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 .
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 1-2, 4, 12-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US Pub. No. 2023/0132497) in view of Kim (US Pub. No. 2013/0169901).
Regarding claim 1, in FIGs. 4 and 7, Ahn discloses an array substrate, comprising: a base (110, paragraph [0034]); a buffer layer provided on the base, wherein the buffer layer comprises a first buffer layer (BUF1, paragraph [0051]) and a second buffer layer (BUF2, paragraph [0051]), the first buffer layer is disposed between the second buffer layer and the base, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the second buffer layer (SiOx, 1.5, paragraph [0051]), and a thin film transistor (DT/ST, paragraph [0046]) provided on a side of the buffer layer away from the base. Ahn further discloses that the base is made of a glass, a metal, a plastic, or a polyimide (paragraph [0035]).
Ahn appears not to explicitly disclose that a refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than a refractive index of the base; and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25.
The art however well recognized glass having a refractive index of 1.4 to 1.6 to be suitable for use as a substrate in a display device. See, for example, Kim, paragraph [0006].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Ahn disclosed substrate from glass having a refractive index of 1.4 to 1.6 for its recognized suitability as a substrate in a display device. In doing so, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the base (1.4 to 1.6); and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25 (1.8/1.6=1.125; e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ahn and Kim discloses that the ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is greater than or equal to 1.02 and less than or equal to 1.15 (1.8/1.6=1.125; e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ahn and Kim discloses that the refractive index of the second buffer layer (SiOx, 1.5, Ahn paragraph [0051]) is less than the refractive index of the base (e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Regarding claim 12, in FIGs. 4 and 7, Ahn discloses a display panel, comprising an array substrate, wherein the array substrate comprises: a base (110, paragraph [0034]); a buffer layer provided on the base, wherein the buffer layer comprises a first buffer layer (BUF1, paragraph [0051]) and a second buffer layer (BUF2, paragraph [0051]), the first buffer layer is disposed between the second buffer layer and the base, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the second buffer layer (SiOx, 1.5, paragraph [0051]); and a thin film transistor (DT/ST, paragraph [0046]) provided on a side of the buffer layer away from the base.
Ahn appears not to explicitly disclose that a refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than a refractive index of the base; and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25.
The art however well recognized glass having a refractive index of 1.4 to 1.6 to be suitable for use as a substrate in a display device. See, for example, Kim, paragraph [0006].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Ahn disclosed substrate from glass having a refractive index of 1.4 to 1.6 for its recognized suitability as a substrate in a display device. In doing so, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the base (1.4 to 1.6); and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25 (1.8/1.6=1.125; e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ahn and Kim discloses that the ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is greater than or equal to 1.02 and less than or equal to 1.15 (1.8/1.6=1.125; e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Ahn and Kim discloses that the refractive index of the second buffer layer (SiOx, 1.5, Ahn paragraph [0051]) is less than the refractive index of the base (e.g. in the case of glass with a refractive index of 1.6).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US Pub. No. 2023/0132497) in view of Kim (US Pub. No. 2013/0169901) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Song (US Pub. No. 2012/0098008).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ahn and Kim appears not to explicitly disclose that a thickness of the first buffer layer is greater than a thickness of the second buffer layer.
The art however well recognized a buffer layer wherein a thickness of a first buffer layer is greater than a thickness of a second buffer layer to be suitable for use as buffer layer in a display device. See, for example, Song, paragraphs [0043]-[0044].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Ahn disclosed first and second buffer layers such that a thickness of the first buffer layer is greater than a thickness of the second buffer layer for its recognized suitability as buffer layer in a display device.
Claims 3, 5, 8, 9, 14, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US Pub. No. 2023/0132497) in view of Kim (US Pub. No. 2013/0169901) as applied to claims 1 and 12, and further in view of Lim (US Pub. No. 2020/0119311).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, the combination of Ahn and Kim appears not to explicitly disclose that the first buffer layer comprises a same material as the second buffer layer.
The art however well recognized a first buffer layer comprising a same material as a second buffer layer to be suitable for use as a buffer layer in a display device. See, for example, Lim, paragraphs [0065] and [0066].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the first buffer layer such that it comprises a same material as the second buffer layer for its recognized suitability as a buffer layer in a display device.
Regarding claims 5 and 16, the combination of Ahn and Kim discloses that the base comprises a glass base.
The combination of Ahn and Kim appears not to explicitly disclose that wherein each of the first buffer layer and the second buffer layer comprises silicon oxide.
The art however well recognized a first buffer layer and a second buffer layer comprising silicon oxide to be suitable for use as a buffer layer in a display device. See, for example, Lim, paragraphs [0065] and [0066].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed each of the first buffer layer and the second buffer layer to comprise silicon oxide for its recognized suitability as a buffer layer in a display device.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, the combination of Ahn and Kim appears not to explicitly disclose that the buffer layer further comprises: a third buffer layer provided between the base and the first buffer layer, and wherein the third buffer layer comprises a same material as the first buffer layer, and a refractive index of the third buffer layer is less than the refractive index of the first buffer layer.
The art however well recognized a buffer layer comprising a third buffer layer provided between a base and a first buffer layer, and wherein a third buffer layer comprises a same material as the first buffer layer, and a refractive index of the third buffer layer is less than the refractive index of the first buffer layer (the refractive index of the first to third buffer layers can increase in a direction away from the device substrate) to be suitable for use as a buffer layer in a display device. See, for example, Lim, paragraphs [0061]-[0062].
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the buffer layer such that a third buffer layer is provided between the base and the first buffer layer, and wherein the third buffer layer comprises a same material as the first buffer layer, and a refractive index of the third buffer layer is less than the refractive index of the first buffer layer (as disclosed by Lim) for its recognized suitability as a buffer layer in a display device.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the combination of Ahn, Kim, and Lim discloses that the third buffer layer comprises silicon oxide (Lim, paragraph [0062]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho (US Pub. No. 2010/0012944) in view of Ahn (US Pub. No. 2023/0132497) and Iwashita (US Patent No. 4,895,432).
Regarding claim 20, in FIG. 6, Cho discloses a display device, comprising: a display panel comprising an array substrate; and a backlight module (Backlight; paragraph [0005]) provided on a side of the display panel opposite (bottom) to a light-emitting side (top) of the display panel, wherein the array substrate comprises: a base (transparent plastic, 30, paragraph [0017]); a buffer layer (34, paragraph [0024]) provided on the base, wherein the buffer layer comprises a first buffer layer (buffer nitride, paragraph [0024]) and a second buffer layer (buffer oxide, paragraph [0024]); and a thin film transistor (50, paragraph [0024]) provided on a side of the buffer layer away from the base.
Cho appears not to explicitly disclose that the first buffer layer is disposed between the second buffer layer and the base, a refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than a refractive index of the base and a refractive index of the second buffer layer, and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25.
In FIGs. 4 and 7, Ahn discloses an array substrate, comprising: a base (110, paragraph [0034]); a buffer layer provided on the base, wherein the buffer layer comprises a first buffer layer (BUF1, paragraph [0051]) and a second buffer layer (BUF2, paragraph [0051]), the first buffer layer is disposed between the second buffer layer and the base, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the second buffer layer (SiOx, 1.5, paragraph [0051]), and a thin film transistor (DT/ST, paragraph [0046]) provided on a side of the buffer layer away from the base.
As such, the art well recognized a buffer layer comprising a first buffer layer (SiNx) and a second buffer layer (SiOx), the first buffer layer being disposed between the second buffer layer and a base, a refractive index of the first buffer layer being greater than a refractive index of the second buffer layer to be suitable for use as buffer layer in a display device.
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Cho disclosed buffer layer such that the first buffer layer is disposed between the second buffer layer and the base, and a refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than a refractive of the second buffer layer for its recognized suitability as a buffer layer in a display device.
The combination of Cho and Ahn appears not to explicitly disclose that a refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than a refractive index of the base, and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25.
The art however well recognized polyimide having a refractive index of 1.7 to be suitable for use as a transparent plastic in a display device. See, for example, Iwashita, col. 5, lines 61-62.
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Cho disclosed transparent plastic from polyimide having a refractive index of 1.7 for its recognized suitability as a transparent plastic in a display device. In doing so, a refractive index of the first buffer layer (SiNx, 1.8, paragraph [0051]) is greater than a refractive index of the base (1.7); and a ratio of the refractive index of the first buffer layer to the refractive index of the base is less than or equal to 1.25 (1.8/1.7=1.058).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 10-11, and 17 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 6 and 17, the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed array substrate / display panel particularly characterized by the refractive index of the first buffer layer is greater than or equal to 1.5 and less than or equal to 1.7 in combination with the relative differences in index of refraction and the ratio recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed array substrate particularly characterized by a thickness of the first buffer layer being greater than a thickness of the third buffer layer in combination with the relative differences in index of refraction and the ratio recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed array substrate particularly characterized by a thickness of the first buffer layer is greater than or equal to 1500 angstroms and less than or equal to 2500 angstroms, and a thickness of the third buffer layer is greater than or equal to 300 angstroms and less than or equal to 600 angstroms in combination with the relative differences in index of refraction and the ratio recited in claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUCKER J WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3234. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/TUCKER J WRIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891