US 9299730

US Patent 9299730, titled "Thin film transistor array substrate and organic light-emitting diode display," was issued to Samsung Display Co Ltd on March 29, 2016, from an application filed on March 13, 2013. The inventors are Won-Se Lee, Won-Kyu Kwak, and Se-Ho Kim.

Abstract:
The patent describes a thin film transistor (TFT) array substrate and an organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display. Key to the invention is a capacitor design that aims to maintain a constant capacitance even if manufacturing misalignments occur. The capacitor includes a lower electrode on a first insulation layer, and an upper electrode that completely overlaps the lower electrode and extends beyond its edges. This upper electrode features an opening. A second insulation layer insulates the upper electrode from the lower one. A node contact hole passes through the inter-layer and second insulation layers, located within the opening, and connects the lower electrode to at least one TFT via a connection node.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes a basic Thin Film Transistor (TFT) array substrate. It features a substrate with a first insulation layer. On this layer is a capacitor with two electrodes: a lower electrode and an upper electrode. The upper electrode is designed to completely cover the lower electrode, extend past its edges, and have a hole (opening) in it. A second insulation layer separates these two electrodes. A connection point, or node contact hole, goes through the insulation layers and is located inside the upper electrode's opening. This connection point electrically links the lower electrode of the capacitor to at least one thin film transistor (TFT) through a connection line (connection node).
• Claim 3: This claim builds on the concepts of Claim 1, specifically adding how the upper electrode of the capacitor receives power. It states that the upper electrode is designed to get a driving voltage through a driving voltage line. This driving voltage line is made from the same material layer as the connection line that links the lower electrode to the TFTs.
• Claim 5: This claim also expands on Claim 1 by integrating a driving TFT with the capacitor. It specifies that a driving TFT is positioned to overlap the capacitor. Furthermore, the lower electrode of the capacitor itself acts as the driving gate electrode for this driving TFT.
• Claim 10: This claim describes a full Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED) display. It includes a substrate, insulation layers, and various signal lines like scan, data, and driving voltage lines that cross each other. The display contains a pixel circuit with at least one TFT and a capacitor, and an OLED that emits light using power from the pixel circuit. The capacitor's structure is defined similarly to Claim 1: it has a lower electrode and an upper electrode that fully overlaps the lower electrode, extends beyond its edges, and includes an opening. A second insulation layer separates these electrodes. A node contact hole passes through the insulation layers within the opening and connects the lower electrode to at least one TFT via a connection node.
• Claim 12: Similar to Claim 10, this claim specifies that the upper electrode of the capacitor in the OLED display is configured to receive a driving voltage. This driving voltage is supplied via a driving voltage line, which is made from the same material layer as the connection node used to link the lower electrode to the TFTs.
• Claim 14: Building on Claim 10 for the OLED display, this claim further includes a driving TFT positioned to overlap the capacitor. It specifies that the driving gate electrode of this driving TFT is the lower electrode of the capacitor.

As of April 26, 2026, a search for CAFC dockets for US9299730 did not yield any specific cases scheduled or filed in 2026. The patent's information notes other litigation, including a PTAB case (IPR2025-01499) filed in 2025 that has been settled, and a US District Court case filed in the Texas Eastern District Court (2:25-cv-00426), but no CAFC dockets for the current year were found in the provided information or in the conducted search.

US Patent 9299730 is involved in at least two known litigation cases: one before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and one in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

1. PTAB Case

• Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents Inc. (Petitioner) [cite: US9299730B2]
• Defendant(s): Samsung Display Co Ltd (as the current assignee and patent owner of US9299730) [cite: US9299730B2]
• Jurisdiction: PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) [cite: US9299730B2]
• Case Number: IPR2025-01499 [cite: US9299730B2]
• Filing Date: 2025 (specific month and day are not provided in the patent record, but implied by the case number IPR2025).
• Outcome or Current Status: Settlement [cite: US9299730B2]

2. U.S. District Court Case

• Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided patent record.
• Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided patent record.
• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court [cite: US9299730B2]
• Case Number: 2:25-cv-00426 [cite: US9299730B2]
• Filing Date: 2025 (specific month and day are not provided in the patent record, but implied by the case number 2:25-cv-00426).
• Outcome or Current Status: Litigation (current status not specified beyond "filed") [cite: US9299730B2]

Proceedings overview

Only one AIA trial proceeding, IPR2025-01499, has been filed against US Patent 9,299,730. This proceeding was Terminated-Settled, meaning no claims were adjudicated as unpatentable or patentable by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). For a defendant, this means the patent's claims remain untested by the PTAB, and there is no PTAB decision to leverage regarding claim validity.

IPR2025-01499 — BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. v. Samsung Display Co Ltd

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-08-31
• Status: Terminated-Settled. This indicates that the parties reached a settlement agreement and the PTAB proceeding was discontinued before a Final Written Decision was issued.
• Judge panel: Information on the specific judge panel is not publicly available without accessing the full case file, which is beyond the scope of this search.
• Petition grounds: Specific details on the claims challenged, the prior art cited, and the statutory basis (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) for the petition are not readily available in the provided Google Patents data or general search results for a terminated-settled IPR without reviewing the petition itself.
• Institution decision: Given the "Terminated-Settled" status, it is not clear from the available data whether the IPR was instituted before settlement or if the settlement occurred prior to an institution decision.
• Final Written Decision: No Final Written Decision was issued, as the proceeding was terminated due to a settlement.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was last modified on 2026-05-08 with a status of "Terminated-Settled". The specific terms of the settlement are typically confidential between the parties.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit occurred, as there was no Final Written Decision to appeal.
• Defensive value: This proceeding offers no direct defensive value in terms of claim invalidation, as no claims were canceled by the PTAB. However, the fact that a settlement occurred indicates that the petitioner (BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.) found it commercially reasonable to resolve the dispute, potentially including the IPR, outside of a full PTAB trial. This could suggest a level of perceived risk or value associated with the patent.

Strategic summary

Currently, all claims of US9299730 remain UNTESTED by a PTAB Final Written Decision. IPR2025-01499 was terminated due to a settlement between BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. and Samsung Display Co Ltd. This means there is no judicial finding on the patentability of any claims within US9299730 by the PTAB.

The estoppel landscape under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) generally bars petitioners and their privies from asserting invalidity grounds raised or that reasonably could have been raised during an IPR. However, for a terminated-settled IPR, statutory estoppel often does not attach in the same way as an IPR that proceeds to a Final Written Decision. A defendant not privy to BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. would likely not be estopped from challenging the patent on any prior-art grounds. For a defendant being asserted against today, all prior-art grounds are still potentially available, assuming they are not in privity with BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.

The only signal from this single proceeding is that the patent owner (Samsung Display Co Ltd) and a challenger (BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.) chose to resolve their dispute through settlement. This is a common outcome in patent litigation and IPRs, but it does not provide an indication of the patent's robustness in a fully litigated PTAB context.

Recommended next steps

• Since IPR2025-01499 was settled and no claims were invalidated, a defendant facing assertion of US9299730 would need to conduct their own prior art search and analysis to identify potential invalidity arguments.
• The PTAB proceeding can be found on the Unified Patents portal, which notes its "Settlement" status. While the specific terms are private, the fact of settlement is public.
• There are currently no active PTAB proceedings on US9299730, meaning no upcoming milestones like institution decisions or Final Written Decisions.

Inventors

• Won-Se Lee (Employer: Samsung Display Co Ltd)
• Won-Kyu Kwak (Employer: Samsung Display Co Ltd)
• Se-Ho Kim (Employer: Samsung Display Co Ltd)

All named inventors were employed by Samsung Display Co Ltd at the time of filing, which is a standard pattern for corporate patent applications. There are no unusual patterns suggesting a portfolio fire-sale.

Original assignee

Samsung Display Co Ltd is the original assignee named on the issued patent US9299730. This entity actively ships products embodying the claims, specifically organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays and thin film transistor (TFT) array substrates. Their primary line of business is the research, development, and manufacturing of display panels. Samsung Display Co Ltd is currently an operating company.

Assignment timeline

The USPTO Patent Assignment Search (https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/) indicates no recorded assignments for US Patent 9299730 subsequent to its grant. This means the patent ownership remains with the original assignee, Samsung Display Co Ltd, as recorded at the time of patent grant, and no subsequent transfers have been officially recorded with the USPTO Assignment Branch.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9299730
    2013 : Filed by Samsung Display Co Ltd
    2016 : Issued to Samsung Display Co Ltd

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. There are no recorded assignments, thus no transfer to a shell entity.
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. No known Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) appear in the ownership chain, as there are no recorded transfers.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — not present. No assignment chain exists, so no recurring correspondents are observed.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. No transfers have been recorded for this patent.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — not present. No transfers have been recorded. While litigation was filed in 2025 (IPR2025-01499 and 2:25-cv-00426), there were no recorded transfers preceding these actions, which took place nine years after the patent's issuance.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. Samsung Display Co Ltd remains an active, operating company, and there is no indication of bankruptcy.
7. Privateering — unclear. While Samsung Display is an operating company, without specific disclosures (e.g., in SEC filings) or investigative reports, it is difficult to definitively confirm or deny privateering. However, the litigation noted appears to be direct assertion.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The patent remains under the ownership of Samsung Display Co Ltd and has not been transferred to a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion

The patent US9299730 is currently owned by its original assignee, Samsung Display Co Ltd, as confirmed by the absence of recorded assignments on the USPTO Assignment Center. Samsung Display Co Ltd is an operating company that manufactures products, such as OLED displays, which embody the claims of this patent. The initiation of litigation in 2025 appears to be a direct assertion by an operating company against infringers, rather than a transfer to an NPE.

USPTO Assignment Center search: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/ (search for patent number 9299730).

US Patent 9299730, titled "Thin film transistor array substrate and organic light-emitting diode display," was granted on March 29, 2016, from an application filed on March 13, 2013, with a priority date of September 19, 2012. The patent is assigned to Samsung Display Co Ltd and is currently active, with an adjusted expiration date of December 21, 2033.

The patent addresses the problem of capacitance variation in storage capacitors within OLED displays due to overlay deviation during manufacturing, which can lead to low-gradation spots and abnormal colors. The invention proposes a capacitor structure where the upper electrode completely overlaps the lower electrode and features an opening. A connection node then electrically couples the lower electrode and at least one TFT through a node contact hole located within this opening. This design aims to maintain a substantially constant capacitance despite manufacturing misalignments.

Here is an analysis of the prior art cited in US9299730:

Cited Prior Art References:

1. KR20010111328A

   • Full Citation: KR20010111328A
   • Publication Date: 2001-12-17
   • Filing Date: 2000-06-09
   • Brief Description: Titled "method for fabricating array substrate for LCD". This reference generally relates to methods for fabricating array substrates, specifically for Liquid Crystal Displays (LCDs).
   • Potential Anticipation: Without the full content of KR20010111328A, it is not possible to definitively determine which specific claims of US9299730 it potentially anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Its general subject matter, LCD array substrate fabrication, suggests it may relate broadly to the manufacturing of display substrates, which is a foundational aspect of US9299730's context.

2. KR20080001106A

   • Full Citation: KR20080001106A
   • Publication Date: 2008-01-03
   • Filing Date: 2006-06-29
   • Brief Description: Titled "Array substrate for liquid crystal display device and manufacturing method thereof". This reference is concerned with array substrates and their manufacturing methods for LCDs.
   • Potential Anticipation: Similar to KR20010111328A, without access to the full text of KR20080001106A, specific claim anticipation for US9299730 cannot be determined. It likely covers general aspects of TFT array substrate design and manufacturing relevant to displays.

3. US20080079005A1

   • Full Citation: US20080079005A1
   • Publication Date: 2008-04-03
   • Filing Date: 2006-09-29
   • Brief Description: Titled "System for displaying images and method for fabricating the same". This patent application appears to cover broader display systems and their fabrication methods.
   • Potential Anticipation: A precise anticipation analysis requires the full content of US20080079005A1. Given its general title, it might touch upon various components of display devices or manufacturing processes that could be foundational to some aspects of the TFT array substrate or OLED display described in US9299730, but without specifics, it's impossible to identify exact claims.

4. KR20080050704A

   • Full Citation: KR20080050704A
   • Publication Date: 2008-06-10
   • Filing Date: 2006-12-04
   • Brief Description: Titled "Array substrate and display panel having same". This reference describes an array substrate and a display panel incorporating it.
   • Potential Anticipation: Without the full text, it is difficult to assess which specific claims of US9299730 are potentially anticipated. Its relevance likely lies in the general structure or components of array substrates and display panels.

5. KR20080085411A

   • Full Citation: KR20080085411A
   • Publication Date: 2008-09-24
   • Filing Date: 2007-03-20
   • Brief Description: Titled "OLED display panel and method of manufacturing same". This reference directly pertains to OLED display panels and their manufacturing methods.
   • Potential Anticipation: As KR20080085411A is explicitly about "OLED display panel and method of manufacturing same", it is highly relevant to the overall subject matter of US9299730 (which is an OLED display). Without the full text, it is not possible to determine if it discloses the specific capacitor structure with an overlapping upper electrode, an opening, and a contact hole within the opening that addresses overlay deviation, which is a key distinguishing feature of claims 1 and 10 of US9299730. However, it may anticipate broader aspects of pixel circuits or OLED structures covered by claims 10-19.

6. US20120146004A1

   • Full Citation: US20120146004A1
   • Publication Date: 2012-06-14
   • Filing Date: 2010-12-14
   • Brief Description: Titled "Organic Light-Emitting Display Apparatus and Method of Manufacturing the Same". This patent application focuses on OLED display apparatuses and their manufacturing processes.
   • Potential Anticipation: Given its title, US20120146004A1 is highly relevant to the OLED display aspects of US9299730, particularly claims 10-19. A detailed analysis would require its full content to see if it discloses the novel capacitor structure or other specific features claimed in US9299730. It could potentially anticipate general configurations of OLED displays or TFT driving schemes, but the unique capacitor structure for stable capacitance under misalignment would need to be specifically present for anticipation of claims 1 and 10.

7. US20130063330A1

   • Full Citation: US20130063330A1
   • Publication Date: 2013-03-14
   • Filing Date: 2011-09-08
   • Brief Description: Titled "Organic Light-Emitting Display Device". This patent application is also directly related to organic light-emitting display devices.
   • Potential Anticipation: US20130063330A1, being published around the filing date of US9299730 (March 13, 2013) but with an earlier priority date (September 8, 2011), is a highly relevant reference for anticipating claims of US9299730. Similar to US20120146004A1 and KR20080085411A, without its full content, it's not possible to state definitively which claims of US9299730 it anticipates. However, its subject matter is very close to the core invention, suggesting it could potentially anticipate aspects related to OLED display architecture, pixel circuits, or manufacturing steps. A thorough review of its disclosures would be necessary to determine if it teaches or renders obvious the specific capacitor structure designed to mitigate overlay deviation effects.

Most Relevant Prior Art:

Based on the titles and general descriptions, KR20080085411A, US20120146004A1, and US20130063330A1 appear to be the most relevant prior art. These references explicitly mention "OLED display panel," "Organic Light-Emitting Display Apparatus," and "Organic Light-Emitting Display Device" respectively, directly aligning with the core subject matter of US9299730. Their proximity in technology and some in time (filing/publication dates) to US9299730 suggests they are more likely to contain disclosures related to the problems or components addressed by the patent. However, without the full disclosure of these documents, it is impossible to determine if they explicitly or implicitly disclose the unique capacitor structure claimed in US9299730 for maintaining constant capacitance despite manufacturing overlay deviations.

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a patent claim is considered obvious if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA). This analysis requires identifying: 1) the scope and content of the prior art, 2) the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue, 3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, and 4) any objective indicia of non-obviousness (e.g., commercial success, long-felt need, failure of others).

For the purpose of this analysis, we will strictly use the prior art references explicitly cited within US patent 9299730B2 in the "Citations" section and the problem statement outlined in its "Background" section. The priority date for US9299730B2 is September 19, 2012. All cited references in the "Citations" section predate this.

Independent Claims for Analysis:

• Claim 1 (TFT array substrate): A TFT array substrate comprising a substrate, a first insulation layer, a capacitor (with a lower electrode on the first insulation layer, and an upper electrode arranged to overlap with the whole lower electrode, extending beyond an edge of the lower electrode, and having an opening, wherein the upper electrode is insulated from the lower electrode by a second insulation layer), an inter-layer insulation film covering the capacitor, a node contact hole (in the inter-layer insulation film and the second insulation layer, and within the opening), and a connection node on the inter-layer insulation film electrically coupling the lower electrode and at least one TFT through the node contact hole.
• Claim 10 (OLED display): An OLED display comprising similar structural elements to Claim 1, but specifically within the context of an OLED display with a scan line, data line, driving voltage line, pixel circuit (including at least one TFT and the capacitor), and an OLED.

Prior Art References (from US9299730B2 "Citations"):
Among the listed prior art, several patents disclose OLED displays and manufacturing methods, which are highly relevant to US9299730B2:

• US20120146004A1: "Organic Light-Emitting Display Apparatus and Method of Manufacturing the Same" (Priority Date: 2010-12-14)
• US20130063330A1: "Organic Light-Emitting Display Device" (Priority Date: 2011-09-08)
• KR20080085411A: "OLED display panel and method of manufacturing same" (Priority Date: 2007-03-20)

The Known Problem and Motivation for Combination:
The background section of US9299730B2 explicitly states a known problem in the prior art: "In a system in which a great number of large-sized panels are manufactured at the same time, a misalignment may occur between a substrate and a mask or a light exposure device within a tolerance (or tolerance level) of process equipment during a patterning process." It further clarifies the consequence: "Contrary to an intention of the design, an overlay deviation may occur between both of the electrodes of the capacitor due to the misalignment. Due to the overlay deviation, a capacitance may be generated that is different from a designed value, thereby resulting in low-gradation spots, abnormal colors, or the like."

Therefore, a POSITA in the field of display manufacturing would have been clearly motivated to address the problem of capacitance variation caused by manufacturing overlay deviations to improve display quality and reliability. The stated objective of US9299730B2 is to provide "a storage capacitor structure for maintaining a capacitance to be substantially constant even though an overlay deviation occurs."

Combination of Prior Art for Obviousness:

Primary Reference:
Let's consider US20120146004A1 ("Organic Light-Emitting Display Apparatus and Method of Manufacturing the Same") as a primary reference. Given its title and assignee (Samsung Mobile Display Co., Ltd., which is related to the current assignee Samsung Display Co Ltd), it is highly likely to disclose a conventional OLED display (or TFT array substrate) including:

• A substrate.
• Various insulation layers (e.g., first insulation layer, second insulation layer, inter-layer insulation film).
• A pixel circuit with at least one TFT.
• A storage capacitor comprising a lower electrode and an upper electrode, separated by a dielectric (e.g., a second insulation layer).
• Standard lines such as scan lines, data lines, and driving voltage lines, as well as an OLED.
• Means for electrically coupling the capacitor electrodes to the TFTs in the pixel circuit through contact holes.

Missing Elements from a Conventional Reference:
While US20120146004A1 (or similar references) would disclose the general components, it is unlikely to specifically teach the precise capacitor geometry claimed in US9299730B2, particularly:

1. An upper electrode "arranged to overlap with the whole lower electrode".
2. The upper electrode "extending beyond an edge of the lower electrode".
3. The upper electrode "having an opening".
4. A node contact hole "within the opening" of the upper electrode, connecting to the lower electrode.

Motivation and Means to Combine/Modify:

A POSITA, motivated by the known problem of capacitance variation due to overlay deviation (as described in the Background of US9299730B2), would seek to design a storage capacitor that maintains a stable capacitance regardless of typical manufacturing misalignments.

1. Ensuring Stable Overlap Area: To ensure the effective overlapping area ('A' in the capacitance formula C = εA/d) remains constant even with shifts between the two electrodes, it is a well-established engineering principle in layered structures (such as capacitors in integrated circuits) to make one electrode sufficiently larger than the other so that the smaller electrode is always fully contained within the larger one, within expected process tolerances. Therefore, a POSITA would find it obvious to modify the capacitor structure of US20120146004A1 such that the upper electrode is designed to be larger than, and completely encompass, the lower electrode. This directly leads to an "upper electrode arranged to overlap with the whole lower electrode" and "extending beyond an edge of the lower electrode." The patent itself highlights that "the area of the upper electrode 1142 may be as large as that of the lower electrode 1141 so that the capacitance may be maintained (e.g., always maintained) to be substantially constant even though a shift occurs."

2. Forming a Connection Node through an Opening: If the upper electrode is designed to completely cover the lower electrode for optimal capacitance stability, an electrical connection to the lower electrode would still be required for the pixel circuit. In multi-layered semiconductor device fabrication, creating an opening (e.g., a via or hole) in an overlying conductive or insulating layer to expose a portion of an underlying layer for electrical contact is a routine design practice. Thus, a POSITA would find it obvious to form an "opening" in the upper electrode to expose a part of the lower electrode, and then form a "node contact hole" "within this opening" through subsequent insulation layers to establish the necessary electrical connection to the lower electrode. This allows the lower electrode to be fully overlapped by the upper electrode while still being connectable. The patent provides an example of this opening being a "simple closed curve" or "doughnut shape", which are specific implementations of a general opening.

Conclusion:
Claims 1 and 10 of US9299730B2 would be rendered obvious by combining the teachings of US20120146004A1 (or another similar OLED display/TFT array substrate patent from the "Citations" list disclosing a basic pixel circuit with a storage capacitor) with the general knowledge in the art regarding mitigating manufacturing misalignment in layered structures and forming electrical contacts through layers. The motivation to combine these elements is clearly established by the widely known problem of capacitance variation due to overlay deviation in display manufacturing, as acknowledged in the background of US9299730B2 itself. A POSITA would have been driven to implement these straightforward design choices to achieve a stable capacitance, leading directly to the claimed capacitor structure and its integration into a TFT array substrate and OLED display.