DETAILED ACTION
Specification
1. 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 Objections
2. Claims 9, 10, 12, 13, 23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9, 10, 12, 13, line 2, “the same material” should be changed to “a same material” because it is a lack of antecedent basis.
In claim 23, line 1, “The display panel of claim 1, wherein a constant voltage is applied to the metal layer” should be changed to “The display panel of claim 14, wherein a constant voltage is applied to the metal layer” because “the metal layer” is a lack of antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claim(s) 1 – 10, 21 - 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by YANG et al. (20220352266).
With regard to claim 1, YANG et al. disclose a display panel (for example, see figs. 3A, 8A, 8C) comprising:
a substrate (20) comprising a first opening (201A) and a second opening (201B) that are spaced apart from each other;
a pixel (for example, see paragraphs [0108], [0194]) located in a display area (201, 203A, 203B, 2011, 2012) around the first and second openings (201A, 201B),
the pixel comprising a pixel circuit (for example, the substrate 20 having a pixel circuit includes a transistor, which is described by taking a thin film transistor TFT; for example, see paragraph [0132], fig. 3A) comprising a first thin-film transistor (TFT) and a display element (180) connected to the pixel circuit (the pixel circuit includes the thin film transistor TFT);
signal lines (signal lines 241 as shown in fig. 8C below) located on the substrate (20), extending in a first direction (for example, a direction R2), and spaced apart from each other by the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B); and
first conductive lines (for example, B1 or D1 or C1) surrounding the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B) to bypass the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B), respectively;
wherein the first conductive lines (for example, B1 or D1 or C1) electrically connects the signal lines (241) that are spaced apart from each other by the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B) to bypass the first opening (201A).
PNG
media_image1.png
686
951
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 1, YANG et al. disclose a display panel (for example, see figs. 3A, 8A, 8B) comprising:
a substrate (20) comprising a first opening (201A) and a second opening (201B) that are spaced apart from each other;
a pixel (for example, see paragraphs [0108], [0194]) located in a display area (201, 203A, 203B, 2011, 2012) around the first and second openings (201A, 201B),
the pixel comprising a pixel circuit (for example, the substrate 20 having a pixel circuit includes a transistor, which is described by taking a thin film transistor TFT; for example, see paragraph [0132], fig. 3A) comprising a first thin-film transistor (TFT) and a display element (180) connected to the pixel circuit (the pixel circuit includes the thin film transistor TFT);
signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) located on the substrate (20), extending in a first direction (for example, a direction R1), and spaced apart from each other by the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B); and
first conductive lines (for example, B1 or C2 below) surrounding the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B) to bypass the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B), respectively;
wherein the first conductive lines (for example, B1 or C2 below) electrically connects the signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) that are spaced apart from each other by the first opening (201A) and the second opening (201B) to bypass the first opening (201A).
PNG
media_image2.png
534
958
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, for example, fig. 8C of YANG et al. disclose the first conductive lines (for example, B1 or D1 or C1) and the signal lines (241) are located on different layers or for example, fig. 8B of YANG et al. disclose the first conductive lines (for example, B1 or C2 below) and the signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) are located on different layers.
With regard to claim 3, YANG et al. disclose the first thin-film transistor (TFT) comprises a first semiconductor layer (TFT, fig. 3A) including a silicon-based semiconductor (120, wherein the thin film transistors include amorphous silicon thin film transistors inherently having a silicon-based semiconductor; for example, see paragraph [0158]), a first gate electrode (121) at least partially overlapping the first semiconductor layer (120), and a first electrode layer (181) disposed on the first gate electrode (121).
With regard to claim 4, YANG et al. disclose the first conductive lines (for example, a gate lines functions as the first conductive lines) comprises a same material (the same layer having a same material) as a material of the first gate electrode (121; for example, see paragraph [0168]).
With regard to claim 5, YANG et al. disclose the signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) comprises a same material as a material of the first gate electrode (121; for example, see paragraph [0168]).
With regard to claim 6, YANG et al. disclose a bridge layer (referred to as “BR” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 8B below) connecting one of the signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) and one of the first conductive lines (for example, B1 or C2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
528
957
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 7, YANG et al. disclose the bridge layer having a same material as signal lines (signal lines 2301, 2302, 2303) and comprises a same material as a material of the first gate electrode (121; for example, see paragraph [0168]).
With regard to claim 8, YANG et al. disclose the pixel circuit further comprises a second thin-film transistor (the thin film transistors may include oxide semiconductor thin film transistor functions as a second thin-film transistor), and the second thin-film transistor comprises a second semiconductor layer including an oxide-based semiconductor (for example, paragraph [0158]), inherently a second gate electrode at least partially overlapping the second semiconductor layer (forming in the second transistor), and a second electrode layer (any gate line of gate lines GLn functions as a second electrode layer) disposed on (on the side or top or bottom) the second gate electrode (a gate electrode of the second thin-film transistor).
With regard to claim 9, YANG et al. disclose the signal lines (2301/2302/2303) includes the same material (the same layer including the same material) as the second gate electrode of the second thin-film transistor (the gate electrodes of each of the thin film transistors; for example, see column 29, lines 26 – 31).
With regard to claim 10, YANG et al. disclose the first conductive lines (portions of layer 2301/2302/2303, forming in the openings, functioning as the first conductive lines) include the same material as the second gate electrode of the second thin-film transistor (the gate electrodes of each of the thin film transistors; for example, see column 29, lines 26 – 31)..
With regard to claim 21, YANG et al. disclose a driving circuit (the frame region 204 includes various driving circuits, signal lines electrically connected to the sub-pixels) located in a first peripheral area (204) surrounding the display area (201), wherein the signal lines inherently receives an emission control signal from the driving circuit. In reference to the claim language referring to the function of the signal lines, intended use and other types of functional language must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art. In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963).
Note that functional language in a device claim is directed to the device per se, no matter which of the device’s functions is referred to in the claim. See In re Ludtke and Sloan, 169 USPQ 563 at 567, and In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226, both of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the device per se which must be determined in a “functional language” claim and not the patentability of the function, and that an old or obvious device alleged to perform a new function is not patentable as a device, whether claimed in “functional language” terms or not. Note that the above case law makes clear that in such cases applicant has the burden of showing that a prior art device that appears reasonably capable of performing the allegedly novel function is in fact incapable of doing so. See MPEP § 2114. See also In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Claim to a spout having “taper … such as to by itself jam up the popped popcorn before the end of the cone and permit the dispensing of only a few kernels at a shake,” anticipated by an oil can spout having the same shape as spout Applicant disclosed as being adapted for dispensing said only a few kernels) and In re King, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir, 1986) ("It did not suffice merely to assert that [the cited prior art] does not inherently achieve [the claimed function], challenging the PTO to prove the contrary by experiment or otherwise. The PTO is not equipped to perform such tasks") for discussions of the roles of examiner and applicant in determining when and how functional limitations distinguish a claim from prior art disclosing the same structure.
PNG
media_image4.png
553
506
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 22, YANG et al. disclose a driving circuit (the frame region 204 includes various driving circuits, signal lines electrically connected to the sub-pixels) located in a first peripheral area (204) surrounding the display area (201), wherein the signal lines inherently receives a scan signal from the driving circuit. In reference to the claim language referring to the function of the signal lines, intended use and other types of functional language must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In a claim drawn to a process of making, the intended use must result in a manipulative difference as compared to the prior art. In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963).
Note that functional language in a device claim is directed to the device per se, no matter which of the device’s functions is referred to in the claim. See In re Ludtke and Sloan, 169 USPQ 563 at 567, and In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226, both of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the device per se which must be determined in a “functional language” claim and not the patentability of the function, and that an old or obvious device alleged to perform a new function is not patentable as a device, whether claimed in “functional language” terms or not. Note that the above case law makes clear that in such cases applicant has the burden of showing that a prior art device that appears reasonably capable of performing the allegedly novel function is in fact incapable of doing so. See MPEP § 2114. See also In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Claim to a spout having “taper … such as to by itself jam up the popped popcorn before the end of the cone and permit the dispensing of only a few kernels at a shake,” anticipated by an oil can spout having the same shape as spout Applicant disclosed as being adapted for dispensing said only a few kernels) and In re King, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir, 1986) ("It did not suffice merely to assert that [the cited prior art] does not inherently achieve [the claimed function], challenging the PTO to prove the contrary by experiment or otherwise. The PTO is not equipped to perform such tasks") for discussions of the roles of examiner and applicant in determining when and how functional limitations distinguish a claim from prior art disclosing the same structure.
With regard to claim 23, YANG et al. disclose a constant voltage (the first power line VDD provides a constant first power supply voltage) is applied to the metal layer (a signal layer VDD is metal layer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 11 - 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al. (20220352266) in view of PARK et al. (20200174528).
With regard to claim 11, YANG et al. do not clearly disclose the pixel circuit further comprises a storage capacitor, and wherein the storage capacitor comprises a lower electrode that is a part of the first gate electrode and an upper electrode disposed on the lower electrode to overlap the lower electrode in a plan view.
However, PARK et al. disclose the pixel circuit further comprises a storage capacitor (Cst), and wherein the storage capacitor (Cst) comprises a lower electrode (CE1) that is a part of the first gate electrode (G1) and an upper electrode (CE2) disposed on the lower electrode (CE1) to overlap the lower electrode (CE1) in a plan view (a cross-sectional view including a plan view).
PNG
media_image5.png
569
843
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the YANG et al.’s device to have the pixel circuit further comprises a storage capacitor, and wherein the storage capacitor comprises a lower electrode that is a part of the first gate electrode and an upper electrode disposed on the lower electrode to overlap the lower electrode in a plan view as taught by PARK et al. in order to enhance a high capacitance efficiency of the capacitor for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 12, YANG et al. disclose the signal lines (wirings 220 functions as the signal lines) includes the same material as the upper electrode of the storage capacitor (CE2; for example, see paragraph [0091]).
With regard to claim 13, YANG et al. disclose the first conductive lines (wirings 210 functions as the conductive lines) includes the same material as the upper electrode of the storage capacitor (CE2; for example, see paragraph [0091]).
7. Claims 14 – 16, 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al. (20220352266) in view of Byun et al. (10263211).
With regard to claims 14 - 16, YANG et al. do not clearly disclose a metal layer located on the substrate; wherein the metal layer is located between the first semiconductor layer and the substrate; wherein the metal layer is located directly on the substrate; wherein the first conductive lines and the metal layer are located on a same layer.
However, Byun et al. disclose a metal layer (a metal layer 110 including metal layers 111, 112) located on the substrate (100); wherein the metal layer (110) is located between the first semiconductor layer (126) and the substrate (100); wherein the metal layer (110) is located directly on the substrate (100); wherein the first conductive lines (121. 122) and the metal layer (110) are located on a same layer (110, 120). (for example, see fig. 2).
PNG
media_image6.png
549
835
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the YANG et al.’s device to have a metal layer located on the substrate; wherein the metal layer is located between the first semiconductor layer and the substrate; wherein the metal layer is located directly on the substrate; wherein the first conductive lines and the metal layer are located on a same layer as taught by Byun et al. in order to enhance a high light blocking efficiency of the device for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 18, Byun et al. disclose metal layer (110) is at least partially overlap the first semiconductor layer (126).
With regard to claim 19, Byun et al. disclose the metal layer (110) comprises a same material (copper) as a material of the first gate electrode (132).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al. (20220352266) in view of Byun et al. (10263211) and further in view of Lee et al. (10224344).
With regard to claim 17, YANG et al. and Byun et al. do not clearly disclose the substrate comprises a first organic layer, a first inorganic layer, a second organic layer, and a second inorganic layer sequentially stacked, wherein the metal layer is located on the second inorganic layer.
However, Byun et al. disclose the substrate (as shown in fig. 6 below) comprises a first organic layer (220), a first inorganic layer (230), a second organic layer (240), and a second inorganic layer (250) sequentially stacked, wherein the metal layer (a wiring connection line 280 inherently having a metal material in order to secure the electrical connection) is located on (a bottom surface) the second inorganic layer (250).
PNG
media_image7.png
337
1044
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the YANG et al.’s device to have the substrate comprises a first organic layer, a first inorganic layer, a second organic layer, and a second inorganic layer sequentially stacked, wherein the metal layer is located on the second inorganic layer as taught by Byun et al. in order to minimize the signal interference for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
8. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al. (20220352266) in view of You et al. (9276020).
With regard to claim 20, YANG et al. do not clearly disclose the first conductive lines comprises molybdenum.
However, You et al. disclose the first conductive lines (at least one conductive layer 18c of the conductive lines) comprises molybdenum (for example, column 5, lines 27 – 29, fig. 1).
PNG
media_image8.png
405
716
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the YANG et al.’s device to have the first conductive lines comprises molybdenum as taught by You et al. in order to enhance a high efficiency of the semiconductor device for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN N TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 1923. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davienne Monbleau can be reached on (571) 272-1945. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAN N TRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
