrode (Yoo FIG. 4; Yao FIG. 1, depicting wherein the conductive balls CBL would penetrate the oxidation protection layer 3, and wherein the conductive balls CBL would contact the pad PD1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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:
Regarding claim 4: Yoo in view of Yao and Murata disclose wherein an amount of niobium in the alloy layer is about 5 at% to about 15 at%, with respect to a total amount of elements in the alloy layer (“That is, in the present invention, in a thin film wiring in which a metal film is formed on a substrate, the metal film contains 2 to 15 atomic% of Nb as the additional element, and 2 to 15 atomic% of W when the total amount of Mo and additional elements is 100 atomic% 2 to 20 atomic%, Nb + W at 30 atomic% or less, the balance being Mo and unavoidable impurities.” Translation of WO2009119804A1 at 1). The cited prior art does not specifically disclose or suggest wherein an amount of molybdenum in the alloy layer is about 45 at% to about 55 at%, an amount of tungsten in the alloy layer is about 36 at% to about 44 at%, however.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D WEILAND whose telephone number is (703)756-4760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Steven Gauthier can be reached at (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.
/ADAM D WEILAND/Examiner, Art Unit 2813
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
