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 § 102
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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 13 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 113851491 A, cited by Applicant), Li hereinafter.
Examiner’s note
The following rejection is based on a foreign reference CN 113851491 A. For examination purpose reference is been made to a copy of a machine translation of the applied reference, which is hereby provided.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a display substrate comprising: a base substrate (11, ¶ [52], figs, 1 & 3), comprising a display region (AA, ¶ [47], fig. 1) and a peripheral region (NA, ¶ [47], fig. 1) at least partially surrounding the display region (AA); and a plurality of conductive pads (3, ¶ [53], fig. 1), in a bonding region (BA, ¶ [47], fig. 1), wherein the bonding region (BA) is in the peripheral region (NA), the plurality of conductive pads (3) are arranged along a first direction (D1, hereinafter as denoted on the figure below), and each of the plurality of conductive pads (3) extends along a second direction (D2, hereinafter as denoted on the figure below) intersecting the first direction (D1), and comprises: a first sub-pad (31, ¶ [53], fig. 4), on the base substrate (11); a first insulating layer (15, ¶ [68], fig. 4), on a side of the first sub-pad (31) away from the base substrate (11); a second sub-pad (32, ¶ [53], fig. 4), on a side of the first insulating layer (15) away from the first sub-pad (31); a second insulating layer (16, ¶ [68], fig. 4), on a side of the second sub-pad (32) away from the first insulating layer (15); a first via (151, ¶ [69], fig. 3), penetrating the first insulating layer (15), and the second sub-pad (32) being directly connected with the first sub-pad (31) through the first via (151); and a second via (161, ¶ [69], fig. 3), penetrating the second insulating layer (16) to expose a part of the second sub-pad (32), wherein at least one first via (151) is provided between the first sub-pad (31) and a corresponding second sub-pad (32), an orthographic projection (see fig. 3) of the first via (151) on the base substrate (11) overlaps with an orthographic projection of at least one second via (161) on the base substrate (11), and at least one second via (161) has a size in the second direction (D2) being larger than a size in the first direction (D1) (see fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
792
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Li discloses that an orthographic projection of the second via (161) on the base substrate (11) covers the orthographic projection of the first via (151) on the base substrate (11) (see fig. 3)
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses that each of the plurality of conductive pads (3) further comprises: a third sub-pad (33, ¶ [53], fig. 4), on a side of the second insulating layer (16) away from the second sub-pad (32), wherein the third sub-pad (33) is directly connected with the second sub-pad (32) through the second via (161) (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses that a size of the first via (151) in the second direction (D2) is larger than a size of the first via (151) in the first direction (D1) (see fig 1 above, and fig. 3).
Regarding claim 22, Li discloses a display device (¶ [44]), comprising the display substrate (11) according to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 8-12 and 14-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if at least one the limitations indicated below were included in the base claim.
Regarding claims 2-5, the references of Prior Art of record discloses the general shape of the second via as shown on the rejection of claim 1; however, the Prior Art of record does not provide the dimensions of the second via to be able to determine limitations directed to the ratio of the size of the second via as claimed on claims 2-5.
Regarding claim 8, the references of 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 directed to the third sub-pad comprises: a first sub-layer, at least partially located in the second via and directly connected with the second sub-pad; and an oxide, at a periphery of the second via, in the second via, or on a side of the first sub-layer away from the second sub-pad, wherein a material of the first sub-layer comprises a transparent conductive oxide.
Regarding claims 9-11, the claims are allowable for the reasons given in claim 8 because of their dependency status from claim 8.
Regarding claim 12, the references of Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim 12, and specifically comprising the limitation directed to each of the plurality of conductive pads further comprises: a fourth sub-pad, on a side of the third sub-pad away from the second insulating layer, wherein a material of the fourth sub-pad comprises a transparent conductive oxide.
Regarding claim 14, the references of 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 directed to a ratio of the size of the first via in the second direction to the size of the first via in the first direction is greater than or equal to 5.
Regarding claims 15-16, the claims are allowable for the reasons given in claim 14 because of their dependency status from claim 14.
Regarding claim 19, the references of 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 directed to the second insulating layer comprises only one second via, and a ratio of a size of the second via in the second direction to a size of the second sub-pad in the second direction is greater than or equal to 0.7, the first insulating layer comprises only one first via, and a ratio of a size of the first via in the second direction to a size of the first sub-pad in the second direction is greater than or equal to 0.7.
Regarding claim 20, the references of 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 directed to the second insulating layer comprises only one second via, and a ratio of a size of the second via in the second direction to a size of the second sub-pad in the second direction is greater than or equal to 0.7, the first insulating layer comprises a plurality of first vias.
Regarding claim 21, the references of Prior Art of record fails to teach or suggest the combination of the limitations as set forth in claim 21, and specifically comprising the limitation directed to the gate electrode and the first sub-pad are in a same conductive layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20160306213 A1 discloses a plurality of conductive pads having a similar stack structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE M. DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9822. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, James R Greece can be reached at (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.
/JOSE M DIAZ/ Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/JAMES R GREECE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights